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 19 of 25.
“Sir, a neighbourhood park will be developed in the open space in front of Blocks 551, 552 and 554 of Bedok North Estate to serve residents in Neighbourhood 5. The area in Neighbourhood 7 between Bedok Reservoir Road and Pan Island Expressway is earmarked for development of 1,100 units of 3-, 4-, 5-room Model A and Executive Apartments, 583 units of HUDC flats, an open space, a secondary school and a sports ares. Construction of the sports area and public housing is underway. The sports area will be ready by the end of this year, while the public housing development will be completed by the end of 1983. Tender for the building work of HUDC flats has been called. HOUSING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD (Location of families in the neighbourhood) 11. Dr Lee Chiaw Meng asked the Minister for National Development whether the Housing and Development Board has finalized the scheme to enable immediate families to live within the same neighbourhood.”
“Sir, bus shelters will be provided along the following streets of Bedok North Estate within Kaki Bukit Constituency: No.of Name of Street Shelters Bedok North Avenue 1 1 Bedok North Avenue 2 1 Bedok North Street 3 4 Bedok Reservoir Road 10 Work will commence at the end of this year and is scheduled for completion in mid-1982. BEDOK NORTH ESTATE (Development of open spaces in Neighbourhoods 5 and 7) 10. Encik Saidi Haji Shariff asked the Minister for National Development if he will elaborate on the development of Bedok North in particular the open space in front of Block 551, Block 552 and Block 554 in Neighbourhood 5 and the land in Neighbourhood 7 between Bedok Reservoir Road and the Pan Island Expressway.”
“Sir, they are close to one another because they were built together and certain regulations have been complied with. One block is used for the food processing industry and the other two blocks are used for the other industries. This arrangement is acceptable to the Ministry of the Environment. BEDOK NORTH ESTATE (Construction of bus shelters) 9. Encik Saidi Haji Shariff asked the Minister for National Development whether his Ministry has plans to build bus shelters along the following streets of Bedok North within the Kaki Bukit Constituency:- Bedok North Avenue 1, Bedok North Avenue 2, Bedok North Avenue 3, Bedok Nonh Street 3 and Bedok Reservoir Road, and when the bus shelters will be constructed.”
“Sir, they will not be given priority. They will be treated as normal public tenderers.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, the size of HDB terrace workshops ranges from 88 sq. metres to 330 sq. metres to cater for the needs of the various types of industries, For health and environmental reasons, the food processing and manufacturing industries are segregated from the other industries. In addition, they must comply with approved standards set by the Government authorities. The terrace workshops at Block 12, Punggol Estate, are used exclusively to house food processing industries. Other non-compatible trades, such as wood-working, paper products, engineering and mechanical workshops, are located at Blocks 13 and 14, There is, therefore, no mixing of trades in the same block of workshops. These three blocks of workshops were completed in 1974 for resettlement of small industries which were affected by redevelopment schemes. Owing to business expansion, some tenants have found the workshop space too small for their needs and have applied for bigger units in other estates. Another 64 units of HDB terrace workshops in nearby Defu Estate are scheduled for completion in early 1982. Tenants in the Punggol Estate who require bigger workshop units can tender for one of these units when tenders are invited by the HDB.”
“Sir, their priority will not be adversely affected as they will be allowed to retain their registration numbers. INDUSTRIAL WORKSHOPS (Improvement in design) 8. Mr Ng Kah Ting asked the Minister for National Development whether he is aware that the industrial workshops built by the Housing and Development Board, like the three blocks in the Punggol Estate, are inadequately designed to meet the needs of trades like furniture-making, iron-mongery and small refrigeration plants, and contain a mixture of trades like mee and dumplingmaking; if he will request the HDB to look into the matter with a view to improving the design of such premises to ensure that the different needs are catered for and to separating industries like food manufacturing and other industries for health reasons; and, in future, if the HDB will relocate similar trades accordingly.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, during the period 17th May to 30th June 1981, 260 applicants changed their applications from bigger to smaller flats. Twenty of them changed from executive flats to 5-room flats; 70 from 5-room to 4-room or 3-room flats; and 170 from 4-room to 3-room flats. These 260 applicants represent only 0.28% of the waiting list of 94,400 as at 30th June 1981. It shows that the overwhelming majority of applicants can afford the new prices. Over the same period, 129 applicants cancelled or withdrew their applications. This is, in fact, lower than the average of 150 cancellations over a normal period of 1 1/2-months. The Housing and Development Board cannot ascertain with complete accuracy the ability of applicants to afford flat prices based on the income declared in the application form. Invariably, the applicant's ability to pay would be under-estimated as there may be extraneous sources of finance, such as financial support from parents, or brothers and sisters, or from accumulated personal savings. The purpose of imposing a 10% downpayment on HUDC applicants is to weed out non-urgent or marginal applicants. Since the imposition, 1,543 applicants, representing 22% of the HUDC waiting list, have been weeded out. Mr Ng Kah Ting: Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, would the Hon. Minister for National Development agree with me that those 260 applicants who have changed their applications from bigger to smaller flats should not lose their priority as such?”
“On the average, the HDB is selling in the new town and in the city area at about $50 per square foot. Therefore, Members can see that for public housing the selling price is only about one-fifth the price of private housing. In conclusion, I would say that the HDB has overcome many difficulties in its 20 years of existence and I am confident that within the next two years the HDB will succeed in finding a solution to the problems of the shortage of construction workers and overcome the reluctance of contractors to undertake HDB projects. I am equally optimistic that the future increases in the selling prices of HDB flats will be much less than the 38% hike announced in 1981. Question put, and agreed to. Resolved, That Parliament do now adjourn. Adjourned accordingly at Thirteen minutes past Six o'clock p.m. to a date to be fixed. tables - SELLING PRICE OF HDB FLATS, NEW SELLING PRICES OF HDB FLATS EFFECTIVE FROM 1 JUNE 1981 (Cols. 97 - 100)”
“On the other hand, Singaporeans must also realize that the selling prices and rental of public housing will have to continue to increase in future and they will have to allocate a larger percentage of their income for housing in future. The Government on its part will have to adjust and subsidize the pricing of HDB flats to ensure that they continue to be within the reach of the largest number of Singaporeans. At the same time, the subsidy provided for public housing should not break the HDB and render it an inefficient housing authority. That is the reason why the HDB has to have some reserves. The HDB just cannot use all its resources to subsidize public housing and leave nothing in reserve. Compared with private housing, HDB housing is still extremely cheap as the monthly rental of HDB flats is between $1.10 and $1.80 per square metre or 10 cents to 17 cents per square foot. That is the HDB rental rate for 1-room, 2-room, 3-room and 4-room flats. The selling prices of HDB flats are between $380 per square metre or $36 per square foot in the new towns and about $800 per square metre or $75 per square foot in the City area. These prices can be found in the Table which I have circulated to all Members. The HDB's rental rate is only about 10% of the market rental for private housing. At present, in Singapore, rental for private housing ranges from $1 to $1.70 per square foot. So the HDB's rent is only 10%. When the hon. Member for Toa Payoh says that the private sector would follow the HDB, I doubt very much that it would. The selling price of HDB flats is only about 20% of the market price of private housing. If Members look at today's Straits Times they will find that private housing is being sold between $200 and $300 per square foot.”
“Some contractors have told me that the wages of construction workers have increased 10 times compared with that in the 1960s and five times compared with that in the 1970s if CPF contributions and productivity of the workers are also taken into consideration. I felt that the comparison was exaggerated and I asked for proof or how they calculated it. It was pointed out that in the 1960s, an unskilled construction labourer earned $5 a day for nine hours solid work. In the 1960s, a construction worker usually worked from sunrise to sunset. Today, the same labourer is paid $20-$25 per day. With CPF contributions, his total wage is $30 per day. However, the contractors say that the workers put in only seven hours of half-hearted effort! The contributing factor of abundant supply of cheap labour and cheap building materials which enabled the H D B to build cheap flats is gone forever. The reality is that even if we are prepared to pay high wages, we may not be able to get the required number of workers to build our flats. It is unrealistic for the HDB or Singaporeans to hope for the return of the good old days. Both the HDB and Singaporeans will have to face this new situation. The HDB will have to explore new construction methods and techniques, i.e. including the prefabricated method which the HDB is at present actively negotiating with two foreign firms and we hope that the HDB will be successful in this. Prefabrication will not bring the cost down. Prefabrication will increase the construction capacity and, indirectly, it will benefit the building industry. The HDB will also explore new sources of labour supply so that the supply of housing will not fall far below the demand.”
“I think a solution would be for the Government to continue to offer URA sites for sale in order to increase the supply of the commercial and residential properties in the private sector, On the other hand, we have to try and increase the capacity of the construction industry. On the question of the PSA flats raised by the Member for Radin Mas, perhaps I would suggest that he write to me on this matter and give me more information so that I can look into it. I suspect that this is a PSA matter rather than an HDB matter. I do not like to dwell on the cost of land again. The hon. Member for Kaki Bukit has mentioned that since the ground floor has been built up, therefore there should be no land cost for the upper floors, That is not the system in calculating the land cost. Usually when we calculate land cost, it is something like this. Let us say we value the land at $60 per square metre. One hectare is 10,000 square metres. Therefore, the land cost for one hectare is $600,000. Within that one hectare of land, we are able to build 15 units of flats and, therefore, the land cost for each unit is $40,000. Whether the flat is on the ground floor or on the top floor, the land cost is the same. Perhaps I would now like to give my observations on the cost of housing and what the future is likely to be. We are now entering the period of high construction cost in the 1980s and I believe this decade is going to be a decade of high construction costs. The golden era of cheap public housing has come to an end. The abundant supply of cheap labour in the 1960s from unemployed Singaporeans and in the 70s from Malaysia has come to an end.”
“At the prevailing market price. On the question of early marriage as a result of the housing policy, mentioned by the Member for Toa Payoh, I am rather doubtful that his conclusion is correct. I would like to see more evidence before I can agree with him. Usually a person gets married for various reasons. I do not think the intention of purchasing an HDB flat is the only reason. The Member said that after the announcement he saw a traffic jam along the road in front of the Registry of Marriages and that was conclusive evidence of that policy. I am rather doubtful if that is so. On the question of regulating the building industry and the sale of U RA sites mentioned by a few Members, I agree with them that the sale of URA land has a bearing, in fact, a strong demand on the resources of the building industry. It indirectly affects the number of contractors undertaking HDB housing and, in turn, affects the cost inflation of HDB flats. On the other hand, the Government is the biggest land owner in Singapore and if the Government does not sell State land, then there would not be enough supply of residential and commercial properties in the private sector. In this way, the Government has to strike a balance, The Government cannot say that it requires all the capacity in the construction industry for public projects and therefore should freeze private development. We cannot do that. On the other hand, we will not allow the construction capacity to be completely cornered by private development while there is nothing left for public development projects. So we have to strike a balance.”
“I am happy to inform him that the H DB is at present looking into the proposal to relax the income constraints for purchase of HDB flats. A statement will be released shortly on this matter. On the suggestion of the hon. Member for the use of CPF funds for other members of the family, I think it would be more appropriate if he approaches my colleague, the Minister for Communications and Minister for Labour, on this matter as the Central Provident Fund is under his jurisdiction. On the question of the sale of rental flats, the Government policy is to promote home ownership for the people and therefore the HDB will be quite happy to sell flats to sitting tenants when more than 70% of the tenants in a block of rental flats wish to purchase their flats. The reason is that if it is less than 70%, for example, if only 50% of the tenants wish to purchase, then the HDB will have the problem of rehousing the other 50% and this will create difficulties.”
“Sir, I do not think this is quite true. First, the majority of the land used by the HDB for housing development is HDB's land and State land. Acquired land constitutes only a small percentage of the land used for housing. Even when Singapore attained internal self-government in 1959, the State land was, in fact, very extensive. I cannot give the exact figure, but it was very extensive. Secondly, most of the private land which Government acquired were heavily squattered. I am not saying that none of the land was clear of squatters. But the majority of the pieces of land were heavily squattered, and it would be next to impossible for the owners to clear the large number of squatters. I can quote the figures, The number of squatters cleared by the Singapore Government last year was 15,000. In FY 1979-80, there were 18,052 resettlement cases, and in FY 1978-79, there were 16,443 cases. Most areas of private land were squattered and their value was not very high. Another point is that a lot of the squatter land which the Government acquired was not zoned for residential development. When we talk about private land being worth a lot of money, we mean private land which is suitable for development. But a lot of private land is zoned as rural or green belt and most of these lands are also not accessible. So when the Government acquired those lands at a low price, they were not lands which would have fetched a high market price. The acquired lands were squattered, they were inaccessible and in the rural zone and, therefore, the Government managed to acquire them at a lower price. The hon. Member for Bedok asked for flexibility on the income ceiling.”
“Sir, I agree with hon. Members that the land cost to the Government is much less. Therefore, the subsidy which I have mentioned is not the actual subsidy in dollars and cents that the Government is paying out. However, I would like to remind hon. Members that when we talk about subsidy, we must talk about what is the actual or fair market land price. When the Government develops a piece of land for public housing, it is only fair for the Government to remind the public that in the promotion of its policy of home ownership scheme, the Government is, in fact, subsidizing very heavily on the land cost. I think the public should be made to realize this fact rather than mislead them into believing that the Government is unfair to them in the sense that, since the land costs nothing, what the Government is now saying that the land costs so much and that the Government is subsidizing towards the cost of the land, is not true. When we calculate the subsidy, we have to calculate on the basis of the actual market price of land, because only then will Government decide to utilize a piece of land for any specific purpose. For example, if the Government is going to build a school, in calculating the expenditure for the Ministry of Education, the Ministry would include the construction cost of the school, the land cost and other costs. So I think we should tell the public what is the actual subsidy. I personally believe that the correct way of calculating is to find out what is the actual land cost. Let us say a piece of land can fetch a certain price in the open market and we are utilizing it to build HDB flats for sale to our citizens at a cost to be decided by the Government. I think the subsidy should be reflected in the actual land cost, that is, the market price of land.”
“metre, which means that the land was sold for more than $500 per sq. ft. If we were to calculate the cost of that piece of land at $6,000 per sq. metre then, of course, the public housing built on that land has been heavily subsidized, much higher than the figure which I have circulated. But, on the other hand, as I have said earlier, if hon. Members say that the HDB cannot calculate the land cost at the market price but can only calculate what it costs the HDB, then of course the land cost would be very low and the subsidy would be very little. I will give another example. If the Member for Punggol bought a terrace house in 1963 for $30,000, it would be worth $300,000 today. Now, if the hon, Member were to sell this particular terrace house to his brother for $150,000, would he say, "I am being very generous by selling this house to my brother at half the market price, i.e. $150,000", or would the hon. Member say, "Look, the house cost me only $30,000 and I am being very unfair to my brother if I sold it to him for $150,000."”
“In fact, in the HDB's announcement on the increase in the selling price of flats, it has also mentioned that the Board is considering various means, including the designing of smaller and simpler flats, to reduce future cost increases. To come to the point, the bone of contention is the question of land cost. This is perhaps the key issue regarding the subsidy. What is the price of the land we should fix for the HDB flats? It is a fortunate thing that the Government and the HDB have built up a "land bank", so that there is sufficient State land and land owned by the HDB to meet the demand for public housing and other projects. However, land used for housing has a high opportunity cost. The argument is this. If we say that it is HDB land, some of the land has, in fact, been taken over by the H DB from the SIT and, as such, the land cost is virtually zero. And if we say that the land costs nothing to the HDB and therefore there is no land value, we can therefore say that the HDB subsidizes very little. If anyone accepts that line of argument, then the subsidy for the HDB flats will be very much less than what I have stated in my statement circulated to Members. On the other hand, if a piece of land is offered for sale in the open market for housing, then we will be able to fetch the market value for the land. To quote an example. There is a piece of land on which the HDB has built the Hong Lim complex. Three-quarters of that land were utilized by the HDB to build shops for resettlement cases and the flats were sold to the public applicants. As for the remaining quarter of that land, the URA offered it for sale to the public. I cannot remember the exact figure, but it fetched something like $6,000 per sq.”
“If we do not resettle them, then how can we develop? Another consideration is that the policy of selling HDB flats cheaply to resettlement cases does not merely result in an artificial demand for flats but it would also lead to a tremendous pressure on the HDB to build more fists in the Central area. As the increase in the selling price of flats is lowest in the New Towns and the Suburban zones and highest in the Central Core and the Inner Urban zones, the resettlement cases will opt overwhelmingly to buy flats in the Central area where they will enjoy the maximum benefit. Because the land for public housing within and around the City is limited, the HDB will not be able to meet this demand. Therefore, clearance work will be held up and the development projects cannot go ahead. So this is another consideration why we cannot allow the HDB flats to be sold at the old prices for the resettlement cases because public applicants who apply for flats in the Central area will never have a chance to get these fiats. It is, therefore, obvious that the Government cannot adopt the policy of selling HDB flats at the old prices to the resettlement cases. The effect of this policy will be disastrous. I share the view expressed by some hon. Members that the HDB should build flats of a simpler design in order to reduce costs. In fact, I have given instructions to the HDB to look into the designing of HDB flats and I hope that very soon the HDB will build less numbers of Model A flats. It will most probably go for the Model B type of flats. The design will be simpler and the cost will be much lower.”
“This is the highest inflation rate experienced by HDB in the last 20 years. Even in 1974, when the oil price quadrupled, the inflation rate experienced by HDB was only 34%. Therefore, with the wisdom of hindsight - although some Members say that we should have more foresight and less hindsight - I share the opinion of hon. Members that it is better for us to have a gradual increase in the selling price of the flats rather than a sudden increase. Perhaps in future HDB will try to manage with a gradual rather than a sudden increase in the selling price. On the question of construction costs, the Member for Whampoa has brought up several points. The construction costs are contained in my statement which has been circulated to Members. That figure in the statement is the actual cost of the HDB flats and, in fact, if the Member for Whampoa knows of anyone who could build HDB flats at that cost, I would be very grateful to him. If he suspects that the figure is inflated and that it is not the actual figure, I would say that it is the actual construction cost today.”
“Sir, first of all, I wish to thank hon. Members for giving their opinion on the recent price increases in HDB flats, and I will ask the staff in my Ministry and the HDB to carefully consider the various proposals suggested by Members. If we look at the housing situation in Singapore rationally, I would say that today the majority of Singaporeans live in comfortable homes, and not in a miserable situation. 70% of the population live in public housing, mainly in HDB flats, a small percentage in JTC flats and HUDC flats; another 10-12% of our population live in 70,000 units of private housing comprising bungalows, semi-detached houses, terrace houses and private flats; the remaining 18-20% live in shop-houses, mainly rent controlled, and semi-permanent housing generally in the rural areas. The squatter colonies and slums in Singapore are on the verge of disappearing. In the sixties, the majority of Singaporeans lived under deplorable housing conditions. When the Government formed the Housing and Development Board in February 1960 to launch the public housing programme, large numbers of people believed that a solution to the massive housing problem was impossible. Twenty years of dedicated effort by the PAP Government has transformed Singaporeans into one of the best housed peoples in Asia, if not in the world. Our standard of housing surpasses that of Hong Kong whose per capita income is about the same as ours. We are equal to, if not better than, some of the cities in Japan, Europe and America where the per capita incomes are three to four times higher than ours. I agree with Members of the House that the recent increase of 38% in the selling price of HDB flats is steep. However, this has been necessitated by the 48% increase in the cost of public housing in 1980.”
“Sir, the soiling of lifts is a problem, particularly in the older H DB estates. Although it is possible to instal urine-detecting devices in lifts, as suggested by the Member for Cheng San, such devices are costly to instal and maintain and may not be practicable. Such devices could create more nuisance if they are accidentally triggered off by other liquids. The HDB is taking several measures to solve the problem. Apart from organizing talks and campaigns to educate residents, the HDB is providing additional public toilet facilities in both old and new housing estates for the convenience of residents and visitors. With these improvements, the HDB hopes that the soiling of lifts will be reduced. REVIEW COMMITTEE ON CENSORSHIP (Particulars) 16. Mr Ch'ng Jit Koon asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Minister for Culture if he will inform the House (i) when the Censorship Review Committee was constituted; (ii) who are the members of the Committee: (iii) what are their terms of reference; and (iv) what progress has been made and when the Committee is expected to conclude its work.”
“I think the law has to be followed, and the Government cannot grant special consideration to these tenants, Otherwise people who have been served with notices to quit from their luxurious flats or bungalows will also come to the Government and say, "My landlord has thrown me out, so please give me alternative accommodation." SOILING OF HDB LIFTS (Punitive measures) 15. Mr Lee Yock Suan asked the Minister for National Development, in view of the widespread soiling of Housing and Development Board lifts, if the HDB will consider, besides public exhortations and campaigns which in this instance are like preaching to the convened, more imaginative measures to apprehend the culprits including, for example, research by outside consultants to try and design lift alarm systems which may be activated by traces of urine.”
“Sir, tenants generally fall into two groups. The first group is protected by the Control of Rent Act. These tenants do not have to move out because under the Control of Rent Act, the land-owners cannot sell their land to the Government as unencumbered land. Therefore, the tenants are eligible for alternative HDB accommodation. But the second group of tenants is not protected by the Control of Rent Act and the landowner has the right to sell the land to the Government as unencumbered land. If he does so, the tenant has to move out. These unprotected tenants are not eligible for alternative accommodation by the HDB.”
“Mr Ng Kah Ting asked the Minister for National Development whether he is aware that, in compulsory acquisition of land for public development, some owner-occupiers of small plots of land offer vacant possession in order to get higher compensation than the compensation they would got for encumbered land, and if the relevant authority will consider giving priority to such persons to purchase Housing and Development Board or Housing and Urban Development Company flats as the compensation they receive is hardly enough for them to purchase a private housing unit. Mr Teh Cheang Wan: Sir, owners of land who can offer vacant possession on acquisition are compensated at a higher value than encumbered land because the Government does not have to shoulder the financial burden of resettlement compensation and give priority to purchase HDB flats. The value of compensation for encumbered land is therefore lower, Owner-occupiers, however, cannot have it both ways. If they are in need of housing, they should opt for compensation based on encumbered land values so that they can get resettlement benefits including priority for the purchase of HDB flats. There is no priority allocation for HUDC flats to resettlement cases.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, the Public Works Department (PWD) is aware of the traffic conditions in the Balestier/whampoa area. It intends to widen Moulmein Road from Balestier Road to Thomson Road beginning 1982. This will be completed by 1983. Together with the road widening, the intersection at Balestier Road/Moulmein Road will be improved with additional road capacity. Meanwhile, the PWD will implement interim traffic management measures to help ease the traffic flow in the area. First, the short stretch of Kim Keat Road linking Jalan Bahagia with Jalan Toa Payoh will be expunged when Jalan Toa Payoh is upgraded to form part of the Pan Island Expressway in 1982. The expunction will prevent external traffic taking short-cuts through the Whampoa area, i.e. from Towner Road to Jalan Toa Payoh and from Jalan Toa Payoh to Balestier Road, thus adding to traffic congestion. Traffic conditions along Jalan Bahagia and Kim Keat Road will therefore improve. Secondly, PWD will in July 1981 prohibit right-hand turns from Whampoa Drive into Balestier Road. This will improve the main traffic flow out of Whampoa Drive and from Balestier Road into Whampoa Drive. The traffic signal timings at the Balestier Road intersections with Whampoa Drive and Kim Keat Road will be linked and synchronized to enable smoother traffic flow. The light traffic presently turning right from Whampoa Drive into Balestier Road con use Whampoa Road and Kim Keat Road to turn right into Balestier Road. PURCHASE OF HDB/HUDC FLATS (Priority for owner-occupiers of land acquired and compensated at higher vacant possession values) 14.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, the HDB has plans to develop an indoor stadium on the vacant land between the Toa Payoh Swimming Pool and the Sports Complex. Tenders for its construction will be called in the second half of this year. Provision has been made in the plans for future extension to include construction of squash courts. Part of the site has been earmarked for construction of tennis courts by other organizations. BALESTIER/WHAMPOA AREA (Traffic congestion) 13. Mr Sia Khoon Seong asked the Minister for National Development, in view of the worsening traffic congestion in the Balestier/Whampoa area, especially during peak hours, as a consequence of intensive private and public development in the area, whether his Ministry will take appropriate measures immediately to relieve the unbearable traffic congestion experienced everyday by residents in the vicinity.”
“Mr Eric Cheong Yuen Chee asked the Minister for National Development whether there are any plans to develop the vacant land between the Toa Payoh Swimming Pool and the Sports Complex and, if not, whether he will consider using the land for the construction of additional recreational facilities like squash and tennis courts for the benefit of the people staying in and around Toa Payoh New Town.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, cigarette kiosks located at some of the void decks have attached toilets which are available for public use. There are six kiosks strategically located within that pan of Ang Mo Kio New Town which falls within the Jalan Kayu Constituency. In addition, there are five eating houses located within the area, whose toilets can be used by the residents. As there are adequate public toilet facilities in the area, there is no necessity to build more public toilets. According to the HDB Area Office, a group of senior citizens are observed to meet regularly at the void deck of Block 534. For their convenience, they can either use the toilet facilities of the eating house at the adjacent Block 532, or the public toilet at Block 539 which is two blocks away. In answer to part (b) of the question, the HDB received 11 written complaints of rudeness against its staff in 1979 and 14 in 1980. All the complaints were referred to the management and thoroughly investigated by the departments, whose reports were then submitted to the management for decision. If any complaint is substantiated, the officer or officers concerned will be disciplined. Officers who have contacts with the public have to undergo courses on courtesy. They are constantly reminded to be courteous and tactful. In answer to (c), most of the unauthorized dumping areas in Jalan Kayu have been cleared and tidied up. They will soon be allocated for non-pollutive farming use. Meanwhile officers from the Primary Production Department and Public Health Division frequently patrol these sites to prevent further dumping of rubbish. Persons caught committing the offence will be prosecuted in court. DEVELOPMENT OF VACANT LAND BETWEEN TOA PAYOH SWIMMING POOL AND SPORTS COMPLEX 12.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I wish to thank the hon. Member for Kampong Ubi for his kind words about the Public Works Department on the recently com- pleted Pan-island Expressway at Jalan Eunos. Quite often, the widening of roads causes inconvenience to the residents and quite often it is unavoidable because of the increase in traffic. In the case of Eunos Crescent raised by the hon. Member, it is because of the increase in traffic. In the Housing and Development Board, there is always proper planning in the development of HDB new towns and estates. However, the HDB does not stop at the completion of an estate. If warranted, existing facilities will be upgraded. And as there is an increase in the volume of traffic in Eunos Crescent, the road has been widened to improve the flow of the increased traffic. The hon. Member has also touched on the animal symbols adopted by the HDB in designing the play equipment for HDB children's playgrounds. The HDB has always tried to adopt universal symbols which are generally not connected with any specific culture. However, the hon. Member's suggestion to include symbols of the various cultural groups in Singapore in designing the play equipment is a good one, and I will ask the HDB to incorporate his suggestion in future.”
“Sir, the Changi Fisheries Research Station has successfully carried out experimental breeding of the grouper fish. The station has also successfully demonstrated the feasibility of rearing marine fish in floating cage nets and intensive mussel culture in floating rafts. The Primary Production Department is finalizing a scheme for the private sector to undertake commercial marine fish farming projects. The Department has identified several areas off Pulau Ubin and the coastal waters off Serangoon as designated fish farming areas. Entrepreneurs who are interested in undertaking commercial fish farming projects may soon apply to the Primary Production Department for licences to rear fish in the designated areas. The annual fee for a licence shall be $500 for each 5,000 square metres of fishing farm area.”
“The resettlement policy is that when an area is being cleared, we ask the various Chinese temples to group together and the HDB will allocate a site to them at a very low land cost so that they can jointly build a temple. But if any individual temple affected by the clearance is financially strong and the owners want to build their own temple, they are certainly welcome to tender for the temple site. All things being equal, since they are paying the same premium for the land, a site will be allocated to them. For example, if they have tendered a sum lower than that of the highest bidder, the HDB will be prepared to ask them to up the price and allocate the land to them so that they can build a temple. This consideration is being given to all the affected cases. However, if the temple has certain unique features worthy of preservation and that it does not interfere with the development of the land, as I have assured the Member for Kaki Bukit, the temple will be preserved. On the last point, a very eloquent plea has been made by some Members for a need to revise the compensation rate for resettlement. I am prepared to say that the compensation rates will be revised. In fact, the policy of the Government is such that compensation rates are constantly being reviewed. The last review was in 1979 when compensation rates and cash grants to farmers were generally increased. We are currently reviewing the rate to take into account inflation and the rising cost of housing. When finalized, the new rates will take effect from today. Those affected by resettlement and who move out today, but before the new rates are announced, will therefore still be entitled to the increased rates.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the Member for Changi has raised a point about the sand quarry. The sand quarry project in the Lorong Dangai area has not been shelved. The project has been delayed because of problems in clearing the two saw-mills at the site. Tenders for the operation of sand quarry have been called, and quarrying will commence after the award of the tender. As regards the Member for Kaki Bukit's point on the preservation of the unique features in the Kaki Bukit area, the HDB will take note of the hon. Member's comments. The HDB will consider the retention of these features if they are consistent with the over-all redevelopment plan of the area. On the request by the Member for Nee Soon to allocate more than one flat to a large family which is generally found in squatter areas, I think much depends on the number of persons in a family. Quite often in one household where the family is really an extended family, they get four, five or six flats. This is not unusual. But cases of a large family comprising the husband and wife with 10 grown-up children are very rare. Even if there is such a family, I would suggest that they take a five-room flat. I suppose the grown-up children will get married sooner or later. They can submit their respective applications to the HDB, and they will be allo- cated additional flats when they have settled down. But if they have not settled down, we cannot allocate two flats to a family. Once we allocate two flats to a family, we will create a precedent and that will create a lot of problems for us. The Member for Thomson brought up the question of temples.”
“It is applied uniformly throughout. Although I am quite sympathetic towards the emergency one-room flats owners, I am sorry to inform the Member that I cannot waive this requirement. As regards overcrowding in the swimming pool in Toa Payoh and that it is essential to have a swimming pool either within the Whampoa constituency or nearby, I generally agree with the Member's observation and I will ask the HDB to look into it. We will find a place to build a swimming pool either within the Whampoa constituency or around Whampoa constituency.”
“Just for argument's sake, if there is a senior citizen who is very old and some neighbour is willing to look after him upon relocation, I would say that the HDB will be prepared to consider the allocation of adjoining flats to the senior citizen and his neighbour only if the neighbour can give an undertaking that he is going to help the senior citizen. But this will not be the general case with neighbours both of whom are old citizens. I think I have touched on most of the points raised by the Member for Bedok. On the point raised by the Member for Whampoa on the provision of lifts for the six-storey flats, I will ask the HDB to make a study of it. If we want those flats to remain after this decade, i.e. after 1990, we will most probably have to consider installing lifts. But if HDB intends to demolish those flats within this decade, then the installation of lifts would be a waste of public funds. What we will do is to allocate the flats at the top floors to those families with younger members who are able to climb up to the upper floors, and to allocate those on the ground floor to families with senior citizens or older people. On the question of allowance for removal expenses, I will deal with this matter together with the Resettlement vote which is going to be discussed subsequently. On the area of choice, HDB's policy is that whenever residents are relocated, if accommodation is available in the same constituency, we will give priority to the residents. That has been the existing policy all the time. They are considered as resettlement cases and they are given priority. On the question of 20% deposit for the purchase of flats, we cannot waive this condition. This is the standard requirement and it does not apply only to the emergency one-room flats.”
“They are not similar to the Home Ownership Scheme. In other words, the owners of these flats are allowed to sell their flats, to assign or rent their flats. They are allowed to do virtually the same as private flat owners. For this reason, they are under different conditions. The hon. Member has requested that the residents be allowed to pay their maintenance service and conservancy charges at quarterly intervals. I will ask the HDB to look into it and, if at all possible, I will ask them to accede to the request of the hon. Member. As to the lack of a playground, the position is this. Previously when there were some open spaces they complained that there was the lack of car parking facilities. So the open spaces were converted to a car park to satisfy the parking requirements. Once the open spaces were converted into car parks, naturally there were no more open spaces for the construction of a play-ground. This is one of those situations. To solve the problem, we may have to resort to acquiring the whole area for redevelopment. But I would like to assure the Member and the residents there that the HDB has no such intention. Therefore, they can continue to own the flats but they have to put up with this lack of open spaces because the open spaces have been used as car parks. As regards the relocation of residents which was brought up by the Member for Kim Seng, the HDB allows the family members to live together on relocation. That is to say, brothers and sisters with their parents can live next door to each other. But as far as the request that neighbours be allowed to live together, I say that each case will have to be considered on its own merit.”
“Results from a series of tests and experiments conducted by the Department indicate that the most efficient way to channel moisture to the tree roots in large tarmac areas is to dig up the tarmac and replace it with perforated or aeration slabs. To a layman, trees planted in the tarmac car park appear to be growing well and aeration seems to be a waste of money. In reality this is not so. Aeration is essential to promote the tree growth and it is not a waste of public funds. As all Members know, the Ministry of Finance has been very careful about approval of public funds. If this is a waste of money, I am quite sure the Ministry of Finance will not grant its approval for the provision of aeration slabs. On the point raised by the Member for Kaki Bukit about the lack of essential facilities in a housing estate, such as a police station, I would like to inform the House that a revised procedure is now being worked out to ensure that the essential facilities are provided in time when a HDB new town is ready for occupation. When this procedure has been finalized, the facilities will be provided together with the development of public housing. On the question of street lighting of PWD streets, the point is that HDB will not hand over the keys to the owners or tenants of the flats when the facilities such as street lighting around that neighbourhood are not ready. But PWD roads are a separate matter because PWD roads have their own programme, and this is not part of the HDB programme, I will pass this information to the PWD to see what can be done in the Kaki Bukit area about the PWD roads and the public lighting. On the point raised by the Member for Tiong Bahru, the pre-war flats sold to the residents in Tiong Bahru come under a different set of conditions.”
“A 500-square foot flat which is slightly bigger than a one-room improved HDB flat but much smaller than a two-room flat has been sold at $240,000 and people are queuing up overnight to buy these flats. So it is quite obvious that the HDB flats cannot be priced at market price because this will be beyond the reach of our citizens. On the few points raised by the hon. Member for Telok Blangah requesting for more facilities, the policy of the HDB is to continuously upgrade the facilities in all HDB estates. So Telok Blangah is included. Additional sports and recreational facilities such as jogging tracks, hard courts and keep-fit playgrounds will be provided in Telok Blangah Constituency, and I hope work will start soon because I am told that the tender has already been called. On another point raised by the hon. Member about the bin centre, bin centres at all HDB housing estates will be modified so that the collection of refuse can be done within the bin centre itself. Improvements will be made and it will include Telok Blangah. 5.00 p.m. Several Members have questioned the need to provide aeration slabs. They consider it a waste of public funds. I want to assure hon. Members that it is not so. In fact, several Members have questioned the need to spend large sums of money on aeration of trees in car parks. Since the "Make Singapore Green" campaign in 1963, the Parks and Recreation Department of my Ministry has been monitoring the growth of trees in all parts of Singapore under different conditions. Observations show that trees planted in tarmac car parks grow very slowly because their roots are unable to obtain the necessary moisture.”
“On the question of poor lighting in the common corridors, I will ask the HDB to look into it and, if necessary, we will switch on some of the lights in the day-time in these corridors. On the question of housing subsidy raised by the hon. Member for Boon Lay, the subsidy to the HDB is based on the overall deficit in the income and expenditure account of the HDB. Though there was a provision of $64 million for subsidy to the HDB for the financial year 1980, the actual deficit incurred by the HDB in the year was $53 million. This year's provision is $55 million, and there is therefore no reduction in the subsidy. Another part of the subsidy which is not shown here is actually the land subsidy which means that the HDB actually provides a nominal land cost when it computes the prices of flats for sale. As all hon. Members here in this House know, if the HDB is going to use the market price of land, then the cost of HDB flats will be much higher than the present selling prices. So this land subsidy is not reflected in this provision. While the Government would like to be able to progressively reduce the subsidy over the years, this is not possible. In fact, the housing subsidy has continuously increased with inflation and with the increasing oil prices. The Government recognizes that there is a need to keep housing price within the reach of the lower income-group. Therefore, I would like to assure the Member for Boon Lay that it is not possible for Government to pass on all the cost to the purchaser even if the Government wants to because this is not practical. This would price the house well beyond the reach of many Singaporeans. Hon. Members must have read the newspapers about the sale of private flats in the Katong area.”
“But if he has lived there for more than three years and, having been allocated a five-room flat, he intends to sell his three-room flat in the open market and make a profit, then the HDB will ask him to put a deposit of $600. I think the hon. Member is aware of the prices advertised in the newspapers on the sale of old HDB flats. The owners are, in fact, making a very substantial profit and I believe the additional $400 deposit will not cause a hardship. The Member for Radin Mas complained about lifts. I am aware of the situation. The breakdown of the lifts in Blocks Nos. 1 to 6, Telok Blangah Crescent - which are not in Telok Blangah Constituency but in Radin Mas Constituency - these six blocks of flats have a much higher rate of breakdown. The HDB has carried out a series of checks on the lifts and has replaced the defective parts. The frequency of breakdown of the lifts in these six blocks has been reduced from 2.3 breakdowns per lift per month in December 1980 to the rate of 1.53 breakdowns in February 1981, which means that the defective parts have been replaced and there has been a very considerable improvement. I would like to give the hon. Member for Radin Mas an assurance that we will continue to try to improve the lifts. A lift has an average service life of 20 years and some of the lifts installed by the SIT are still functioning quite well for more than 20 years. The lifts in these six blocks of flats are only 7 1/2 years old. I would like to give the Member the assurance that if our efforts to reduce the frequency of breakdowns are not successful, then we will consider replacing these lifts at an earlier date.”
“Again, we find that in the last two or three years, the contractors are also facing the problem of getting sufficient cleaners in spite of a very substantial increase in the contract price. They are facing this problem because cleaning is a very dirty and unpleasant job and the social status of a cleaner is relatively low. Young Singaporeans generally prefer other jobs to cleaning. Because of the shortage of cleaners, the HDB is not able to do as much as they would like. But I would certainly not give the excuse that because there is a shortage of workers, therefore, the housing estates should be dirty. That is not an excuse. But this is a fact - we are short of workers and the HDB is trying to do the best possible job with its limited workforce. Our supervising officers are very strict on the contractors who do the cleansing job and make sure that they provide sufficient workers under the contract to do the cleansing job. On this matter, I would say that the Residents' Committees, another grassroots organization, can help to get the message across to the residents that littering, or the throwing of rubbish, all over the housing estate only increases the cost of cleaning and maintenance. Vandalism or damaging the amenities in the housing estate, again increases maintenance cost. If the residents can cooperate with the HDB by reducing acts of littering and vandalism, the HDB will be able to save on maintenance and cleaning costs and our housing estates will be much cleaner. The Member for Changi raised a point about deposit. The HDB's rule is that if a person already owns an HDB flat, let us say he has been living in a three-room flat for less than three years and wants to buy a five-room flat, he is only required to put a deposit of $200.”
“The HDB has separated the complaints into two groups, namely, defects which can wait and which can be attended to by the contractors. But for serious complaints, such as somebody being trapped inside a lift, or the WC is choked and overflowing, or the electricity is out of order and emergency repairs have to be carried out, the HDB has a 24-hour emergency service unit which will respond to these emergency calls. The other defects will be attended to through the normal procedure. Of course, I must admit that there are good contractors who respond reasonably quickly and there are also bad contractors who respond rather slowly. In our experience with the not-so-good contractors, we find that the owner of the flat suffers the frus- tration of having to wait for the repair jobs or maintenance work to be carried out slowly. But in a situation like Singapore where at present the HDB has a very large building program me, coupled with development in the private sector, we have a serious shortage of construction workers. We must therefore accept that the response to requests for repair work cannot be as quickly as we would like it to be. The Member for Changi complained about poor standard of cleaning work. The Member for Bedok also touched on the subject and asked whether or not the HDB has sufficient cleaners. My answer is "No." In fact, less than 90% of the vacancies in the HDB's establishment are filled. In other words, we have a fairly large number of vacancies of cleaners as the job of cleaning is not popular. Singaporeans generally shy away from it. For most of the time the number of vacancies remains large. In the HDB, we have allowed 50% of the cleaning work to be done by our own HDB workers and 50% by the contract workers.”
“" Then the HDB will ring up the owner of the flat and make arrangements for the contractor to go to the flat to make good the defects. The repair cost is very cheap, maybe $1 or $2 for adjusting the door which may take one hour of the carpenter's time. But if we add up the transport costs - he went to the flat three times with his tools - instead of $1, it becomes $50 for making the three trips. This is a quite common occurrence. On the one hand, the owner of the HDB flat complains that the repair work is too slow. On the other hand, the contractors complain to the HDB, "Whenever I go to do the repairs, I cannot get into the flat." Today, Singapore is experiencing a great shortage of construction workers. Wages of construction workers are very high and, therefore, if we are going to extend the maintenance period to more than one year, even perhaps for as short a period as six months more, I think for each flat we will have to pay several thousand dollars more. The HDB thinks so, and I personally agree that it would be rather unwise to extend another six months and to allow the contractors to charge several thousand dollars more. Also, if we extend it for another six months, there is no guarantee that the defects will not occur in the 19th month. Still we are going to have a lot of complaints. Previously, when the maintenance period was six months, they said, "I have defects appearing after eight or nine months." So we extended it to one year, and the complaints appear after the 12th month. And if we extend it to 18 months, there is no guarantee that the defects will not occur on the 19th month. As regards the complaints on defects, the HDB has rationalized the response to the complaints. The HDB has set up the 24-hour emergency service.”
“Eventually we extended the liability period to one year. In other words, after the sale of a flat, all defects have to be reported to the HDB within one year. The HDB will then arrange for the contractor concerned to make good all the defects. After one year, any defect discovered will no longer be the responsibility of the contractor. Some Members of Parliament have suggested that we should extend the period from one year to 18 months or even two years. But we thought that this would be rather unwise because the contractor will put a very substantial amount of money in his tender to cover the extended period. In fact, when we extended the period from six months to one year, the contractors added in a substantial amount of money in the tender. We had several meetings with the contractors. They brought up some problems faced by them. For instance, there is a small defect to be attended to, such as a door cannot be closed properly, and it needs some slight adjustment which may take a carpenter one hour to rectify. But when the contractor and his workmen go to the particular flat in the day and knock at the door, the lady inside will tall them, "My husband has left word with me that I should not open the door to strangers if my husband is not in." So the contractor cannot do anything. 4.45 p.m. Then they ask the lady, "What time does your husband come back?" She tells the contractor, "My husband comes back at 6 p.m." At 6 p.m. the contractor goes back to the flat and knocks at the door but nobody is in. Perhaps the husband and wife have gone out for dinner. Then the contractor goes to the Housing Board Area Office and says, "Look here, you are chasing me to make good the defects. I have called at the flat twice but I am unable to get into the flat.”
“A person may come to me and say, "The Immigration Department says I need a letter of introduction from a Member of Parliament." Some of my constituents genuinely believe that a letter from me will help them get their citizenship earlier, or it would help their sons to do part-time national service instead of full-time; or if their children have been detained under the criminal law provisions and are in prison, a letter from me will enable them to be released immediately. They hope for such things. They come and tell me all sorts of stories which, I would say, may be untrue. But we can well appreciate their situation. They are desperate for something to be done, and so they do not mind coming up and telling a story to the Member of Parliament in the hope of getting something done earlier. I would like to assure the House that the HDB staff know very well that the policy is first-come-first-served and they should not send any applicant to see his Member of Parliament. They know full well that this will only create additional work for them because if a Member of Parliament writes to the HDB, it has to be replied. I do not think the HDB staff will do that. I have been there for quite a long time. As regards the question raised by the Member for Changi, previously, when the HDB offered flats for sale, the maintenance period was six months. In other words, all defects have to be reported to the HDB within six months, after which period the owner is responsible for making good any defects. But as a result of complaints made in this House, I think the maintenance period was extended. I was not here then. It was the time of my predecessors, i.e. the present Minister for Law and Science and Technology, Mr Barker, and the former Minister for National Development, Mr Lim Kim San.”
“No, it is not because of the Member's request but for some other reasons. I am just giving an example. The flats have been vacant for two or three years. Since we offered the flats on a first-come-first-served basis, that accounts for the long period during which the flats have been vacant. It is not because we are not trying to fill them. We are trying very hard. In Punggol, the HDB tried 11,000 times in order to fill up the flats. On the question of misleading information given to the applicants by the Area Office, I do not think that is so. Again, we know this from our experience, and quite often what happens is something like this. A person goes to the HDB Ares Office and says, "Look here, I want to get married" or "I have been thrown out by my former landlord." He then says, "I need a flat quickly." Those in the HDB Area Office know that it must be on a first-come-first-served basis and it is therefore not possible for that person to jump the queue. Thus, it is not possible to allocate a flat to him. He will then say, "Look here, if you do not want to allocate a flat to me, I am going to see my MP." He may threaten the officers in the HDB Area Office by saying, "If you do not want to give me a flat quickly, you are being very unhelpful. I am going to complain to my MP." So the officer may reply, "If you want to complain to your MP, what else can I do? You can go and see your MP." It is not the HDB Area officers who are really misleading these people. A constituent who goes to see his Member of Parliament will not normally tell him the true story of what has happened. He will just say, "I have been sent by the officer from the Area Office to see you, If you can give me a letter, it will help me." I get similar problems during my Meet-the-people sessions.”
“The HDB may wait for about three weeks, and only when he says "No" will the HDB allocate it to the next person on the list. So if we were to offer a flat and unfortunately for one reason or another, all the first 10 applicants for the same flat say "No" to the offer, we end up with the flat remaining unoccupied for 30 weeks. That accounts for the fact that a flat can be unoccupied for a long period. This is the case with some unpopular areas. For example, take the Punggol Estate. The hon. Member for Punggol knows about the problem because I have written a letter to him. In the rural area of Punggol where there were vacant flats, we have had to make offers to 11,000 applicants before the flats could be filled.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I wish to thank the Member for Alexandra for his kind words about the HDB, especially the good response and cooperative attitudes adopted by the Area officers. On the Member's point about lifts, the HDB has been receiving complaints about lifts for many years. As Singapore develops in accordance with the financial capability of the Singapore Government, so will the HDB. In 1960 the HDB was not able to provide additional lifts for those flats which have one lift in each block. We could only afford to provide one lift in each block of flats. But now, as the financial position of HDB has improved and also with increased Government subsidy, we are able to provide additional lifts for those blocks of flats which are above seven storeys high. It is unfortunate, however, that in Whampoa the flats there are only five or six storeys high, and so it is missed out. But I will deal with the points which have been raised by the Member for Whampoa later on. On the question of empty flats in Alexandra, this is not just a problem for the Member for Alexandra. It has also become a problem for me when I face my constituents during my Meet-the-people sessions. They would come to me and say, "Why don't you give me the flat next door? I know that the flat next door has been empty for the last six months. You are telling me that the flat is not vacant or not available and yet it has been empty for the last six months." The position is that the HDB allocates flats either on a first-come-first-served basis to the public or resettlement cases. When the HDB allocates a flat to a person, it gives him two weeks to say whether or not he accepts the flat. Although the HDB gives him two weeks, it does not re-allocate it to another applicant after the two weeks' period.”
“Sir, the planting of fruit trees has, in fact, already started. We first planted fruit trees in the schools and army camps. This is important because all our children who are now in school will get to know the various fruits trees. Let them get used to the idea of seeing fruits on the trees so that they will not try to pluck them before they are ripe. In the second phase, we have planted fruit trees in the housing estates. Our intention is that when the trees are established we will hand them over to the Residents' Committees. They will look after them and when the fruits are harvested, they can distribute them to the residents or to members of the senior citizens' club. Eventually we hope to be able to plant fruit trees along public roads when our citizens have already got used to the sight of fruits hanging from trees and will not make any attempt to pluck them.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, for the financial year 1981, the Parks and Recreation Department has been provided with adequate funds for the continued development of Central Park, East Coast Park, Pasir Ris Park and West Coast Park. Two new parks, Sembawang Park (Phase II) and Mount Faber Park (Phase (I), are now being planned. I agree with the Member for Punggol that the provision does not appear to be enough. The reason is that the plan has not yet been finalized and, therefore, we are not able to arrive at the exact figure for the additional funds required. Therefore, funds will be sought for their implementation in May when the detailed planning is completed. In fact, we will be asking for more money. The Member's observation is correct.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I wish to thank the Member for Ang Mo Kio for speaking very highly of the planning of Ang Mo Kio New Town. I think my colleagues in the Housing and Development Board will be very happy with the good comments. On the question of the safety of pedestrians in Ang Mo Kio New Town, four overhead pedestrian bridges will be built in Ang Mo Kio New Town in the coming financial year. They will be located at Avenue 3, near the Oriental Emporium: Avenue 3, linking the Town Garden to Neighbourhood 4; Avenue 4, near Neighbourhood 6 shopping centre; and Avenue 1 near Neighbourhood 3 shopping centre. Another eight pedestrian crossings have been planned for the new town. They will be constructed at the beginning of 1982. Of the eight crossings, six will be overhead bridges and the remaining are push-button crossings. I hope that the provision of these pedestrian crossings on the busy roads in Ang Mo Kio New Town will be adequate. Mr Yeo Toon Chia( In Mandarin): Sir, in view of the Minister's assurance that four overhead pedestrian bridges will be constructed in the coming financial year and another eight pedestrian crossings for the next financial year, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment by leave, withdrawn.”