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 23 of 25.
“The portion of the Pan-island Expressway in the Changi constituency will be completed within the next two to three years. The north-south arterial road linking the Pan-Island Expressway with the East Coast Parkway will be completed within the next five years. The New Upper Changi Road from Bedok Road to Tampines Road now under construction will be completed next year. A coastal road next to the Airport running towards Changi Point will be completed within the next three years.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the Pan-island Expressway at Lorong Lodeh is now under construction and will not be completed until early 1981. There is at present a temporary access for residents to cross the construction site to Lorong Tebera or Jalan Somapah Timor opposite. When the Expressway is opened, residents will be able to cross the Expressway by an alternative access route at the Expressway's junction with Upper Changi Road. The Public Works Department will monitor this pedestrian traffic and, if the volume justifies it, consideration will be given to the construction of a pedestrian bridge across the Expressway at Lorong Lodeh. CHANGI CONSTITUENCY (Five-year development plans) 9. Mr Teo Chong Tee asked the Minister for National Development what development plans his Ministry has for Changi constituency in the next five years, other than the Changi Airport project. Mr Teh Cheang Wan: Mr Speaker, Sir, there are several development plans for Changi constituency in the next five years. The Jurong Town Corporation will develop the new Changi South Industrial Estate for clean industries. The Estate covers some 170 hectares and will be planned in a park-like setting. The Parks and Recreation Department will develop the East Coast Park Extension and the coastal strip abutting the Changi Airport. The area involved is about 113 hectares. Basic park amenities such as cycle tracks, benches and refreshment facilities will be provided. Singapore Airlines will be developing a 2.8 hectare Sports Complex near Fairy Point. The Complex will provide a comprehensive range of sporting and recreational facilities. Several road projects have been planned to serve the Constituency.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the Public Works Department will construct a pedestrian overhead bridge across Upper Thomson Road, in front of Thomson Plaza, next year. LORONG LODEH (Pedestrian crossing facilities) 8. Mr Teo Chong Tee asked the Minister for National Development why there is no provision for pedestrian crossing facilities for the daily use of approximately thirty families at Lorong Lodeh to safely and conveniently cross the Pan-island Expressway where it cuts across Lorong Lodeh.”
“The development of Raffles City is confined to the former Raffles Institution grounds and will not affect the grounds of St Andrew's cathedral and the Padang. There are no immediate plans for further development which will affect the schools along Bras Basah and the playground of St Joseph's Institution. Tables - Number of Graduates from Students admitted for Part-time Bachelor of Accountancy Course for the 1965-66 to 1969-70 Academic Years, Number of Graduates from Students admitted for Part-time Bachelor of Laws Course for the 1957-58 to 1960-61 Academic Years (Cols. 423 - 424)”
“Resolved, That this Parliament, pursuant to Section 3 of the Departmental Titles (Alteration) Act (Chapter 53), resolves that the Schedule to the said Act be amended by the addition under the headings of "Old Title or Name of Office" and "New Title or Name of Office" respectively of the following:- Old Title or New Title or Name of Office Name of Office Director, Botanic Gardens ) Commissioner of Parks and ) Recreation Botanist, Botanic Gardens ) Deputy Commissioner of Parks ) and Recreation Curator, Botanic Gardens ) Assistant Commissioner of Parks ) and Recreation ) Curator of Parks and Recreation ADJOURNMENT Resolved, "That Parliament do now adjourn to Friday, 21st September, 1979." - [Mr E.W. Barker]. Adjourned accordingly at Two minutes past Four o'clock p.m. to Friday, 21st September, 1979. WRITTEN ANSWER TO QUESTION RAFFLES CITY PROJECT 1. Mr Ho See Beng asked the Minister for National Development whether the Raffles Centre development project will lead to the acquisition of schools along Bras Basah Road as well as the playground of St Joseph's Institution, the grounds of St Andrew's Cathedral and the Padang in front of City Hall.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move the motion* standing in my name as it appears on the Order Paper. *The motion reads as follows: That this Parliament, pursuant of section 3 of the Departmental Titles (Alteration) Act (Chapter 53), resolves that the Schedule to the said Act be amended by the addition under the headings of "Old Title or Name of Office" and "New Title or Name of Office" respectively of the following:-- Old Title or New Title or Name of Office Name of Office Director, Botanic Gardens ) Commissioner of Parks and ) Recreation ) Botanist, Botanic Gardens ) Deputy Commissioner of ) Parks and Recreation ) Curator, Botanic Gardens ) Assistant Commissioner of ) Parks and Recreation ) ) Curator of Parks and ) Recreation The motion seeks to amend the following old titles of office to the current titles: Old Title or New Title or Name of Office Name of Office Director, Botanic Gardens ) Commissioner of Parks and ) Recreation Botanist, Botanic Gardens ) Deputy Commissioner of Parks ) and Recreation Curator, Botanic Gardens ) Assistant Commissioner of Parks ) and Recreation ) Curator of Parks and Recreation Before 1965, the Botanic Gardens was a unit under the Ministry of National Development. In 1973, the Botanic Gardens and the Parks and Trees Unit of the Public Works Department were integrated to form the Parks and Recreation Division of the Public Works Department. In 1976, the Parks and Recreation Department became a separate department, i.e., the Parks and Recreation Department, under the Ministry. Consequent to these changes, the titles of office have been re-designated. Hence it is necessary to amend the old titles to the new titles. Sir, I beg to move. Question put, and agreed to.”
“Dr Lau Teik Soon asked the Minister for Social Affairs when construction of the Sports Centre at Burghley Drive will commence, when it will be completed and what will be the facilities in the Sports Centre.”
“Sir, the Public Works Department will install a pedestrian crossing with push-button signals across Ang Mo Kio Avenue 3, near Ang Mo Kio and Mayflower Primary Schools, in December 1979. Construction work will be completed by January 1980. AMBULANCE STAFF (Adequacy of) 21. Haji Rahmat bin Kenap asked the Minister for Social Affairs whether there is sufficient manpower for the ambulances as, when an ambulance attends a call from a flat resident, usually only one attendant goes up to the flat and the sick person is carried down on a canvas sheet instead of on a proper stretcher. The Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Social Affairs (Mr Chan Chee Seng) (for the Acting Minister for Social Affairs): Mr Speaker, Sir, the Member for Geylang Serai may like to know that the Singapore Fire Brigade has sufficient staff for the manning of 16 ambulances to cover the whole of Singapore. From 15th April this year, there are three officers for each ambulance instead of two. Each ambulance is manned by an ambulance officer who is a staff nurse, an attendant and a driver. The canvas sheet which the Member for Geylang Serai mentioned is actually a specially designed stretcher which is also used in the Accident & Emergency Departments of hospitals. This type of stretcher is ideal for use in Housing & Development Board apartment blocks. As it is not rigid like a normal stretcher, it permits the ambulance crew to manoeuvre narrow corridors, sharp corners, staircases and small lifts and lobbies. The patient is transferred to the normal stretcher at the ground floor. Each ambulance is equipped with at least two normal stretchers which are used to transport patients to hospitals. SPORTS CENTRE AT BURGHLEY DRIVE (Particulars) 22.”
“Sir, the Sale of Commercial Properties Act and Rules came into force on 20th July 1979. It requires developers to use a prescribed form of agreement which, among other things, stipulates a date for the issue of strata titles. Although the law does not apply to agreements already entered into before 20th July 1979, we are closely monitoring the situation. Where developers are considered to have unduly delayed the issue of strata titles, a cut-off date will be set for the issue of such titles. Appropriate action will be taken against developers who fail to meet the cut-off date. ANG MO KIO AVENUE 3 (Construction of pedestrian crossing) 20. Mr Yeo Toon Chia asked the Minister for National Development if he will consider constructing a pedestrian crossing or an overhead bridge at Ang Mo Kio Avenue 3 for the safety of the pupils of Ang Mo Kio and Mayflower Primary Schools.”
“Sir, the Animal Infirmary treats about 18,000 pet cases a year. There are no plans to provide a mobile unit, as it will be too costly. Furthermore, a mobile unit will not efficiently utilise professional staff which is in short supply in the Primary Production Department. Pet treatment services are also offered by licensed private veterinarians. Some of them make house calls to treat pets which cannot be conveniently transported. The Dog Control Unit regularly visits areas which are affected by development schemes to collect pets abandoned by people who have been resettled. In 1978, the Unit collected 21,000 abandoned dogs and cats. Mobile teams from the Unit will continue to patrol affected areas. SALE OF COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES ACT, 1979 (Issue of strata title) 19. Mr Eugene Yap Giau Cheng asked the Minister for National Development, in the light of current complaints received by the Consumers' Association of Singapore (CASE), if he will explain why no provision was made in the Sale of Commercial Properties Act, 1979, to protect purchasers of commercial properties where such properties had been fully paid for but where purchasers had not yet been issued with strata titles although a certificate of fitness for occupation had been issued by the Building Authority; and if he will consider a cut-off date for strata titles to be issued to purchasers of commercial properties already fully paid for before the Act came into operation.”
“Sir, the Changi Point Jetty was reconstructed and the jetty deck extended as recently as 1978. The Ministry, therefore, has no plans to expand further the facilities at the Changi Point Jetty. Dredging work, however, will be carried out to deepen the navigational channels within Changi Creek. Work will start in September and will be completed by November 1979. ANIMAL INFIRMARY (Mobile unit) 18. Mr Teo Chong Tee asked the Minister for National Development (a) whether the Animal Infirmary will run a mobile unit to make its services readily available to people who own pets and live far away from the Infirmary; and (b) whether officials from the City Veterinary Centre can regularly visit areas which are affected by resettlement to collect pets abandoned by people who have moved to Housing and Development Board flats.”
“Mr Teo Chong Tee asked the Minister for National Development (a) whether facilities at the Changi Point Jetty will be expanded to relieve the present congestion and to cope with the increasing sea traffic plying between Changi Point and the nearby offshore islands, like Pulau Ubin and Pulau Tekong Besar, and Pengarang in south-eastern Johore; and (b) whether further dredging work will be carried out to deepen the sea at the Jetty so as to enable boats to have better access to the Jetty at low tide.”
“Sir, I presume the hon. Member is referring to the Hwa Siah Musical Association at No. 86A, Lorong 25A. Geylang Road. An application to use the premises as an association was disapproved in August 1978 because the use of residential flats for non-residential purposes cannot be allowed. There were also complaints from neighbourhood residents about the excessive noise caused by the playing of musical instruments until late at night. The Building Control Division gave the Association a grace period till April 1979 to look for alternative premises. However, the BCD found subsequently that the flat was still being used as association premises. A removal exercise by the BCD was scheduled for 20th July 1979. However, the exercise was not carried out because of an appeal from the hon. Member. The BCD team did not seize any property. The Assistant Director, Building Control Division, is empowered under section 7 of the Building Control Act to seize all movable property found in a building that has been converted to an unauthorised use. The Building Control Division has always exercised flexibility in carrying out enforcement action. The operator is always given ample time to cease the unauthorised use. Seizure of property is carried out only as a last resort. CHANGI POINT JETTY (Expansion of facilities) 17.”
“Mr Ho See Beng asked the Minister for National Development (a) whether he is aware of the seizure by the Building Control Division of fittings and furniture belonging to a certain civic association in spite of the discontinuance of any meeting or activity since its application for change of use of the premises into association office had been rejected; (b) which section of the relevant law empowers the Director of the Building Control Division to order seizure of the association's property; and (c) if he will instruct the Building Control Division in future to exercise more flexibility under the circumstances.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, a north-south arterial road from Avenue 1, Ang Mo Kio, to Thomson Road is presently under construction. It will provide an alternative high-capacity road linking Ang Mo Kio New Town to Thomson Road, by-passing the junction in front of MacRitchie Reservoir. This scheme is expected to be completed by October 1979. There is, therefore, no need to build a flyover at MacRitchie Reservoir junction. To cater for traffic in the 1980s from the Upper Thomson Corridor to the City, there are plans to build an expressway joining Ang Mo Kio Avenue 1 to Balestier Road. This expressway will cater for the traffic demand generated by Ang Mo Kio as well as Nee Soon New Town in the 1980s. CIVIC AND CLAN ASSOCIATIONS (Applications for change of use of premises) 15. Mr Ho See Beng asked the Minister for National Development how many applications for change of use of premises into association offices have been rejected by the Building Control Division in 1977, 1978, and the first seven months of 1979; and whether steps have been taken to develop a piece of land in Geylang to accommodate those civic and clan associations which have been affected by urban renewal or whose applications for change of use of premises have been rejected. Mr Teh Cheang Wan: Sir, 18 applications for change of use of premises into association offices were rejected in 1977 and 12 in 1978. Three were rejected in the first seven months of 1979. My Ministry is considering several parcels of State land for the development of association or religious buildings. These will be sold through the next URA sale of sites for private development. A number of these sites are in the Geylang area. BUILDING CONTROL DIVISION (Seizure of property) 16.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, traffic lights are being installed at the junction of Ang Mo Kio Avenue 1 and Avenue 8. Installation work will be completed by September 1979. COMMUNITY HALLS (Increase of Void Deck space) 9. Encik Sidek bin Saniff asked the Minister for National Development if he will consider allowing the conversion of three instead of two units of void deck space for use as community halls. Mr Teh Cheang Wan: Mr Speaker, Sir, a community hall equivalent to a HDB 3-room flat occupying two bays of the void deck is provided for each constituency. Generally this has been found to be adequate. The Housing and Development Board, in addition, will be converting additional void decks for the Residents' Committees and its Constituency's Committee Office. Part of this may be used to supplement the community hall, if the need arises. SENTOSA (Development plans) 10. Mr Rohan bin Kamis asked the Minister for Trade and Industry what are the plans to enlarge the facilities of Sentosa Island to make it more attractive to both Singaporeans and the tourists.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, under the Master Plan for Nee Soon New Town, 907 hectares of land will be used for public housing, middle income housing and light industrial development. Approximately 40,000 units of HDB flats will be built in Nee Soon New Town over the next 15 to 20 years. The Housing and Development Board will build 1,500 units of flats in Nee Soon New Town in the next three years. ANG MO KIO AVENUE 1/AVENUE 8 (Installation of traffic lights) 8. Dr Lau Teik Soon asked the Minister for National Development whether he will consider installing a traffic light system at the junction of Ang Mo Kio Avenue 1 and Avenue 8.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, "Pedestrian Crossing Ahead" signs have been installed to warn motorists of the presence of zebra crossings. Some of these signs may not be easily seen by approaching motorists, e.g. at a bend or crest of a road. The Public Works Department will be conducting a survey to find out whether more warning signs should be installed at existing zebra crossings. NEE SOON NEW TOWN (Development plans) 7.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, our resettlement policy entitles residents, who have been staying at a clearance site on or before the resettlement eligibility cut-off date, to resettlement benefits. This was relaxed recently to allow persons who moved into acquired land after the cut-off date and have continuously resided on the land for at least three years as at the appointed date of census to be eligible as well. The cut-off date is the first day of census for State Land or the date of Gazette Notification for acquired private land. Those who fail to change the addresses on their identity cards or change them only after the cut-off date can submit other documents to substantiate their claims of residence for consideration. PEDESTRIAN ZEBRA CROSSINGS (Warning signs) 6. Mr Ho Kah Leong asked the Minister for National Development if the Public Works Department will erect proper signs to warn motorists of pedestrian zebra crossings ahead.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, it is not necessary, at present, to provide traffic lights at the junction of New Upper Changi Road and Bedok South Avenue 1 as the turning traffic is light even during peak hours. The Public Works Department will, however, keep this junction under observation and provide the lights if traffic volume warrants it at a future date. RESETTLEMENT BENEFITS (Claim of residence) 5. Haji Rahmat bin Kenap asked the Minister for National Development whether the Housing and Development Board will consider the early resettlement of those illiterate residents, who have been living for many years in a house now affected by redevelopment but whose addresses on their identity cards remain unchanged or have been changed recently although the street name had long ago been changed, as there has been a long delay in dealing with such cases.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, a bus shelter has been provided near Apartment Block 40, Bedok South Road. The bus shelter at Apartment Block 65, New Upper Changi Road, will be completed by September 1979. NEW UPPER CHANGI ROAD AND BEDOK SOUTH AVENUE 1 (installation of traffic lights) 4. Haji Sha'ari bin Tadin asked the Minister for National Development if he will consider installing traffic lights at the junction of New Upper Changi Road and Bedok South Avenue 1.”
“Mr Eugene Yap Giau Cheng asked the Minister for Trade and Industry, in view of Singapore's industrialisation drive ,for the 1980s, whether a blueprint for action to stimulate technological development in Singapore has been drawn up, and if he will provide an outline of the blueprint and state when it will be implemented.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the solution is not to send an inspector to monitor the level of noise generated by these cultural organisations during their music practice sessions. The solution would be to give them appropriate accommodation so that these cultural associations can continue with their music practice without disturbing the residents. In certain practices, the noise level has to be loud. If you ask them to tune it down, they will find that it is very difficult to practise their music. So the solution is to provide alternative accommodation rather than trying to ask the residents to allow these associations to carry on with their music practice with lower level of noise. I think this kind of a complaint will continue to be received, but it would be very difficult to station an inspector there to keep on asking the association to tune down the volume of their music practice. I do not think that is a practical thing to do. A better solution would be to provide suitable alternative accommodation for these cultural organisations. This is what the HDB and URA are doing. Perhaps I would ask the Planning Department to look further into this. For example, in certain areas, like Geylang, where these associations prefer to go, certain blocks of flats could be set aside for them. We may allow these clans and associations to occupy the whole block of flats so that they will not disturb the residential neighbourhoods. TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENT IN SINGAPORE (Measures to stimulate) 25.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the complaint is not so much that the sweet dreams of residents have been disturbed by the music practice in the early morning hours. The music practice is usually held in the evenings, and the residents have complained that it disturbs their children who are studying and that it disturbs them when they are watching television. That is the complaint that we have received. It is not so much that the music practice in the morning has disturbed them and so they have to get up early.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, applications for change of use are evaluated according to the Master Plan Zoning, prevailing ground conditions and the effect on traffic and the amenity of the neighbourhood. Activities with loud musical content, like lion dance practices, disturb neighbouring residents. Another complaint is about the use of residents' car parks by members and visitors of an association. For these reasons, associations which adversely affect the peace and quiet of the neighbourhood cannot be permitted in residential buildings, whether on the ground or on other floors. In areas where privacy and quiet is not an important consideration, associations may be allowed. We are aware of the importance of cultural organisations and where these are affected by resettlement, alternative accommodation have been offered. So far, 20 associations affected by clearance schemes have accepted alternative accommodation in HDB complexes. The Urban Redevelopment Authority has reserved 12 units in its Murray Street Rehabilitation Block specially for association use. There are still two vacant units in the Block.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the Departmental Committee of Inquiry has completed its report. The report which contains a preliminary assessment of the matter has been submitted to the Attorney-General. I am advised that because of the preliminary nature of the report and legal implications, it would not be desirable to release the reasons for the collapse at this stage. Nevertheless, as a precautionary measure, the Public Works Department has intensified the checking procedures for the design and construction of all flyovers in Singapore. ACCOMMODATION FOR CLANS AND ASSOCIATIONS 24. Mr Ho See Beng asked the Minister for National Development if he will state the reasons why the Building Control Division would not approve the change of use of the first floor of postwar buildings into offices for some clans and associations, and whether he is aware that this rigid attitude is jeopardising the development of the cultural activities of those civic organisations which the Ministry of Culture is at the moment vigorously promoting.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the land acquired for the development of Punggol Pig Farming Estate, Phase Ill, has not been cleared completely of squatters. However, an area within Phase Ill which has been cleared is ready for development to cater for the immediate needs of resettlement. Tenders for land preparation will be called in June, with development work expected to be completed by the end of 1979. FLYOVER AT JALAN EUNOS (Inquiry into collapse) 23. Encik Mansor Haji Sukaimi asked the Minister for National Development whether the inquiry into the collapse of the flyover at Jalan Eunos has been completed; and if he will give the reasons for the collapse and state what steps will be taken to ensure that there will be no further collapse of that flyover and other flyovers.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the Housing & Urban Development Co (Pte) Ltd considers automatic rescue devices in lifts as essential and is likely to install them in all HUDC blocks. It has approached the Housing and Development Board for assistance. PIG-FARMING DEVELOPMENT IN PUNGGOL (implementation of Phase III) 22. Mr Ng Kah Ting asked the Minister for National Development, in view of the fact that clearance of land at Punggol acquired for pig-farming development has been completed, whether any progress has been made in the implementation of Phase Ill of the project.”
“Sir, I beg to move, In page 2, line 25, to leave out "subdivision" and insert "title". The reason is that this corrects a mistake in the drafting. Amendment agreed to. Clause 2 as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clauses 3 to 10 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. Bill reported with an amendment; read a Third time and passed. ECONOMIC EXPANSION INCENTIVES (RELIEF FROM INCOME TAX) (AMENDMENT) BILL Order for Second Reading read. 6.52 p.m.”
“Rules to be enacted under this Bill will require agreements for sale and option forms to contain such terms and conditions as may be prescribed. Any terms or conditions of sale which are inconsistent with the prescribed terms shall be null and void. Penalties are provided for offences. Where a company commits an offence, its officers will be held liable unless they can prove otherwise. The Bill will put an end to prevailing abuses by developers. By laying down proper safeguards, it will inject confidence in commercial property transactions thereby encouraging the healthy development of this sector. Sir, I beg to move. Question put, and agreed to. Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House. The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. - [Mr Teh Cheang Wan]. Bill considered in Committee. [Mr Deputy Speaker in the Chair] Clause 1 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 2 -”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." There have been complaints from the public about the inequitable manner in which some developers conduct the sales of their shop units. The main complaints are the exorbitant option fees and the absence of a completion date in the sales agreement. In some cases the option fee is as much as 10% of the purchase price. The whole sum is forfeited if the option is not taken up. By signing such an option, the purchaser binds himself to terms which are unfavourable to him. The absence of a completion date in the sales agreement enables the developer to escape liability to pay liquidated damages for late completion. On the other hand, the developer charges interest for late payment of instalments. Buyers are compelled to take possession and pay property tax when the Architect's Certificate of Completion is issued. This is inequitable because premises cannot be occupied until Temporary Occupation Licences are issued. Some developers demand exorbitant fees for consenting to assign an agreement. There are also cases where a purchaser has to pay the full purchase price even before separate title is obtained. These abuses must be checked and purchasers protected. This Bill will regulate the sale of commercial units. It will not, however, apply to buildings containing four or less separate units or to buildings having a Certificate of Fitness or to buildings as may be exempted by the Minister. "Commercial property" is defined as any property approved for non-residential use. Such premises shall not be offered for sale unless the plans have been approved by the building authorities.”
“Sir, the new building for the fish merchants at the Jurong Fishing Port will be completed by the end of this year. The Member for Jurong has said that there are a lot of potholes in the market compound, I was told that they had already been patched up in the middle of this month. I think the Department spent $2,400 in patching up the potholes. At the same time, they have also provided about $305,000 for general improvements and resurfacing the whole area. They hope to start this work towards the end of this year. On the question of extending the wharf, it is true that the Jurong Town Corporation has offered additional land to the Land Office. The Primary Production Department and the Public Works Department are now studying the feasibility of extending the wharf facilities.”
“I hope that when splits are made and if the families wish to live together in the same block, this will be allowed. I appreciate the problems faced by officials of the Resettlement Department. It is a thankless task. They have a job to do. But I am sure the Hon. Minister will also understand the problems that we face when large areas of land are being acquired for public redevelopment. In that sense, the MPs also face resettlement problems which are further compounded by rules and regulations. He has mentioned that the rates of compensation were again reviewed in 1975. But I agree with him that when the committee has been set up, the Ministry could send a letter inviting our suggestions. I think we will do what the Hon. Minister expects us to do. In that light, Sir, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.”
“But the Housing and Development Board has developed a special industrial estate for these obnoxious industries. In respect of farming, as we all know, we are very short of land. It is not possible for us to allocate land to farmers for subsistence farming because we are not like other countries which have vast land areas and can therefore allocate land to their citizens very generously. But in Singapore we are very short of land and we have got to make good use of every square inch of it. For this reason farmland is only allocated to those farmers who can efficiently make productive use of the land. Those farmers who are unable to make productive use of the land will not be allocated any land. But the Resettlement Department usually recommends them for a hawker licence if they can satisfy certain conditions. In other words, if they are old and it is difficult for them to learn a new trade, they will usually be granted a hawker licence. But I would like to assure the Member that the resettlement policy will be reviewed very soon. Any policies which give rise to a lot of unhappiness among the residents affected by resettlement will be amended, and we hope, to make them happier. Mr Ng Kah Ting: Sir, the Hon. Minister has just mentioned that a Review Committee will be set up. I can assure the Hon. Minister that we MPs will not be found wanting in making suggestions, and when they are made I hope they will be well taken. Take, for example, Sir, the question of housing priority for families. I believe only one split is allowed. But in the rural areas sometimes the people have large families because they are deeply rooted. They just live together in one or two houses.”
“Sir, the present resettlement policy was formulated in 1975 and it has already been in existence for quite some time. As I have mentioned earlier in the House, my Ministry will review the resettlement policy. We will thoroughly and very carefully review the compensation rates and the various benefits to be granted to the people who are affected by resettlement. I have also said earlier that I welcome Members to write to me if they have any suggestions to make to improve the resettlement policy, so that when the Review Committee is formed we will have the benefit of the wisdom of Members who, having been dealing with their constituents daily, would have a lot of information on the unhappiness of the people who are affected by the resettlement policy. However, I would like to emphasise here that the policy of the Government is to try to cause as little inconvenience as possible to the resettlement cases. For example, if the people who are affected by the resettlement policy are residents, they will get priority for allocation of flats. In fact, some Members have been complaining that the flats in the popular areas have been reserved for the resettlement cases, and making their constituents very unhappy. These are the benefits granted to the resettlement cases. 5.45 p.m. We have also provided shops and factories for resettlement cases at concessional rentals, and we also develop new areas where the resettlement cases can go to if they wish. For example, we have a lot of these obnoxious industries affected by resettlement. Factories like the soya sauce factory and tanneries normally would not be able to obtain a licence from the Ministry of the Environment to continue with their operations because they will find it difficult to comply with the anti-pollution rules.”
“Sir, I would advise the hon. Member for Nee Soon to send the case to the Housing Board and they will look into it. Mr Tan Cheng San( In Mandarin): Sir, although the answer by the Minister concerned is not very satisfactory, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment by leave, withdrawn.”
“Sir, I want to clarify this. Should single persons who are affected by the cut-off date, subsequently get married, be allowed to rent one-room flats only? Perhaps the Member for Kampong Chai Chee was referring to this, and he says that this is applicable to all the constituencies throughout Singapore. But what I am saying is that the policy allowing people to rent two-room and three-room flats is a concession granted only to Perseverance Estate where the cut-off date used was 1975. I do not want to repeat and bore Members of this House but it is because of the special situation. But the general policy that applies to all the constituencies in the case of a single person who gets married after the cut-off date is to allow him to rent a one-room flat. I want to assure the Member for Jalan Kayu that his constituents have not been treated any worse than those in other constituencies. 5.00 p.m. Mr Tan Cheng San( In Mandarin): Just now in his answer the Minister said that the cut-off date for Lorong Tai Seng was 1975. Since the cut-off date is 1975 then those who got married between 1971 and 1975 should be given priority to buy HDB flats. But the Resettlement officers said that they could only rent and not buy the flat, Mr Teh Cheang Wan( In Mandarin): If the people had moved into Perseverance Estate before 1971, they will be allowed to buy a flat. If they moved in from 1971 to 1975, they can only rent two or three-room flats, whereas in other areas, the people concerned can rent only one-room flats.”
“They are being offered rented flats of the one, two and three-room type. This privilege is not offered to resettlement cases in other areas. It is allowed here only because of the peculiar situation of Perseverance Estate. So we are not really applying the rule as unreasonably as some of the Members of this House may think. When we come to review the policy the next time, we will take this matter into consideration, and we may be able to arrive at some satisfactory new rules so as to grant certain benefits to people who are caught by the cut-off date. But certainly there was no intention to play shadow boxing.”
“Sir, let me say that there is no intention on my part to try to be evasive or something like that. Any change in the rules of the resettlement policy will have very important consequences on the housing programme, on the supply of housing, and on various other matters. I did not brush aside the suggestion of the Member of Parliament. I say that we will take the suggestion quite seriously. We will soon have a review of the resettlement policy, which will not be five years later. It will be soon, which means, in the next few months or in a year's time. In our review we certainly will take this problem into consideration. This is not a very common problem. I would say that it is peculiar to Perseverance Estate, simply because Perseverance Estate has an area of almost a thousand acres. It is a very big area, stretching from Changi Road to Lorong Tai Seng. I would say the residents there number more than 50,000, involving about 10,000 to 20,000 families. It is because of the unusually large size of the Estate involving a very large number of residents that it is not possible for the Resettlement Department to resettle them straightaway. So we have to resettle the people in stages, and that takes a long time. It is because of that when the Housing Board gazetted the land for acquisition in 1971, that we realised in 1975 we needed many more years to clear the Perseverance Estate. For this reason, the Housing Board gave special concession only to Perseverance Estate residents. Those people who live in the Perseverance Estate from 1975, not 1971, are entitled to alternative accommodation in one, two, and three-room flats. So in the mean-time if those people had married and have children, as the Member for Jalan Kayu has said, the case for their families is recognised.”
“And if he was married with a family when census was taken, then we should treat him as being married and having an independent family. Rather than say "no", we should be more humane and sympathetic. In other words, the later date, i.e. the census commencing date should be taken into consideration and not the earlier date. I feel that the Minister's performance can be said to be literally "round" and "smooth" ( ) in a way. He seems to adopt an about-turn, or rather, a roundabout way, different from his behaviour at the last meeting when he spoke on other matters. We would expect the Minister to give us a positive and sympathetic answer rather than going about in a shadow boxing way.”
“So if the HDB were to use the gazette date and not census commencing date as the cut-off date, then the residents might not be aware of the acquisition as in this case. So I think that the date, 1971, is not very appropriate. A better time would be October 1977. So I hope the Minister will give favourable consideration to this suggestion. Mr Teh Cheang Wan( In Mandarin): Sir, I have already explained why we could not change our present policy. The reason is that it will cause confusion in our resettlement regulations. However, the policy regarding resettlement is subject to constant review, if better suggestions are forthcoming. So I can say that the suggestion by the Member for Paya Lebar will be taken into consideration in the future when the regulations next come under review. Mr Hwang Soo Jin( In Mandarin): Sir, the Minister does not seem to be very clear about the position stated by the Member for Paya Lebar. The Member was saying that before the announcement of the acquisition in the Gazette, a certain person was already in occupation of the land, and it was only after six or seven years before they took a census and tried to evict him. In the meantime during this period there would have been changes in the circumstances of the person living there. For instance, a person who was there at the age of 15 would, after seven years, be 22 years old. By that time he might have been married or might even have children. Then on taking census the Resettlement Department said, "At the cut-off date you were not married; so how can we treat you as married?" That is just the point the Member was raising just now. So the Government should consider that although at the cut-off date, that person was not married, he could after these several years be married.”
“If it is private land, the Government has no authority to enter into it and take a census because the land is privately owned. After gazette notification and issue of award, we can then take possession of the site and the land becomes State land. Only then can we enter into the State land to take a census. So a certain period of time will lapse from notification of the acquisition in the gazette and the taking of a census. Mr Fong Sip Chee: There was a case when the landowner could not be found and different Area Offices of the Resettlement Department have different policies. But I do not believe that that is the case. They do have a uniform policy, but the problem lies in its interpretation. Certain Area Offices say that once a land is under acquisition and a gazette notice is published to that effect, then on the advice of the HDB the owner had to move out of the site. Subsequently he was not given compensation on the ground that he was not in physical occupation of the land before and after the census and the gazette notification. Therefore, it seems that on the one hand while the HDB encourages people to clear the site so as to facilitate speedier redevelopment, on the other hand if the owner moves out earlier he risks getting no compensation. I do have cases like that in my area. Mr Tan Cheng San( In Mandarin): Following what the Minister has said, I would like to say this. With regard to the Lorong Tai Seng case, although the acquisition was gazetted in 1971 the old landlords were still collecting rent from the occupiers of the land who were still unaware of the Government acquisition of that particular piece of land. Only when the Resettlement officers went there for a census did the people realise that the land had been acquired.”
“Sometimes an application will be approved if the Building Control Division considers that the change of use is not detrimental or that the change of use is not against the amenities of the area. In other cases, most probably the answer would be no. That means they would not be allowed to change the use originally approved for the building.”
“Sir, on this non-residential use of the premises in Lorong G, I will ask the Building Control Division inspector to go and have a look. If the premises are not used in accordance with the zoning, they will take appropriate action against the owner. On the sheds along main roads in various areas, let me explain the Government policy. It is that buildings which were constructed before 1969 without approval are being tolerated. In other words, the Government will not take action against any unauthorised buildings built before 1969. But after 1969, any building constructed without approval is considered an unauthorised structure and the Building Control Division will take action against the owner. As regards the sheds which the Member for Kampong Kembangan referred to, it is most probable that they were constructed after 1969. Therefore, they have to be considered as unauthorised structures. I have just explained what the policy is. But if there is evidence to show that those structures were put up before 1969, we will tolerate them. On the question of residential premises being used by civic organisations or for other non-residential purposes, this is against the Building Regulations. If the premises are approved as residential buildings, then the owners will not be allowed to convert them into office buildings, civic organisation premises, shops or other business premises without the approval of the Building Control Division. So I would suggest to the Member to advise those who are using these buildings for other purposes to submit their applications to the Building Control Division for permission for change of use.”
“Sir, I do not know exactly the full facts of this case. I have just explained the position generally. But if there is evidence to indicate that the mother owns the motor workshop, then they will get the same concessions as citizens. But I have a feeling from the evidence that most probably the mother cannot be such a good mechanic. It is the son who owns the motor workshop. Therefore, we have to treat this as a non-citizen case.”
“Sir, the Member for Khe Bong is quite right in saying that we have adopted a different resettlement policy for non-citizens. Only our citizens are entitled to rental concessions while the non-citizens are not entitled to such benefit. But, on the other hand, non-citizens do enjoy also certain benefits. I can quote the case of motor workshops in the Jalan Eunos area, or other areas for that matter. A unit of motor workshop is about 100 sq. m., or about 1,100 sq. ft. If we call for public tender, the rental tendered usually ranges from $1,000 to $1,400 per month. So if we were to take the mean rental, members of the public will have to pay about $1,200 per month as rent for a motor workshop. But in respect of the resettlement case, the rental charged is 90% of the lowest successful tender. But we have fixed it at $900 only. If the tenant is a citizen, he will enjoy a rental benefit of $450 for the first year. It is only at the end of the sixth year that he will have to pay the full rent of $900. Even then he continues to enjoy the benefit by paying only $900 per month after the sixth year, whereas a public tenderer who is not affected by resettlement has to pay rental ranging from $1,000 to $1,400 per month. And for a non-citizen affected by resettlement, he only pays $900 per month straightaway. Of course, if we compare him with a Singapore citizen, he is placed in a less favourable position. But if we compare him with a member of the public who tenders for a motor workshop, he enjoys a rental benefit, on the average, of about $300 per month so long as he remains a tenant of the shop. Therefore, he also gets some concession though not as much as our citizens. And this should be the case because after all our citizens should enjoy better benefits than non-citizens,”
“In the case of young people, I would agree if they can produce a medical certificate certifying that they cannot climb stairs. But if the young people simply say that they are not happy about climbing stairs, I cannot agree to that. From the HDB's waiting register, you will find that upward mobility of our residents is quite fast. In the case of rented flats I would say that the mobility rate is between 5% and 10%. In other words, every year about 5% to 10% of families have substantially improved their income and wish to buy bigger flats through the use of their CPF contributions. Those people who live in the upper floors most probably will not stay for too long because they will eventually purchase their own flats and move out. It is therefore not practical to build lifts in those six-storey flats for the reasons which I have explained earlier. Maybe by the late 80's, if our economic development grows at the rate of 6-8%, we might be in a position to pull down those flats and to build better flats in that constituency.”
“The proposal to provide grilles to block up the balconies so that people cannot jump down is not a satisfactory one, for two main reasons. One is that if we put up grilles in these four blocks, then it is probable that we will have to put up grilles in all the Housing Board flats because these blocks also have balconies from which the people can jump down. If that is the case then it would make the flats very unsightly; they will look like a prison. It is also very costly to put up grilles in all the blocks of flats which number more than 3,000. Another reason is that the Fire Brigade will raise strong objection because those balconies are used for fire rescue. In case of fire, the firemen can go into the flat through the balcony by placing a ladder against it. For these reasons, we cannot consider the Member's request.”
“This is probably because the building is low and therefore the rain water does not beat hard onto the louvre windows. The architects are rather surprised that there is this complaint. So they are looking into this problem and have been making a study. The architects are toying with various solutions. The easiest solution, of course, would be to seal up the louvres with a sheet of glass so that rain water will not splash in. But that would mean cutting off ventilation and breeze. So the architects have been trying hard to retain these timber windows in those buildings. The Housing Board has commissioned the Applied Research Corporation to make a study and to find a satisfactory solution to the problem of keeping the rain water away during heavy rain while still retaining the timber louvres. The Applied Research Corporation, however, has not been able to come out with any satisfactory solution. Instead it advised that the buildings are too exposed to the elements and because of the height rain water can beat heavily against the walls of those flats at the top floors. Since the Housing Board cannot find any solution, we have to go back and fix a piece of glass at the back of the window. We have to accept what we originally could do at that time. In fact, we have wasted several years going round in circles and now come back to square one. So we will soon have to call for tenders to fix a sheet of glass at the back of the windows. On the matter of people jumping down from these four point-blocks, I think it is not just confined to those four blocks of flats. It happens in all the housing estates. There are people committing suicide in all housing estates.”
“If we construct covers for these concrete benches, it defeats the idea of concrete benches being put up in the open. There was the suggestion that the Housing and Development Board should give priority of allocation of flats to residents in the same area. If this is agreed, it would make the residents in that locality very happy but then the other applicants would be very unhappy. If we put this policy into practice, it means that in those areas where there are no HDB flats, for example, Joo Chiat or Braddell Heights, the people staying there would have no chance of getting a flat at all because they cannot claim the right to be the old HDB residents and have priority to the new flats. But the people who are already living in Toa Payoh or Marine Parade could claim this right when new and better flats are built nearby. They will say, "We are the old residents in this area and under this rule we should be given priority for those new flats." This is not a very fair policy because those people who are enjoying the benefit of public housing will continue to enjoy still better amenities, while others who have not the benefit of enjoying public housing will most probably be forever denied the chance of enjoying these benefits. On the complaint about water seeping into the four point-blocks at Toa Payoh, I would say that the complaint is fair because, from the records, it appears that the Housing Board has been taking a long time to find a solution. We have provided louvre windows to these tall buildings which are about 24 or 25 storeys high. When the Housing Board provides louvre windows for buildings which are 10 to 12 storeys high, normally there is no problem.”