Yeo Ning Hong
Singapore
“The SAF always reviews and enhances its training system to maximise the contributions of NSFs to national defence during their NSF stint. We will continue to ensure that the training syllabus is relevant to the defence needs of Singapore, and NSFs' time in the SAF used meaningfully and efficiently.”
“New recruits will find military training less onerous if they take on the personal responsibility of preparing themselves well physically before enlistment. AUCTION OF #03-06 PEK CHUAN BUILDING 6.”
“Sir, on a point of clarification. I believe Dr Ahmad Mattar had earlier on attributed some comments to me. I just want to clarify that I am not waiting for July to have my views on SBC made known to the Minister for Information and the Arts.”
“Sir, to encourage the new NSmen to maintain the same physical fitness that they have achieved while they were in full-time National Service, Mindef will increase the IPPT pass standards for new NSmen who ROD on or after 1st April to the same level that they attained when they were NSF.”
“Sir, I do not think Mr Chiam has any clue whatsoever about what is involved in basic military training. It is not fitness. It is the acquiring of basic military skills, to know how to fight, to know how to ensure that you do not get killed.”
“Sir, Mr Chiam would make a most popular Member of Parliament in Kuwait - if only they had a Parliament in Kuwait. That is exactly the sort of situation that had brought the Kuwaitis the disaster they had a year and a half ago, when people are only interested in having a better life and are not prepared to make the effort to ensure that th…”
The complete record
Every one of 853 lines we hold for Yeo Ning Hong, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 5 of 18.
“For example, as mentioned by one of the Members earlier on, should the quota system be applied only to cars? Or should it be applied to all vehicles because, all vehicles contribute to congestion? Should goods vehicles be included? Should motor-cycles be included? Should buses be included? Are there not some buses that ought to be exempted because they provide a special public service? Sir, another question that many members of the public have asked concerns the question of equity, equity between existing owners of vehicles and potential first-time owners, people who will be buying into the vehicle market. Is it fair to all concerned that existing owners should have that right of ownership in perpetuity? I think Mr Lew Syn Pau addressed that point. Or should we have a slightly more equitable system where, instead of having that right to ownership of a vehicle in perpetuity, have that right to ownership for a fixed period only? Whether that fixed period is for a year, two years, five years or 10 years? Which is fairer to existing owners and future first-time vehicle owners? Because, do not forget, Sir, the future owners are our younger brothers and sisters. They are going to be our children. Which is fairer? In short, can we develop a quota system that is as efficient as possible in ensuring that we use our roads efficiently, with minimal of traffic congestion? Can we devise a quota system that is as effective as possible to contain the rapid growth of vehicles? Can we also design it in such a way that it is as equitable as possible to everyone concerned? And whatever system we devise, it should be such that it does not permit the big car owners to edge out the small car owners.”
“This quota system was put forward as a more predictable, more reliable approach, to managing the overall increase of vehicles on our roads. Over the last four hours, Members have been debating the pros and cons of the quota system. I believe the key difference between the two is really this. With the quota system, the Government would determine the number of vehicles that the roads in Singapore would be able to take without massive congestion and then the public will decide on the price to be paid. Whereas with the present system that we have, the Government decides on the increase of road tax that has got to be implemented periodically, averaging about once every other year. Sir, some Members who are not familiar with the overall picture for the last 15 years believe that the past system, in other words, periodic and regular increases of road tax, ARF and custom duty, has not been successful. That is not true. If we take an overall view, for the last 15 years, from 1974 to 1989, with the tried and tested method of regular increases, the Government has been able to keep the overall growth rate of vehicles at the rate of 4.2% per year. And that was during the period when we were building the PIE, the ECP, the AYE and all the other major construction projects, including the flyovers. Far from the previous approach not working and not being successful, it has worked, and worked very well. The key question that we have to decide in the first instance is this: Do we now go for a quota system or do we not, and stay with the tried and tested method? If that question is answered in the affirmative, in other words, if the answer is yes, then a lot of other issues will have to be addressed.”
“30 pm instead of 7.00 pm. The Committee has also made that recommendation. Unfortunately, Sir, the problem is not as simple as it appears. The complete survey data from the PWD has just come in. The Ministry is looking at it carefully. I expect an early decision on this recommendation. When the decision is taken, the detailed explanations will be given. The PARF scheme. Sir, last year the Government gave early notice that it is engaged in a study to consider modifying the existing PARF scheme. The objective is to remove the anomaly caused by what some members of the public as well as Members of this House term "the investment effect" in the PARF scheme, namely, you can buy a car for investment and hope that new cars will become more and more expensive as a result of inflation and appreciating foreign currencies and hence minimise the overall cost of owning a car. Sir, the Select Committee has looked into this problem in some depth and the Committee has recommended that the existing PARF be retained for cars that are presently on the road. The Committee has also called for a modified PARF scheme to take out the investment effect. Again on this matter, the Government will study the Committee's recommendation carefully, bearing in mind the Government's overall objective. The quota system. Sir, the quota system was recommended by the Select Committee not as an alternative to usage measures, nor as an alternative to the "do-nothing" approach. As we understand it, reading the Report very carefully, the recommendation of the quota system is meant as an alternative to the present system of increasing road tax, custom duty and additional registration fee.”
“I have already stated that the Governmen itends to build the North-East line as soon as plans for the housing estates in the North-East sector have been finalised. And (iv) managing the growth and usage of the private vehicle propulation. Sir, Members will also remember that last year I stressed the importance of an integrated balanced approach to managing the growth and usage of vehicles. Here, I am happy to note that the Committee shares the view of the Ministry. Let me quote from the Select Committee's Report. I quote from page 10: 'The Select Committee recognises the continued need for rigorous measures to control car ownership as the total vehicle population is the single most important determinant of congestion levels on Singapore roads.' The Committee also said, on page 4: 'The correct way to view usage restraint is that it is a supplementary instrument to sharpen the efficacy of ownership restraint measures.' Sir, I do not intend to draw any conclusions today. As I said earlier, the recommendations of the Committee will have to be studied in detail by the Government. Three recommendations have attracted a lot of public interests as shown by the coverage in the mass media over the last two weeks. Indeed, the debate today very clearly showed the special interest of Members of this House, who reflect the sentiments of the public. These three measures are the evening ALS, the PARF scheme, and the quota system. I do not intend to state the Government's position before we have completed our detailed studies. To do so would be premature. But I believe it will be useful for me just to make some brief clarifications on each of these topics. Firstly, the evening ALS. Sir, many members of the public have called for the evening ALS to be brought forward to end at 6.”
“With your permission, Sir, I would like to circulate a list of some of the suggestions that the Ministry has received over the past 15 months. [Copies of list circulated to Members of the House]. Sir, Members will note from the list and this is not a comprehensive list; this is only a partial list - that there are more than 75 ideas suggested on how we can manage our land transportation. If Members go through the list carefully, they will find that many ideas are at odds one with another. For example, the first proposal is to scrap PARF. The second proposal asks that we should not scrap PARF. In other words, every point of view has got its supporter and its opponents, its critics. So regardless of what we do eventually, after all the detailed discussions, there are bound to be some people who will be unhappy with Government's proposals. Sir, I mentioned earlier that the Select Committee has done a thorough job over a period of five months. They have submitted their recommendations. The Government will consider all their recommendations seriously, all of them. I do not need to go through all the discussions that we had last year when I emphasized in the budget debate the importance of the four key features in Government's overall land transport strategy - (i) the systematic town planning; (ii) the importance of building the best possible network of roads in Singapore and managing them with all the sophisticated equipment at our disposal; (iii) the importance of giving top priority to having the best possible public transport system in Singapore, integrating the bus services together with the MRT, and extending the MRT as soon as new needs are confirmed.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise to join the debate on the motion standing in the name of the Chairman of the GPC on Communications and Information, Dr Hong Hai. First of all, let me thank all the Members of Parliament for their participation in this debate and for the many suggestions that they have put forward. I would also like to thank members of the public who have engaged in this on-going discussion on land transportation. We have been talking about land transportation ever since the early 70's. I suspect we will continue to discuss this matter for many more years to come. In particu- lar, over the last 15 months, since November 1988, the Government has encouraged the public to engage intensively in the discussion on land transportation; on how we need to manage it such that it does not become a problem for us. The public have responded enthusiastically to the Government's invitation to discuss this matter. The media has been very helpful and ahs published a lot of different points of views in the forum pages, and over television. Many other members of the public have also submitted points of views and ideas, to other discussion groups. Many community groups have also been involved. Most important of all, the Government appointed a Select Committee chaired by Dr Hong Hai to go into this matter in-depth. I would like to take this opportunity to thank Dr Hong Hai and Members of his Select Committee for doing an excellent job. Over a period of five months, they received some 71 written representations and heard oral evidence from 28 different groups. Sir, as we encourage greater participation from the public, we must of course expect widespread points of views. This is something which we encourage and this is something that we indeed have received.”
“Secondly, the appointment of a Select Committee would enable more Members of Parliament to take part in this task beyond the membership of the GPC on Communications and Information. Thus, with the participation and contribution of more MPs, we would have a stronger committee which would be able to complete and achieve its tasks more effectively. Thirdly, the setting up of the Select Committee will give it a proper standing with proper mandate to proceed with this task so that it can study, research and work on the problems more extensively, more comprehensively, more thoroughly and in-depth concerning problems of all aspects of land transportation. This is why there are six terms of reference clearly listed in the motion. These terms of reference embrace all questions and matters that would merit the discussion by the committee and also authorize the Select Committee to make recommendations. Mr Speaker, Sir, in view of the reasons I have stated above, I believe this motion will certainly be supported by the Parliament.”
“Some of them wrote in. Some wrote fairly long letters as I am told. We collected well over 100 of such proposals and suggestions and points of view. These were grouped into the various categories and brought up by the members of the media and we had a very thorough discussion. Notwithstanding, I think the open hearing by the Select Committee will permit others who have not had the opportunity of putting their views across to do so and we will have another independent group of experts to look into the problem. I welcome that. Dr John Chen Seow Phun (Hong Kah GRC)( In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I support the motion raised by Dr Hong Hai urging Parliament to set up a Select Committee to conduct public hearings on our road transportation policy with six terms of reference. I support the motion for the following three reasons. First, undeniably the tackling of land transportation is a very important task in Singapore. Just as Mr Yatiman has stated earlier land transportation policy plays a very important role in our economic development. This is because land transportation policy has a great deal to do with the use of our land resources, as it directly affects the speed of turnover of our commercial and industrial goods, business activities and even our attractiveness for foreign travellers and tourists to visit Singapore. Also it has a direct impact on the lifestyle and consumption habit of our people. It has become a matter of great concern to all our people. Therefore, it is something which calls for our careful consideration and handling with full discussion in order to work out effective solutions.”
“Sir, I do not intend to go on for six hours. I support the motion. I disagree with Mr Chandra Das. I think there is value in having more points of view. For six hours we talked and talked and talked. But I suspect that there are lots of other Singaporeans who would also like to talk about the subject. I think it would be a good move. The members of SAFRA were part of the policy gaming committee. They formed two groups, two Cabinets as it were. They spent more than two months each studying the problems of land transport. They had briefings from the various Ministries that were involved in public transportation, PWD, ROV, the various agencies, and various organizations such as SBS, SMRT and MRTC. With the appropriate background, with the appropriate facts at their disposal and all the data made available to them, they studied the problem for more than 2(r) months. In effect, they represent the most knowledgeable of all laymen in Singapore on land transport. My Ministry also invited the representatives from the media. They have been covering the transportation beat. They know the arguments backwards and for- wards because they have been covering it for a long time. At the end of six hours, nothing was left to clarify. But these are people who have spent a lot of their time on this particular subject. I am sure there are lots of other Singaporeans who wish to give their views. Sir, I need to remind Members of the House that those present at the dialogue session were not only just airing their points of view because we did encourage the media to go out and collect questions, collect ideas, collect suggestions, from the general members of the public. The media had indeed been very supportive. A lot of people had given valuable points, suggestions, feedback, by the hotline.”
“Sir, 90% of the postal services are used by commercial companies. And as for the ordinary consumers, people who use both postal and telecommunications services, they will also benefit from the reduction in telecommunications services. VOCATIONAL LICENCES FOR PUBLIC BUSES AND TAXIS (Debarment for applicants with criminal or drug abuse records) 10. Mr Heng Chiang Meng asked the Minister for Communications and Information what is the rationale for the Registry of Vehicles' policy of debarring applicants from obtaining vocational licences for public buses and taxis if such applicants have criminal or drug abuse records. The Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Communications and Information (Mr Ho Kah Leong)(for the Minister for Communications and Information): Mr Speaker, Sir, on behalf of my Minister. Sir, the Registry of Vehicles has a responsibility to ensure the safety of the commuting public. This is because more than 3.5 million passenger trips are made on buses and taxis each day. For this reason, persons who have adverse criminal or drug abuse records are generally not allowed to hold bus and taxi drivers' vocational licences. However, the Registry is prepared to consider applicants with less serious criminal offences, provided that public safety is not compromised.”
“Sir, the Member obviously has not been listening to the answer because overall there has been a decrease in rates collectively, combining both the postal as well as telecommunications services.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, on 1st July 1989, Telecoms adjusted the rates of a number of postal and telecommuncations services. Some of them went down. Others went up. Overall, customers of Telecoms will save about $11 million per year as a result of this round of adjustments. It has always been Telecoms' policy to price each service according to the cost of providing it. This way, customers stand to benefit. They pay only for the service they use and not for those that they do not. In general, labour intensive services show rate increases, while technology intensive services experience rate decreases. Over the last decade, as a result of high productivity and increased use of technology, Telecoms has been able to reduce its rates on a large number of occasions, so that cumulatively over the last 10 years customers of Telecoms had savings of over $2,400 million. Today, postal and telecommunications services in Singapore are among the lowest in the world. With your permission, Sir, I would ask the Clerk of Parliament to circulate some of the rates (Cols. 397 - 402) that we have for postal and services in Singapore as compared with other countries. (Copies of document distributed to Members of the House). rates - SINGAPORE OUTGOING TELEX RATES VS. CORRESPONDING INCOMING RATES, SINGAPORE IDD RATES VS. CORRESPONDING INCOMING RATES, COMPARISON OF POSTAGE RATE FOR A 20 GRAMME DOMESTIC LETTER (Cols. 397 - 402) Dr Lee Siew-Choh (Non-Constituency Member): Sir, is the increase in the postage an admission of inflation in the country?”
“Contrary to what has been said, the Ministry of Communications and Information has over the years via Telecoms, via the airport and via the port, been giving money back to Singaporeans by way of lower rates, with a cumulative total of more than a billion dollars over the years. Indeed, next month Telecoms will be making announcements of some adjustments in charges that will have a net result of giving more than $10 million a year back to the economy. At MCI our objective is to give Singaporeans and Singapore the best possible airport, the best possible port, the best possible telecommunications systems and also the best possible land transport system. I believe, Sir, Singapore's efforts in these areas have not been in vain. I have no doubt that the overall effect of this package of restraint measures will in the long term help give us the highest possible quality of life for the largest number of Singaporeans. On that firm belief I commend the land transport measures to this House. (Applause]. Question put, and agreed to. Resolved, That this House supports the principles underlying the latest measures introduced by the Ministry of Communications and Information to curb road usage but urges the Ministry to review the specific measures regularly as their effects are uncertain. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT TO THE CHAIR”
“If we do not manage it carefully, all of us pay a price, maybe imperceptibly. Trips taking 30 minutes will increase to 35, to 40, to 45 minutes and so on, to one hour eventually. I would like to urge Members of this House to continue with giving the Ministry their suggestions, their feedback, so that we can manage the traffic in a manner that will give the least burden to vehicle owners and yet at the same time maintain a reasonably free flow of traffic. We are prepared to learn from any Member of Parliament. We are prepared to learn from any Singaporean. We are prepared to learn from any city that has got a better system than ours, that has ot a system that we can use. If Members of the House know of any city with a better transport system, please let me know. I give my assurance to the House that we will send our officers to get all the details and study it for possible implementation in Singapore. Sir, I want to round up just on one point, namely, there is no desire at all on the part of the Government to use land transport policies to generate revenue. I cannot over-emphasize that point. My job in the Ministry of Communications and Information is not to raise revenue for the Government. No, not at all. My job is to manage the airport, the seaport, telecommunications services, our land transport system, in a manner that will give Singapore the best possible international competitiveness so that it will boost our conomy, so that it will bring in investments, preferably investments that will give high value added jobs to Singaporeans. And in the process, give Singaporeans higher pay and better lives.”
“Our situation in Singapore at the moment, the number of motorcycles is approximately half of that of cars. A $1 ALS is reasonable. Some of the motorcyclists will go into the CBD some of them will not. Only those who go in are affected. Some Members have taken up the appeal on behalf of residents living inside the CBD. Again, I appreciate the unhappiness that residents in the CBD feel in having to pay $3 when they are going home from work outside the CBD. Sir, I think the principle of equity is very clear. Those who live outside and go in to work in the CBD in the morning have got to pay. So those who live inside and have to return home in the evening, they too have to pay. And in the long term, measures of this sort wil encourage Singaporeans, whereever possible, to live close to where they work. I know, Sir, it is not always easy, it is not always possible, but we help encourage that trend; for example, you have fewer people in the CBD going to work in Jurong and fewer people living in Jurong going to work in the CBD, then we reduce some unnecessary flow. I am not saying that it is easy. I am saying that we should encourage that trend. Then if those who work in Jurong live in Jurong and those who live in the CBD work in the CBD, we will find our traffic conditions much less problematic. Why decrease the ALS fees? Sir, if we keep it at $5 then few cars will go into the CBD during restricted hours. We will be under-utilizing our roads. Is that a good thing? No. Land is scarce; we must use it optimally. We want to have a free-flowing traffic. We do not want to have empty roads. That will be contrary to the objectives of the Ministry. Sir, let me conclude. Land transport is a national problem. Everybody is affected by it.”
“But it will be at a great cost to the economy, a great detriment to the population, as our traffic seize up. Sir, I have touched very briefly on why all vehicles should not be exempted. Now I will talk about motocycles because many Members have raised it. Members believe or perceive that a motorcycle does not add to the congestion. Let me suggest that we think about the problem a little. If we have a car in front of us on a road, we keep a certain distance when driving, for reasons of safety. If there is a motorcycle in between the two cars, do we not also keep a certain disance from the motorcycle? We do, don't we? We all so, Sir. That simple picture demonstrates very clearly that on the move, a motorcycle is like a car. It takes up space and therefore contributes to overal congestion. And indeed transport planners have got to make allowance for that. For purposes of calculation, a motorcycle is treated as 0.7 passenger car equivalent. In other workd, for purposes of transport planning a motorcycle is treated as if it is three-quarters of a car. That is its contribution to the congestion. Of course, when a motorcycle is parked, it takes up less space. We have decided, because we are aware that motorcyclists, with some exceptions are low-income earners to keep the ALS fee for motorcycles low. A dollar a day or $20 a month. We need to apply some measure of restraint for motorcycles also. We cannot allow the motorcycles to be different. Because if we do, then we may possibly end up like some other cities. Again, I use the example of Taipei. The number of motorcycles in 130% that of the number of cars. Those who cannot afford a car will movbe on to a motorcycle, and add to the congestion.”
“But we must remember that the routes for the MRT are designed such that when the MRT system is completed, it will be serving about 80% of the population of Singapore, namely, those in the HDB housing estates. And the volume of people from outside of these housing estates, in other words, in the private housing estates, the number of people wanting to use the MRT will be small. The SMRT is headed by the president and chief executive officer of a local bank. SBS is headed by a senior managing partner of a multi-national accounting company. And TIBS have got a Chief Executive Officer who is a business graduate and runs a number of companies. They have all looked at the situation. They have concluded that there is no real demand for such a service. But we have not given up, Sir. We are now trying to encourage other operators. Indeed any bus operator who wants to provide this service will get my endorsement and support, with their application to the Public Transport Council. But if all the operators, after having looked at it carefully, were to conclude that there isn't sufficient demand that will make it viable for them, should Government rush in when practical businessmen fear to tread? Sir, Dr Lee Siew-Choh said that the measures have got nothing to do with land transportation. It is just a device to generate revenue for the Government. The Government can find no worst way, no more painful way, of raising revenue than by way of land transportation. The allegation is completely untrue. If the Government were to do nothing and just allow the number of cars to grow by 10%, every year the revenue obtained would be about the same or maybe even more than what the various measures will bring in. It would have been perfectly painless.”
“Indeed that has been the policy of the Government, to have the best possible public transport system in Singapore. Is our present system perfect? No. Can it be improved upon? Yes, we are working on it. Are there other cities with much better transport systems? We are not aware of them. I spoke to the experts on public transport systems when they were in Singapore earlier this year for the Conference on the International Union of Public Transport. These are the world's experts on public transport. I asked them, "Is there anything that we can do to improve our system? What is it that you are doing in your cities that you think can improve the purblic transport system in Singapore? They laughed. They told me there are very few cities, none that they were able to tell us, that had better public transport systems than ours. And they know because they went on a ride on our MRT trains and on our buses. But we will spare no effort at further improving our public transport system. We are presently working at seeking improveing our public transport system by way of an integrated ticketing system, a through ticketing system, where a ticket can be used both for buses and for trains. "Why does the project take so long?", some Members asked. Again we are once more at the edge of the technology. We have been acouting for system that can be applicable to Singapore. I believe the three public transport companies, namely, SBS, TIBS and SMRT, shall be announcing the award of the tender for the equipment very soon. Sir, Dr Hong Hai has asked why not have buses that will service the private housing estates, bring them to the MRT stations. I support that proposal. Indeed we have been encouraging the bus companies to do that.”
“I welcome the suggestion put forward by the Chairman of the GPC for the Ministry of Communications and Information. I welcome his desire to have open hearings, to collect views. I hope he will look at them carefully and in due course submit his recommendations and the recommendations of other members of his GPC to the Ministry for possible consideration. If the recommendations are practical, if they can help us achieve better, freer flowing traffic in the CBD and in the rest of Singapore, I can assure him and his GPC that we will use his measures. Sir, I now come to specifics. Scheme B buses - I explained a moment ago why we drew the line at scheduled buses. Scheme B buses, by and large, do not operate as scheduled buses. In fact, our records show that only 16 buses out of 356 Scheme B buses are operating scheduled services. Scheme B buses are buses which are licensed to carry children and workers en masse, transporting them from a few points to a school or a factory. And because they transport children, because they transport workers, the Government has given them a low taxation regime. A Scheme B bus may pay as low as one-sixth the tax of an ordinary scheduled bus. At the upper end, buses for workers may pay as low as half the tax of the scheduled buses. Some of these buses do not have to go into the CBD at all. I shall ask my Ministry officials to look into the details of these 16 buses hat are operating scheduled services to see whether we could include them for exemptions. I can see administrative difficulties. But we shall look at them and give our consideration to these 16 buses, not the remainder of the 356. Sir, Dr Hong Hai has called for a better public transport system. I support that.”
“Now, if we allow a 5% increase in growth of vehicles, then unless we are able to achieve a 5% reduction in traffic usage overall, then our traffic conditions must inevitably get worse. We are hoping, Sir, that if these measures work, then ownership restraint measures can be used more sparingly. A number of Members have asked about the possibility of removal of PARF. As Dr Wang Kai Yuen has mentioned, it is a very painful process. If we do not have to, we may not want to do it. But we may have no choice. That option must be kept open. We will watch the situation carefully. Sir, I believe most of the Members of this House who spoke yesterday and today, supported the principles ofusing restraint on usage. But quite obviously, as I indicated in my speech in the Committee of Supply in March, every individual affected in a particular way by a particular measure will find that particular measure onerous and obviously attack that policy. Members have done their jobs well. They have reflected those sentiments - different groups ofpeople unhappy with different aspects of our measures. This is to be expected. I hope that after Members have listened to the explanation, they will be in a better position to explain to their constituents. Sir, many Members have asked for more explanation. This we will continue to give. But these measures are not new. Petrol duty is not new, the ALS is not new. Yes, applying it to all vehicles is new, but the principle is a simple and an old one. Car park increases, increases, these are not new. These are on-going measures used for the last 20 years. Yes, we use it less frequently previously, when we are trying to discourage ownership. But they are not new measures as such. Nevertheless, we will have to continue to explain.”
“Will it lead to additional congestion along our ring roads? Possibly, initially, just as it did way back in 1975 when we introduced the morning ALS. We will have to give it time. People will make their own choices. The traffic will make its own adjustment. And over a period of time, we can review the situation. I am poen-minded on this. The object is simple - keep the CBD free flowing. the instruments in our hands are not perfect. These are all proxy instruments. They are not direct instruments. We will have to watch the situation, monitor it closely and, if necessary, make adjustments. Sir, if we want to keep the CBD relatively free flowing of traffic, do we not also want to do the same for the ring roads, for other roads outside the CBD? The answer obviously is yes. Hence, we want to discourage usage as much as possible. That is why we have introduced a small restraint measure, a 10 cents increase in the petrol duty, to discourage in a small way unnecessary trips made. It will be marginal. But every bit helps. Also the increased car park charges, particularly day time car park charges, will support this policy of discouraging unnecessary travel. Sir, the present package of measures represents a watershed in our overall land transport management. We have by and large stayed mostly, not completely, but mostly with restraint on ownership. We have now moved over to increased use of restraint measures on usage. But we cannot do it exclusively. We can only change the emphasis. Members have appealed to the Ministry to allow more people to own cars and not to keep the number of cars growing at the rate of 1% a year which was what the Ministry was hoping to target at.”
“So to be fair, all who contribute to congestion should bear part of the burden. Many Members have asked for the hours to be reduced. I think different Members ask for slightly different reductions in different directions. Some have asked for it to be imposed for only an hour; others a little more - 4.30 pm to 6.00 pm, some 4.00 pm to 6.00 pm, some 5.00 pm to 6.00 pm. Sir, 6.00 pm is really a critical point. At the moment 6.00 pm to 7.00 pm is when the traffic is heaviest. For the time being, I want to leave it at 4.30 pm to 7.00 pm. But we will monitor the situation. I appreciate the concerns of Members wanting to be helpful to their residents, to shoppers, to parents wanting to go pick up their children, and have therefore appealed for a reduction from 7.00 pm to 6.00 pm. Our experience with the morning ALS is the first hour after the ALS is the worst of all hours. So if we stop the restricted hours up to 6.00 pm, then the so-called post-ALS traffic would add to the already existing congestion which is the worst of all possible times. Then we would be making the situation from bad to worse. I want to explain this because this may not be obvious to everybody. Sir, the ALS works in two different ways. Firstly, it spreads out traffic in space. Those who do not need to go into the ALS can take other roads and avoid having to pay. So the traffic is spread out. Secondly, the ALS works by spreading out the traffic in terms of time. Since the restricted hours are from 4.30 pm to 7.00 pm, those who do not need to go in during that period can either delay a little or go in a little earlier. Those going in after 7.00 pm, you don't pay. Similarly those who go in before 4.30 pm, don't pay also. So the traffic is spread out in two different ways.”
“Conversely, if $3 turns out to be too low a figure, we will have to adjust it upwards, to $4. It is not likely that we will have to adjust to $5 on the basis of our studies. We have to be realistic. We cannot forecast the behaviour of all consumers and their response to a measure of this type. The new ALS will definetely reduce the number of cars into the CBD. By how much, we will have to monitor very carefully. So why do we have to include all vehicles for the morning and evening ALS? At the moment, of all the vehicles going into the CBD in the morning, only one-third of the vehicles pay the ALS fee. Indeed, only 22% of the vehicles are cars which pay the ALS fee of $5, and another 12% of the vehicles are taxis, paying an ALS fee of $2. If we do not adopt the equitable principle of all contributing to the congestion having to bear part of the burden, then to reduce the traffic flow a heavier and heavier burden on the small group of people presently paying the ALS fee will have to pay much more. And the 66% of vehicles which are not paying ALS will mushroom in proportion to the overall increase in vehicles and also in response to the demand of the economy, Then we will have severe congesttion in the CBD. That is why we have to include all vehicles. The same principle applies for the evening. Why do we need an evening ALS? Presently, the traffic flow in the evening is worse than in the morning. Can we improve it a little? Yes. Is it worth the price we pay? We believe so. Because we must remember that congestion takes up people's time, and in an economy like ours, time is money. Those who contribute to congestion are making others take longer time in going home from work. A large number of people who do not own cars have got to bear that burden.”
“2 million to 1.3 million commuters every day. That is why we have made a special exemption for the scheduled buses. I know, Sir, that once we allow one group, where do we draw the line? What about group No. 2, No. 3, No. 4, ad infinitum? That is really the crux. We have decided to draw the line and allow only scheduled buses to go in. The other vehicles, because all of them in their own ways contribute congestion, have got to be subjected to the same extend of discouragement from entry into the CBD during peak hours. Sir, some Members have asked, why is it so important to have the CBD free flowing? Why do we need evening ALS? Indeed, why do we need the morning ALS at all? The Central Business District is the nerve centre of our economy. It provides employment for the largest number of people. Within that very small, very compact area. If we allow that area to seize up, it will have severe impact on our economy, with serious negative consequences for all Singaporeans. We have had the morning ALS, we had the same level of unhappiness, if not much more. Today, nobody doubts that the morning ALS has worked and works very well and has helped us. I want to remaind Members that when we introduced the morning ALS, we had to fine tune, we had to make adjustments to the ALS, adjusting both the fees and the restricted hours. My Ministry has stressed the same need for the evening ALS, because we are introducing it for the first time. We will be watching and monitoring the situation very closely, and we will have no hesitation making adjustments if necessary. If the volume of traffic is too low, and we want to optimize the use of our roads, my Ministry will have no hesitation lowering it from $3 down to $2.”
“Far from discouraging people from having car pools, this approach will encourage people to have genuine car pools. Previously, many cases of car pools were just drivers in cars picking up three passengers. Now that the driver has to pay $2.40 if he goes in regularly. If he finds three or four other car owners, the cost of $2.40 will be divided by four or by five. Now with the higher car park charges in the CBD, there is an even greater incentive for them not to bring in their car. With the higher petrol duty on petrol there is an even greater incentive not to drive unnecessarily. So, far from discouraging car pools, we will be encouraging genuine car pools. Sir, I now move on to deal with the questions of the different groups of people who have appealed directly to the Ministry and also through the Members of Parliament for exemption from the ALS scheme. The underlying principle, Sir, is to have every vehicle which who contributes to the congestion pay, so that the owner makes a decision to go in or not to go in - to go in by bus, by MRT, by car pools or all by himself. A key question which Members of Parliament should have asked is: why did we exempt the scheduled buses - SBS, TIBS and CSS? Because that is a fundamental deviation from the general principle of all who contribute to congestion - having to pay. It was a difficult decision for the Ministry to make, We have decided to breach the principle. Why? Scheduled buses, unlike all other vehicles, are required to go into the CBD during peak hours under the terms of licence. Why do we want scheduled buses to go in during peak hours? Because they carry the largest number of people, so the more scheduled buses there are going into the CBD during the restricted hours the better the service they provide to the 1.”
“Many Members have urged that we work on it quickly. We have been working on it actively. But unfortunately the technology is at the edge of development. We have looked around for a city that has an Electronic Road Pricing system operating. There is no such city. A few cities are carrying out pilot trials. There are others doing it on an extremeley small scale, but no city with a population similar to ours or bigger has ever tried it. We are working on it, and PWD has been actively scouting the world to look for ERP systems that may be applicable to us. At the moment there are three models that may have the potential - here I want to underline, that may have the potential - of being adapted to Singapore's circumstances and can be used. This is what a typical electronic number plate looks like [indicating]. It is just a black box. It can be stuck onto the windscreen and detector systems overhead will detect a vehicle passing. Obviously there are different black boxes [indicating] from different companies. What is inside the black box is very different with different capabilities with different functions. We are actively looking at the different systems. But our best estimate is five to seven years. Nobody has got a ready-made system. Nobody has tried it out. We will be among the first, if not the first. Hench we will have to look at them very carefully. Sir, the restraint measures that we have put out earlier this month, I believe, are fair and equitable. As I explained a moment ago, it gives people the option to decide whether they want to go into the ALS or not. If you want to go into the ALS, you pay $3 if you are going in once. You pay about $2.40 if you average it out over the entire month.”
“Do whatever it is you are doing. Carry on with your fatty foods, with your high cholesterol diet, your destructive lifestyle, with your smoking, with your drinking." Is that a responsible approach? Or should the doctor not tell the patient how serious the situation can get if he were to continue to do exactly what he has been doing before? Of course, Sir, not all patients are happy to receive such advice because it is painful. The doctor is asking him to change his lifestyle, maybe do some exercises and, maybe in extreme cases, take a certain number of bitter pills. It is not welcome but a responsible doctor has to do what is necessary. Sir, non-action, when the situation is getting progressively worse, is action in itself. The situation to get out of hand and that is very costly. Dr Lee mentioned a moment ago that once, a trip took an hour. Now it takes half an hour. True, but does he want a situation when a trip which takes half an hour today will take an hour or more in future? Let us think about what that means. Let me give a simple illustration of a goods vehicle having to make delivery for a factory. With travelling time double to carry out the same level of service of delivering the same amount of goods in the same amount of time, the company will have to employ twice as many goods vehicles and twice as many drivers plus attendants. The result will be twice as many vehicles carrying out the same function which will only add to the congestion and make what is already a bad situation worse. In other words, congestion feeds upon itself. Everybody will be spending more time on the roads and therefore our roads will be more congested. We are all looking forward to the availability of the electronic road pricing system.”
“Nevertheless, in view of the Members' regular call for a number, we have looked at certain computer projections which may give an indication. Sir, I want to emphasize that this can only give an indication, because this is a computer projection. If Members will look at the top of the map, the title is "Areas of congestion with car population of 350,000", they will see the bottom half of Singapore shaded. Almost all the housing estates in Singapore are within the shaded area. In other words, with 350,000 cars in Singapore, we will have congestion from the Central Business District all the way to all the major housing estates. Practically every one of the major housing estates will be in. The assumption, Sir, is that the traffic flow will be what it is today and that there will be no modifications to the ALS, then, with 350,000 cars practically the entire commercial and residential areas of Singapore will be under severe congestion. Sir, 350,000 sounds like a lot relative to our present situation of 250,000. But is it? At the end of April 1989, this is the latest figure I have, we grew at the rate of 9.8%, round it off to 10%. If we continue to grow at that same rate, in less than 3(r) years we would exceed 350,000 cars. That explains the urgency. Dr Lee asked: "Why is it so urgent?" Why do we need to do this? Sir, good doctors, I am sure, know that prevention is better than cure. Prevention is better than procrastination. The situation is similar to a medical situation. Since so many Members have given medical analogies this afternoon I would add one more. Our traffic situation is like a patient. The doctor has discovered certain blockages in the certain arteries leading out from his heart. What does the doctor tell the patient? "Carry on.”
“So the fact that the situation today is satisfactory is a clear demonstration that the measures applied over the years have worked, it has helped us maintain relatively free flowing traffic. But Sir, with growing affluence, more people are able to afford a car and so we are seeing congestion growing again. Yes, at the moment only in isolated locations. Sir, I will distribute a map to Members to give them an idea of the congestion that we are experiencing at the moment. [Copies of map distributed to hon. Members]. Sir, I have marked out just the major roads that are presently experiencing congestion: some of them giving traffic flow of less than 20 km an hour, some less than 15 km an hour. There are even some roads where the flow is as low as 11 km an hour. That is the situation at peak hours as ascertained by surveys at the end of last year and early this year, December 1988 and January 1989. This is May 1989. The present situation is worse than that. Because over the last 12 months the number of cars in Singapore has grown by another 9.8%. April 1989 versus April 1988. Sir, can we just allow the growgh to go on? If we do, what are the consequences? Are we over-reacting? Sir, I submit that we are not, and I want to distribute a second map to let Members have an idea of what the situation will be like if we do nothing. The first map, is based on actual surveys. The second map gives computer projections as to the extent of traffic congestion in Singapore with continued growth in cars. [Copies of map distributed to hon. Members]. Members have on a number of occasions asked for a specific number for the limit of cars allowable on our roads and I indicated that it was notpossible to give a specific number because there were so many factors to consider.”
“Sir, our limited roads must carry the greatest possible number of people and goods with the minimum of delay to the smallest number of people. That is the objective. While we are talking about car owners, we must remember that the vast majority of Singaporeans are not car owners. We have only 250,000 cars in Singapore. We have a population of 2.6 million. The majority of people travel by bus. They take the MRT. Together they are responsible for more than 3.1 million passenger trips each day. We have to protect the interest of these people too because they too are our citizens. They should not be made to bear the burden of congestion because when a hundred people travel on a bus during peak hours, they are making practically no contribution to the congestion. So why should they bear the burden in terms of longer time spent on travelling resulting from congestion from other vehicles. Sir, it has been pointed out many times, today and yesterday, that our traffic situation is satisfactory today. Why is that so? It is because for the last 20 years we have been systematically, at regular intervals, bringing in measures to prevent the situation from getting out of hand. There is an increase of less than 100% from about 140,000 cars in 1975 to about 250,000 cars today. What about other countries where there are no such restraints? I was reading an article in a publication "Asia Business Letter". It reported that The number of cars in Taipei has gone up 10 times since 1975. If we had allowed the same situation in Singapore, we will be talking about 1.4 million cars in Singapore. Where are we going to get the roads for 1.4 million cars?”
“Sir, a large number of Members have spoken on the land transport policies. I will attempt to give justice by responding to the very many points of criticisms, queries and suggestions and ake them one by one. I hope, Sir, you will bear with me. But, first, let us get our perspective right, because if we don't, we will always be going off at a tangent, because we will miss the essence of what the subject is all about. The subject is about finding ways and means of ensuring that traffic in Singapore flows freely. Why is that important? Because congestion costs. In April 1989, there was in the Straits Times an article "Traffic jams put London in a S$47 billion pickle". It is a measure of how costly traffic congestion can be for an economy. The population of UK is slightly over 50 million people, that works out on the average to a cost of approximately S$1,000 a year levied on every man, woman and child. That is a very heavy cost. That is why we must make every effort to make sure that our traffic is free flowing. Sir, as Dr Augustine Tan has alluded, my Ministry has listened very carefully to the suggestions put forth by the various Members in this House over the past years. I have been talking about this subject since 1983 - this is my sixth year in the Ministry - and a lot of practical useful suggestions have come our way and we have adopted some of them. Other suggestions found not to be practical or difficult to administer, we have put it at the back burner. I want to assure the House that the suggestions put forward today will be carefully considered. But I cannot promise the House that all of them will be implemented, because some of them will, instead of helping the situation, make the situation worse.”
“Is that how they operate in the shops? Is that how they operate in restaurants? Do doctors ask the income of their patients before they decide on charges? It is not practical to devise a mechanism where the Ministry sits in judgment and decides who should or should not be allowed to own a car, who should or should not be allowed to go into the CBD, who should or should not be allowed to do a whole long list of things. Sir, we operate a market economy, and it has made Singapore successful. We are one of the most successful of the developing countries because we have approached our problems rationally, logically, systematically. And that same approach has got to be applied to what is an extremely complex problem - that of managing the vast demands for use of our roads by a wide spectrum of people in a very large number of different circumstances. And the market distributes that scarce commodity - roads - best of all. It gives us the best use for our roads, which means it gives us the best use for our land. Hence I believe that the measures that we have introduced are equitable and fair. Sir, I would urge Members of this House to reject the three amendments and to give their support to Mr Abdullah Tarmugi who has urged the Ministry to carry out regular reviews.”
“Overall, it will be in the order of about $100 to $150 million more imposed upon the economy. What does that mean in terms of dollars and cents per vehicle owner? The cost are 500,000 vehicles in Singapore, half a million. That works out to be approximately $17 to $25 per month per vehicle; not cars anymore, but per vehicle, because this series of measures applies across the board to all vehicles. On this occasion, the unhappiness is much more widespread, as reflected by the many speeches of Members of this House sho articulated very sincerly the feed back that they have received from their residents. So I believe that "harsh" is relative. Yes, because the measures are based on usage rather than on ownership, there is greater variation in the extent of impact on different vehicle owners. Take for example, one extreme. A motorcyclist, if he does not go into the CBD, is hardly affected by the ALS scheme. He just pays a marginal increase for his car park and pays a marginal increase for his petrol. On the other hand, those who previously went into the CBD free will now have to bear a greater burden. But looking at it overall, the impact this round is only marginally higher than that in November. So I believe the measures are not too harsh. If the measures are any milder, then almost certainly in the coffeeshops it would be have said that the measures will have no effect whatsoever. Sir, the Non-Constituency MP, Dr Lee, said that the measures are not equitable. I would have thought it is patently clear to anyone that the measures are equitable. How does one sell a bowl of noddles to one's patrons? How does one charge them? Does one ask them: what is your income this month? And then charge him accordingly? Is that how they operate in the hawker centres?”
“Members will recall that way back in the early '70s we started moving on restraint measures because if we had not done so the situation in Singapore today would be very different. Members of this House who have been to other cities in Asia, in Europe, in the United States, would know the state of traffic conditions. We could not have waited because we had no MRT at that time. We were then only talking about the MRT. If we had waited until we had the MRT where would we be today? We had very few expressways, then. We had no proper bus system at that time. Members will recall the various bus companies on the verge of collapse and the Government had to send in a full team of officers to put the bus companies together, put it in shape, run the bus companies and create what is today - SBS, functioning reasonably well but not perfectly. At that time we did not even have proper taxis. We only had pirate taxis. Those were the very early days, just before the introduction of NTUC Comfort. If we had done nothing at that time and since then, because all these perfections were not available, where would we be today? We had to proceed. And at the same time improve the public transport system as we go along. Similarly we have to proceed with restraint measures now. Sir, the Member also said in his amendment that the measures were harsh. Sir, "harsh" is very subjective. Yes, the measures will have some effect on some people because if they have no effect at all, they would not work. When we introduced a small increase in tax in November last year, an average of about $20, $25, per car owner, word that went round in coffee shops was that, it was too mild; that it would have no effect whatsoever. That was about $25 per car owner. The present package is of a similar order.”
“At the same time, Sir, you may recall that the Minister for Trade and Industry announced during the Budget debate that the Government was setting up an Economic Policy Review Committee reporting directly to the Minister and comprising Permanent Secretaries of the different ministries. They too have reviewed very carefully the Government's land transportation policy, particularly from the point of ensuring that it supports the economic development of Singapore. So we have not rushed into this. We have been very careful. We have been very deliberate, and the measures have been arrived at. Members will recall that during the Committee of Supply debate I went to great lengths to explain to Members of the House the rationale behind the Government's basic policy in land transportation, the strategy behind the various measures. Indeed, Sir, I even went to the extent of naming the measures that were actively under consideration. The only thing that I did not do at that time was to announce the dollars and cents and to announce the date. Sir, I quote from the Hansard: 'The measures [under study by the Ministry] include higher duty on petrol [which is what we have imposed], parking charges [which is what we have imposed] and the possible extension of the ALS by way of its application to all vehicles contributing to the congestion [which we have introduced for implementation on 1st June].' Then I concluded, Sir: 'I hope when these measures are finalized in about two to three months' time, [that was in March] Members of this House, who have advocated strongly the use of measures to restrain usage, will give the Ministry their full support.' Sir, we have not arrived at the measures hastily. We cannot wait until we have a perfect public transport system.”
“Initially, he said that we have not taken this package of measures to Parliament, not discussing it in detail. Then earlier on this afternoon, he said that we do not have a satisfactory public transport system - MRT has not been completed in the eastern sector of the island, no proper bus integration system and so forth - a number of different possibilities but all leading to the suggestion that we should not take any action at all. Sir, I submit that the measures have not been hastily arrived at. Indeed, here I believe the Non-Constituency MP has got it right. These measures have been looked at very carefully, very thoroughly. The Ministry indicated in its press release last year in November when it increased the road tax by a marginal quantum that the Ministry was doing a thorough review, with a view to coming up with a package of measures that would restrain usage. This was in response to widespread urgings by Members of Parliament, both outside and in this House, calling upon the Ministry to move away from ownership restraint to usage restraint. My Ministry has taken the various proposals put up by the different Members of Parliament. We have looked at them very carefully over the last six months. We have representatives from a number of ministries. They include the Ministry of National Development, the Ministry of Home Affairs, the Ministry of Finance, the Ministry of Trade and Industry, PWD, ROV and Traffic Police. And the measures were arrived at after six months of detailed deliberation.”
“It means that Members are able to reflect a wide spectrum of views. This is a positive development in our parliamentary system with Members being able to speak freely, reflecting the views of their constituents. There is also another point raised by the Chairman of the GPC for MCI. He has asked for the possibility of his GPC conducting open hearings to collect views from members of the public. I welcome that too. Indeed the First Deputy Prime Minister urged the various GPCs to go out and seek views of members of the public. Members of the GPCs have been doing that already. Now they can do it with open hearings where previously these were normally held in closed-door sessions. I would urge the Chairman of the GPC to commence his hearings. But, first of all, allow the measures a certain amount of time to work - three months, four months. We should give time for the people to adapt to the new measures because we must expect a certain amount of change after the measures have been introduced. The GPC can get the views of professionals, get the views of hawkers, get the views of experts, get the views of everybody, and then look at them carefully and then give the Ministry their considered opinion, theirrecommendations on what we need to do further. I look forward to receiving recommendations from the GPC for Communications and Information. Sir, I now turn to the other three amendments put forward by the Member for Fengshan, Mr Ng Pock Too and the Non-Constituency Member of Parliament, Dr Lee Siew-Choh. The thrust of those three amendments is similar. Dr Beng, the Member for Fengshan, emphasized the fact that the measures were too hasty and he has got a number of different definitions why he considered it hasty.”
“Sir, thank you for allowing me to join the debate at this juncture. I shall be giving a lengthy reply to the many Members of Parliament who have spoken on the subject and who have put forward a large number of proposals. I intend to take those detailed comments later on when we revert to the debate on the main motion. Suffice it for me at the moment just to respond very briefly to some of the comments made on the amendments. Sir, I will start with the last amendment, ie, the amendment put forward by Mr Abdullah Tarmugi. Sir, the Member for Siglap is amending the motion to read, "but urged the Ministry to review the specific measures regularly in view of the uncertainties". The Ministry carries out reviews of its policies all the time,regularly. I would go along with that particular amendment because it is an amendment that is sound. Sir, the present package of measures obviously will have some impact on the overall travel pattern, on people's choice of doing one thing versus another, of doing it a little earlier versus doing it a little later, or the other way round - doing it a little later instead of doing it a little earlier. These are the actions which the measures are designed to induce. In other words, if you can get people to go into the CBD at slightly different times, we may be able to create a CBD that is less congested during the peak periods. And a free flow of traffic, as has been pointed out by many Members, is good for the nation because congestion imposes a very high cost on the economy. I am happy to support the motion by the Member for Siglap. The Member also urged greater public participation. Indeed the debate today is an illustration of the much greater participation by Backbenchers and , by Office holders. I think it is a healthy sign.”
“Sir, existing laws are adequate to deal with any person who uses a facsimile machine to transmit or to receive undesirable publications. Offenders can be prosecuted for the possession or distribution of these materials. For example, seditious and obscene contents are covered under the Sedition Act and the Penal Code respectively. Reproductions from publications prohibited under the Undesirable Publications Act will be dealt with under that Act. Those caught infringing the law will face penalties under the law with fines up to $10,000 and imprisonment of up to five years. Recipients of unsolicited undesirable material transmitted by fax should destroy such material upon receipt. If they retain such material, they are liable to prosecution for possession. This is exactly the same as with recipients of undesirable material obtained unsolicited by mail or other means. PUB WATER METERS IN RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES (Numbers) The following Question stood in the name of Mr Chiam See Tong --- 25. To ask the Minister for Trade and Industry if he will give the total number of Public Utilities Board water meters which have been installed in residential properties as at the latest convenient date. Mr Chandra Das: Question No. 25, Sir.”
“Dr Lee Siew-Choh( In Mandarin): On the contrary, what I have heard is that they want to watch Cantonese serials from on local TV station. Mr Ho Kah Leong( In Mandarin): Yes, most of Singaporean viewers, including the older generation, would like to watch Mandarian serials made in Singapore, just as Dr Lee has mentioned a moment ago by a slip of his tongue. In this way the older generation can watch together with their grandchildren and at the same time enjoy family togetherness. Dr Lee Siew-Choh( In Mandarin): Enjoying family togetherness, yes. Then why not allow the older generation to enjoy Cantonese serials together with their children who can also understand Cantonese? Why can they not enjoy the Cantonese serials together then? Mr Ho Kah Leong( In Mandarin): Dr Lee perhaps knows that nowadays, generally the older generation Chinese also understand Mandarin. Although they may not be too fluent in the spoken Mandarin they can still understand it. DRUG ABUSE (Steps to curb) 21. Dr S. Vasoo asked the Minister for Home Affairs whether drug abuse is on the increase again; and, if so, what further steps are being taken to curb this problem.”
“In the meantime, SBC took steps to develop local Mandarin programmes which have become as popular, if not more, than Cantonese programmes made in Hong Kong. Surveys done by Survey Research Singapore (SRS) since July 1988 show that the average Chinese viewership for the nightly SBC Mandarin serials telecast at 9.30 pm during weekdays was 47%. Among the older Chinese, that is those above the age of 50, 52% of them watched these serials. These figures compare well with the viewership for popular Cantonese serials in Hong Kong itself. For example, the two most popular Cantonese serials telecast in Hong Kong in the corresponding period each had a viewership of 46%. Dr Lee Siew-Choh( In Mandarin): Sir, when was this Government survey carried out? Mr Ho Kah Leong( In Mandarin): These surveys are continually carried out every three monthly. Dr Lee Siew-Choh( In Mandarin): Are these surveys published then? Mr Ho Kah Leong( In Mandarin): Sir, these figures are not something new. It is not necessary for us to publish them after every survey. But if the Member would like to have these figures I would be prepared to supply them to him. Dr Lee Siew-Choh( In Mandarin): Are these surveys accurate and reliable? Mr Ho Kah Leong( In Mandarin): As far as I know, the company that carries out the survey is very reliable and the figureshave a high degree of accuracy. Dr Lee Siew-Choh( In Mandarin): Does the Government know that every night many Chinese Singaporeans watch the Malaysian TV3 and RTM3 programmes? Does he know that? Mr Ho Kah Leong( In Mandarin): We do. Because of this, just as Dr Lee has said our Singapore viewers are also able to watch some dialect serials through these channels. This gives SBC the more reason to discontinue the telecast of Cantonese serials.”
“Sir, SBC reviewed the need for the late night TV news last year. The reason for discontinuing the late night news was because of the very low viewership. Apart from TV News, SBC keeps the public informed on the key issues of the day by many other means. For example, most of SBC's radio channels have news bulletins once every hour on the hour up to midnight and on certain channels beyond. SBCText also features the latest news up to midnight. Hence, SBC feels that it is not necessary to produce an amplified version of the news summary for telecast later in the evening when there is no viewership. TELECAST OF CANTONESE SERIALS (Response to demand) 20. Dr Lee Siew-Choh asked the Minister for Communications and Information whether he is aware that many people, especially the aged, would like a resumption of Cantonese serials telecast by the Singapore Broadcasting Corporation, and whether he plans to respond positively to such popular demands. The Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Communications and Information (Mr Ho Kah Leong) (for the Minister for Communications and Information)( In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, SBC's practice of not telecasting Cantonese serials is in support of Government's policy to promote the use of Mandarin rather than dialect. When it did so, SBC realized that some older members of the family would be inconvenienced. It was a sacrifice on their part. But, by and large, most have accepted that their sacrifice has not been in vain. They realize and accept that this is for the good of their children and grandchildren, as the children in the family would not then have to cope with both Mandarin and dialect in addition to the other subjects in the school time-table. SBC will therefore not re-introduce Cantonese serials.”
“Sir, presently SBC is already telecasting special TV variety programmes as part of the celebrations of the main festivals that are observed by Singaporeans. SBC will continue to do so. Telecasting from a location outside of the TV studio adds interest to a variety show and it is something that we intend to do more. For example, the recent Lunar New Year Show with the 'live' inserts from outside were very well received by members of the public. SBC will continue to have these shows. Whether we will be doing the shows completely outdoors or whether we will just be taking inserts from outdoor locations and phasing them in with a programme that is produced indoors will depend on a number of factors, including the feasibility of location, and also the level of public interest on that particular occasion and festival. CIVIL SUIT AGAINST STAR PUBLICATIONS (Government interest) 8. Dr Lee Siew-Choh asked the Minister for Law what interest has the Government in Civil Suit KOD No. S6-25-235-87 between Mr Lee Kuan Yew and Mr Chin Vui Khen and another heard in the High Court of Malaya at Kuala Lumpur on the 27th, 28th and 29th of March, 1989.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, Changi Airport's Second Passenger Terminal Building is scheduled for completion by the second half of 1990. The Public Works Department (PWD) is managing the construction project on behalf of the Civil Aviation Authority of Singapore (CAAS). They have informed CAAS that the construction works at Terminal II are presently still within schedule. It is true that a certain amount of time has been lost but this is still within the time allowed for in a construction project of this size, time allowed for exigencies such as labour and materials shortage, poor weather, and other factors. This period is slowly being used up but as of the latest report from PWD, we will still be able to complete Passenger Terminal Building II by the second half of next year. SPECIAL TV PROGRAMMES FOR COMMUNITY FESTIVALS 7. Mr Chin Harn Tong asked the Minister for Communications and Information whether the Singapore Broadcasting Corporation will produce special TV programmes for the main festivals of the other communities similar to the special TV programme on Lunar New Year's Eve to highlight the celebration of Lunar New Year.”
“Sir, these two Bills, the Road Traffic (Amendment) Bill together with the Customs (Amendment) Bill, will help us contain the problem of evasion of duty on petrol and will enable petrol duty to be used as one of the restraint measures on the usage of cars. Sir, I would also like to respond to a point raised earlier by the Chairman of the GPC for Communications and Information, where he has made the plea for officials, both Customs officials as well as the ROV officials, to be flexible and not create undue inconvenience to motorists. That is the intention of these two Bills, to make it as easy and as convenient for the motorists as possible. 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. - [Dr Yeo Ning Hong]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. STATUTORY CORPORATIONS (CONTRIBUTIONS TO CONSOLIDATED FUND) BILL Order read for Second Reading.”
“Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." Sir, my colleague, the Minister for Finance, has explained in some detail the reasons for the Customs (Amendment) Bill. This Bill, the Road Traffic (Amendment) Bill is meant to enhance the effectiveness of the former Bill. The House has already just passed a moment ago the Customs (Amendment) Bill requiring drivers of motor vehicles leaving Singapore to have more than half a tankful of petrol. Let me go into the details of the present Bill. Clause 3 of the Road Traffic (Amendment) Bill seeks to amend the Act to empower the Minister to make rules on the use and proper maintenance of fuel-measuring equipment in motor vehicles. The objective is to ensure that fuel gauges are kept in proper working condition at all times, providing a true reading of the quantity of petrol in the fuel tank of the vehicle. Anyone using a vehicle with a faulty fuel gauge shall be liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding $500. Clause 4 makes it an offence to alter any fuel-measuring equipment of any motor vehicle for the purpose of preventing it from registering the true indication of the amount of petrol in the vehicle's fuel tank. Sir, the Bill also seeks to create a rebuttable presumption that the person using or owning a motor vehicle with artificial or mechanical means that alter the fuel gauge has abetted in the altering of the fuel gauge. Any person who alters or abets in the alteration of the meter shall be liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding $5,000 or to an imprisonment for a term not exceeding three months.”
“Sir, I do not have the specific number. But my recollection is that the number would probably be in the order of about 150,000. There are already three post offices in Bedok New Town. NEIGHBOURHOOD POLICE POST IN PASIR PANJANG 5. Encik Abbas Abu Amin asked the Minister for Home Affairs whether the plan to set up a neighbourhood police post at Pasir Panjang Road has been finalized.”
“Sir, as part of Government's policy to liberalize the taxi industry, my Ministry will now allow taxis to carry paid advertisements as long as the taxis remain easily recognizable to commuters. Such advertisements, of course, should also not pose any additional hazard to other road users. ROV will be happy to receive any specific proposals from the taxi companies. BEDOK RESERVOIR HOUSING ESTATE (Post Office) 4. Encik Zulkifli bin Mohammed asked the Minister for Communications and Information whether a post office will be built in Bedok Reservoir Housing Estate which now incorporates 130 residential blocks. Dr Yeo Ning Hong: Sir, a postal agency has been appointed at Block 632, Bedok Reservoir Road, to provide residents with basic postal services such as the sale of stamps, registration of mail and the posting of parcels. Besides the postal agency, there are also six stamp vendors in the housing estate where residents can buy postage stamps. The experience of Telecoms in other housing estates has shown that the demand for other services provided by a full-fledged post office is very low. Nevertheless, Telecoms will monitor the present situation in Bedok Reservoir Housing Estate and, if necessary, set up a sub-post office.”
“Sir, my Ministry will allow taxis to install mobile phones for use by commuters. This will be in line with the Government's objective to liberalize the taxi industry and to help improve the quality of taxi service to commuters. However, the use of the telephone by drivers whilst driving can be hazardous both to the drivers as well as to other road users. For this reason, I would urge the taxi companies to set up their own rules and conditions to discourage their drivers from using the telephones whilst driving and when carrying commuters. Likewise, I would also like to urge all motorists to refrain from using the telephone and driving at the same time. In the process they may save a minute or two but they may lose a life. BILL INTRODUCED 12.50 pm JUDICIAL COMMITTEE (AMENDMENT) BILL "to amend the Judicial Committee Act (Chapter 148 of the 1985 Revised Edition)", presented by the Minister for Law (Prof. S. Jayakumar); read the First time; to be read a Second time on the next available sitting of Parliament, and to be printed. MAIN AND DEVELOPMENT ESTIMATES OF SINGAPORE FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR 1ST APRIL, 1989 TO 31ST MARCH, 1990 Order read for consideration in Committee of Supply [9th Allotted Day]. [Mr Speaker in the Chair] Head R -”
“Sir, the Customs Act and the Motor Vehicles (Registration and Licensing) Rules require all vehicle owners including taxi owners to pay their road tax and diesel tax on the month of registration. Vehicle owners are free to choose the date for the de-registration of their vehicles. After de-registration they can apply to the ROV to obtain a refund of the remaining months of road and diesel tax which they have paid. Sir, my suggestion to the Member would be to have the taxis of Comfort registered on the first day of the month and then de-registered on the last day in order to get maximum value for the tax that they have paid. RADIO AND TV LICENCE FEES (Abolition) The following question stood in the name of Mr Charles Chong - 6. To ask the Minister for Communications and Information whether the Singapore Broadcasting Corporation can remain viable without the revenue from radio and television licence fees and, if so, whether the SBC will consider the eventual abolition of such fees.”