(1) PLAN FOR___INDUSTRIAL ESTATE AT KEMUYANG SIBU

(2) EARTHFILLING OF LOW LYING AREAS OF PRIMARY SCHOOLS IN SIBU

(3) IMPLEMENTATION OF MINI MULTIMEDIA SUPER CORRIDOR (MSC)

(4) ECONOMIC DOWNTURN: EFFECT ON TIMBER INDUSTRY

(5) PLANS TO HARNESS INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

(6) OVERSEAS TRIP DURING HAZE EMERGENCY

Speeches /Debates 

(1)BUILDINGS (AMENDMENT) BILL, 1997

(2)LAND CODE (AMENDMENT) BILL, 1997

(3)NATURAL RESOURCES AND ENVIRONMENT (AMENDMENT) BILL, 1997

(4)THE 1998 SARAWAK STATE BUDGET
 
 

Tuan Speaker,

I rise to also participate in the debate pertaining to the amendment to the Buildings Ordinance 1994. This Bill seeks to make significant amendment and improvement to the Buildings Ordinance, 1994. The Minister has already recited and summed up quite concisely the details of the amendment and I need not repeat them here.

Tuan Speaker, In short, these amendments are:

(a) the local authority is to make visual inspection where there are changes to the topography, land features or the surrounding area brought about by the erection of building or natural causes which are not in conformity with any approved plan;

(b) to review the safety and stability of a building, its foundation and surroundings in the course of erection of building;

(c) to issue the order for cessation of the erection of building in certain circumstances, such as when safety of life or property is affected;

(d) to direct the owner of buildings to carry out remedial works;

(e) to make provisions for safety of not only any building and also of earthworks.

The intention of these amendments no doubt is to ensure the safety of buildings and to prevent imminent danger to the safety of life or property. These intentions are good and are supportable. 

I would take the opportunity to make the following observations in respect to this Bill vis a vis the principal Building Ordinance, 1994.

(1) Life and Safety:

It has been wisely said there should be no bargain or compromise to life and safety.

In the premises, buildings must be constructed in strict compliance with approved plans and specifications, with reasonable professionalism and workmanship, with no defective material being used, with patience, e.g., to proceed to the next stage of work only after the concrete is set etc., without being unduly shrewd in making quick and unwarranted profits at the expense of quality. 

The Building Ordinance and the present amendment help to ensure these criterion being met in the building industry.

Errant developers and contractors who are inclined to ignore or shelve the advice of the local councils should therefore suffer the penalty under the law. Hence, the new section 8C seeks to empower the local authority to revoke the approval of any plan and specification where that person has been convicted of an offence. 

For the sake of safety to life and other buildings, I would propose any developer or contractor who show the tendency to violate the provisions of the Ordinance should be black listed, just like black listing those who have the tendency to draw bad cheques.

(2) Building Plans

It is unfortunate that many developers and contractors have shown the tendency to commence building construction works even before the building plans have been approved by the local authority.

There was a big development project near Sungai Merah, Sibu, where a developer had commenced building works without waiting for the building plan to be approved. When I asked him, he said it was very normal in the building industry and allowed by the Council which would in due course grant the approval. He also said that normally developers and contractors do not wait for the Council to grant the approval because it usually takes a long time. 

I have received many of such complaints regarding the delay on the part of the ministries and local councils in granting approvals of plans submitted. I hope that the Minister may enlighten this august House on this alleged delay.

(3) Occupation Permits

Many purchasers have moved in to occupy their houses although occupation permits have not been issued to them by the relevant authorities. This usually happens in the case of an errant developer who was forced by circumstances to abandon the development project.

The case I had pointed out in Sungai Merah is illustrative. The developer went broke and absconded without finishing the project. In fact, only the Developer's share had been completed, or sort of. None of the landowners' share had been started. Many purchasers have moved in. The Sibu Municipal Council had even demanded payment of rates from the land owners.

In the event, no one knows whether these buildings are safe enough for occupation. Some of the buildings have developed cracks. Some floors have subsided, and some of the buildings have a part of the wall slanting and standing by itself, disjointed from the main building.

(4) Movements/Changes in Topography, Land Features and Surroundings

The Building Ordinance has not dealt with the aspects of movements or changes in topography, land features and surroundings. Hence the present amendment is timely.

In considering this amendment, one should not lose sight of the Highland Towers tragedy.

Most of us need not be reminded of the tragedy that happened on 11th December, 1993 when Block One of the Highland Towers condominium collapsed killing 48 people, and Block Two and Block Three were vacated.

The Coroner's Court had ruled on 3rd November, 1997 that the incident was a misadventure, although there were contributing factors. These contributing factors included a weak retaining wall, earth movements and improper drainage. Parties mainly responsible for the collapse were the developer, draughtsman and structural engineer. Neighbouring property owners and local authorities were also contributing parties.

The misadventure of the Highland Towers sounds a warning and a reflective mirror to all developers, engineers, consultants, local authorities and building occupants. 

Most of the time it is difficult to expect any significant change in topography, land features and surroundings. It is even harder to expect any lateral movement underground. The wisdom lies in adequate supervision in the process of construction and periodic inspection thereafter.

Similar tragedy such as the Highland Towers should not be allowed to recur. 

(5) Buildings on Peat Soil

Some houses in Sibu are built on peat soil or on poor and soft ground. Eg., those along Tiong Hua Road and Hua Kiew Road. Some suffer cracks and some have subsided and some have collapsed. 

Recently the excavation of a drain by the Department of Drainage and Irrigation had caused the subsiding of at least 38 houses at Taman Indah, Sibu. Walk paths sank and slanted 45 degrees. Culverts sank by some one foot. Roads cracked. Walls and floors cracked. Some septic tanks were torn and displaced. The problem at Taman Indah had existed long before this drain excavation, but the additional settlement of the houses after excavation could be due to two factors (according to Assistant Professor of Geotechnical Engineering of University of Delaware who visited the site end of October, 1997):

(a) lowering of water table which led to consolidation/compression of soil and (b) lateral flow of soil.

The Assistant Professor also queried the possible responsibility of the contractor.

I wonder what plans does the Ministry have in mind to resolve the problem faced by these families at Taman Indah, Sibu. The people are concerned that the bakau piles may now rot which would lead to further subsiding of their buildings in the future.

Hence earthworks are important. Peat soil have very low stiffness. The local authorities should ensure that developers are not allowed to build houses on these sort of foundation. 

The law should require developers to carry out soil study first before accepting any other plans or proposal.

(6) Supervision and Implementation of the Law: 

The government should ensure that only competent and qualified engineers, in the sense they are registered with the professional bodies, should be employed for the purposes stipulated under the Building Ordinance. 

It is only fair that the law should provide that the local authorities should bear some responsibility in the event that the engineers under their employ fail in discharging their functions properly.

Although the Ordinance and the Bill make provisions for penalties, I do have some reservation as to how are the local authorities going to implement the law, as the local authorities are hampered with lack of personnel, particularly qualified engineers. Maybe the government shall plan a recruitment drive for these professionals.

It used to be that even with the Building Ordinance already in force, and even though the regularization exercise have since long passed, we can still see certain illegal structures standing erect right under the nose of the municipal councils. Yet there is no action being taken against these buildings. A clear cut example would be the Kok Yin premises along Hua Kiew Road, Sibu. The people in Sibu are wondering why a senior serving councilor from the SUPP is allowed to maintain his illegal premises long after the Building Ordinance have come into force. I see that the Sibu Municipal Council intends to prosecute certain offenders in Court. But so far, the prosecution is selective which should not be the case, as the law must be fair to all.

With these observations, the DAP and I support the Bill. #