Amy Khor Lean Suan
Singapore
“Sir, NEA does conduct inspections of these premises from time to time. For this particular premises, they actually did six inspections since 2021.”
“The Land Transport Authority (LTA) conducts enforcement actions against drivers who are found to have provided illegal car-pooling services. An individual who provides an illegal car-pooling service may face a fine of up to $3,000, up to six months' imprisonment, or both.”
“We will also provide the first 500 private heavy vehicle chargers co-funding of up to 50% of the charger installation cost, capped at $30,000 per charger. These measures will narrow the lifecycle cost gap between an electric and internal combustion engine heavy vehicle and spur adoption of electric heavy vehicles.”
“With regard to the extension of the lower speed limit to school zones for full day, we will work with the relevant agencies on the enhanced enforcements.”
“They will provide a certain amount of protection to the pedestrians because, as I have said, the bollards will absorb the impact of the collision from the vehicles. So, there is a protection. But ultimately, of course, road safety really depends on a multitude of factors, including road user behaviour.”
“The bollards installed at pedestrian crossings by the Land Transport Authority (LTA) are not of the K4, K8 or K12 standards stated by the Member. Bollards of these standards are typically security bollards. They are installed to protect critical infrastructure or at high security areas, such as Changi Airport, to be unyielding.”
The complete record
Every one of 2,285 lines we hold for Amy Khor Lean Suan, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 41 of 46.
“Hence, many support the Act and the proposed amendments, but they also have legitimate concerns regarding the Act and the Bill, some of which I have raised, and for which the Ministry must continue to attempt to overcome. With this, Sir, I support the Bill.”
“The composition of, and criteria for, appointment of the ethics committee should also be made transparent to allay public concerns regarding the neutrality, professionalism and integrity of the committee. The ethics committee should preferably comprise not just a medical doctor with no vested interest in that case, but also psychologists and trained counsellors to assess the donor's motivation for organ donation. In this regard, I agree with my earlier colleagues' comments that perhaps there should be a cap as to the number allowable in the ethics committee, as well as a maximum number of representatives from the institution itself. My final point relates to respecting the dead. When HOTA was introduced in 1988 to cover only kidneys, there were already concerns from the public that the body may be mutilated when the kidneys are harvested. Now, as more organs are to be included, there is clearly genuine concern over the possible mutilation of the body. MOH needs to reassure the public that it fully understands and respects the strong emotional ties between the deceased and the family, and that the body would be treated with utmost respect. Before harvesting the donor's organs, the family of the deceased should be informed and counselled on the procedure and what to expect to see after the surgical operation, so that there will not be any added undue concern at a time of their bereavement. I would thus like to ask the Minister to assure this House that the bereaved donor's family will be properly informed and counselled by doctors and professional counsellors before the organs are harvested. In conclusion, Sir, I would like to note that Singaporeans largely understand the primary motivations of HOTA to save lives.”
“Perhaps, the MOH could set up an Organ Donation Advisory Committee to review the scope of organ donation in Singapore, assess existing guidelines and make recommendations to the Minister on how rules can be changed in keeping with the times. The recent high profile incident involving actress and presenter Andrea De Cruz alerted the public to the benefits of allowing for living unrelated organ transplants under special circumstances. The incident has perhaps also made the public more receptive and aware of the need to clearly spell out the rules permitting such transplants. This would make the regulations and conditions under which living donor organ transplants, particularly those between an unrelated donor and a recipient, more transparent and safeguard against outlawed practices, such as organ trading. In our quest to save more lives, we certainly do not want to unwittingly create possible loopholes for organ trading, and where life and death is the outcome of price bidding or the influence of the powerful, as is already happening in some countries. There are merits for each hospital's Transplant Ethics Committee to assess and decide on living organ transplants, such as direct and faster access to information which could spell the difference between life and death. But there is also a need to put in place measures that will ensure uniformity of standards, strict independence of the ethics committee and the pooling of expertise and resources, especially in tiny Singapore. MOH should establish comprehensive, transparent and clear guidelines, rules and procedures for the ethics committee in order to reduce as much ambiguity as possible on the part of the ethics committee in making decisions regarding the eligibility and suitability of a living donor.”
“Finally, the MOH could spearhead an annual "Organ Donation Awareness Day" with welfare and community groups such as the NKF and the CCC. This could form part of a systematic and sustained effort to educate our young, and the public in general, about the critical need for organ donation and, at the same time, allay their fears and concerns. My second point relates to living donor organ transplants and the Transplant Ethics Committee. Of the three major amendments the Bill seeks to incorporate in HOTA, the regulations for living donor organ transplants would be considered the most significant and far-reaching. A press report discussing whether HOTA should include more organs besides the kidney, noted that many people in fact think that HOTA includes more than kidneys. A Gleneagles Hospital consultant, liver transplant surgeon, K C Tan, was quoted as saying, "Many people, even doctors, have assumed all along that the Act refers to all organs. If you accept the Act, other organs should be no different from kidneys." But whilst the majority surveyed are for the inclusion of more organs, there are also detractors who feel that body parts should not be treated like unwanted furniture or auto spare parts. Thus, I support the MOH's stand of adopting a cautious approach of excluding the lung under the current amendment to HOTA, even though there were requests for its inclusion, as lung transplant is not yet established. However, MOH should constantly review the usefulness and appropriateness of including other organs such as the lung and allow for such inclusions as soon as it is deemed suitable.”
“Thirdly, in the previous debate on HOTA in 1987, the then Acting Minister for Health had, in response to Members' concerns, informed the House that following a 6-month intense public education campaign, every year from henceforth, all Singaporeans reaching the age of 20 years will receive a reminder concerning HOTA. I would like to ask the Minister if this practice has continued ever since and, if so, in what form the reminder takes. Fourthly, as new cohorts will come under the Act each year, it is best to educate our young so that they will not be averse to organ donation. Moreover, they can help in bringing the message across to their parents and grandparents. An encounter a friend had on a bus illustrates this point. She overheard a young mother asking her daughter to eat - something in a cup which she was spooning and wanting to put into the child's mouth. The child told her mother, "No eating on the bus!". Even though the mother insisted, the child did not give in, repeating what she believed was the etiquette, over and over again, "No eating on the bus". After a few minutes, the mother got the point and did not pursue the matter. I think this incident illustrates how important it is for us to educate our young in order to reach out to those supposedly older and wiser, and who think they know better. I would like to ask the Minister if efforts have been made to educate students from secondary schools and above on organ donation. If not, I would like to urge the MOH to work closely with the MOE and other community organisations, like the NKF, to reach out to the students who would be future donors, so that they clearly understand the motivations of the Act.”
“It was reported in the Straits Times of 22nd February 2003 that the Ministry is to conduct regular public education programmes in partnership with community organisations. I would like to ask to what extent this has been done. I cannot recall any organisation coming forth to give the grassroots and residents in my constituency an educational talk on HOTA. Continuous public education on HOTA is not just to ensure that Singaporeans make an informed decision, in this case, "not to opt out". But, beyond this, better understanding about organ donation may also encourage more people to sign up, outside the scope of HOTA, under the Medical (Therapy, Education and Research) Act enacted in 1972. In its public education efforts, I would like to suggest the following areas which the Ministry could pay attention to. Firstly, as an Asian society, Singaporeans' views are still likely to be shaped by religious or superstitious beliefs. There is thus a great need to clarify misconceptions and allay fears pertaining to this emotive subject. The Government should, therefore, work closely with the religious organisations and actively enlist their help to reassure the public that organ donation is not contrary to their religious beliefs. Secondly, from our experience in fighting SARS and administering the NSS and ERS, the grassroots could be mobilised to educate the community about HOTA. This will be especially helpful for the senior citizens who do not read the newspapers, surf the Net or even watch current affairs programmes on TV.”
“The concerns over an opt-in versus opt-out system, the definition of brain death, safeguards to ensure that doctors do not prematurely diagnose brain death, and the fear that the body may be mutilated, are not new and have been debated some 16 years ago, when HOTA was first enacted. Indeed, a Select Committee was even set up to receive representations on the original Act. Yet, these same concerns have been raised in the most recent feedback sessions, showing that such concerns continue to gnaw, either because they are deep-rooted and cannot be easily overcome or, perhaps more likely, many of the feedback participants are not aware of the previous debates and responses. In fact, an incident I recently encountered clearly illustrates the need for on-going education efforts to reach out to as many individuals as possible. When I told one of the senior directors of my company a few days ago that I was preparing to speak on HOTA at this Parliament sitting, he asked, "HOTA? What HOTA?" Of course, the acronym will never scale the heights of brand recognition achieved, say, by SIA, or even for that matter the PAP. Nonetheless, whether it is HOTA or the words spelt out in full, the man-in-the-street is probably - and I beg the indulgence of Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, to use Singlish in this House - "blur like sotong". The Acting Minister for Health noted: "I see no reason why properly explained, properly educated, why we cannot achieve this higher pledge rate." Singapore's rate of organ pledging is low compared to those of other cities outside Asia. Can it be partly because the public has not been extensively and properly educated nor continuously reminded?”
“This will allow Singaporeans to make an informed, conscious choice to opt in and pledge their organs, rather than, as one respondent to MOH's online feedback noted: "relying on their ignorance not to opt out". However, in reality, not many will opt in, as they are inclined not to think about the subject of death, since it is something that they deem far away or "won't happen to me yet". For others, it is also something unpleasant or taboo. Or as another respondent to MOH's online feedback declared: "If it is an opt-in system, I will not opt-in, as it is too much of a hassle. While I do not mind donating my organs, it is not a priority for me." Hence, I support the present opt-out system. Indeed, I think it is a pragmatic approach. However, once this Bill is passed in Parliament, it affects the majority of Singaporeans and PRs. Many may be oblivious to the fact that they are subject to the provisions of the Act, unless they opt-out. Furthermore, every year, a new cohort of individuals will reach the age of 21, when they become automatically subject to the Act, unless they opt out. This group must also be educated on HOTA, so that the Act, which operates based on presumed consent, truly does not take away or diminish the individual's rights. I strongly believe that the Government must keep up with its efforts to educate the public on the implications of the Act on a regular basis. If not, very quickly, the public may forget about the Act. There is already some evidence of this from recent public feedback regarding the Bill.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, organ donation is an emotive issue, which may be influenced by the donor's cultural values and dearly-held religious beliefs. For some people, it concerns the wholeness of the body for the afterlife. For others, it constitutes a question of respect for the departed. But, equally important, the statistics show that each year a significant number of people perish because suitable donor organs cannot be found in time. From a secular perspective, the issue boils down to one of whether we should, figuratively speaking, "sacrifice" the already dead for the benefit of the dying, in order that they may have another chance at life. It is entirely appropriate that the Ministry had embarked on an extensive public consultation and feedback programme on the proposed amendments. I am also pleased that the Whip has been lifted for this Bill, and rightly so, given the religious and perhaps ethical questions it might raise in the minds of some people. Allowing MPs to vote according to their conscience and beliefs reinforces the intention of the Bill, that it is not meant to take away an individual's rights to his own body. But, Sir, whilst I personally support the Bill, there are three key issues which I would like to highlight and urge the Ministry to seriously consider. Firstly, as with many of my colleagues before me, the issue refers to not just extensive but sustained, systematic public education. There are still some who advocate an opt-in rather than an opt-out system, as this would allow the rights of the people to be better respected. In an ideal world, I would agree that it would be better to have an opt-in rather than an opt-out system.”
“Sir, I would like to ask the Parliamentary Secretary that for schools that do not have trained or professional counsellors, where would the students be referred to if they were assessed that they actually need help which is beyond the capabilities of the Teacher Counsellors?”
“Sir, I would like the Parliamentary Secretary to comment on the recent press reports that due to budget cuts, some schools have stopped engaging the services of qualified counsellors. If this was so, how would it affect the quality of counselling services that can be given to students who are in need of counselling by professional or trained counsellors?”
“Sir, given the experience of the last two exercises, could the Ministry work early with the grassroots to update the records, especially for those people where we have got information about their passing away or because they are illiterate and simply cannot understand or fill up the forms, so that there will not be a last minute rush to try and get these people to sign up before the deadline?”
“Sir, I would like to ask the Deputy Prime Minister that given the significant numbers of Singaporeans who have not topped up their CPF this year as well as last year - 80,000 and 90,000 respectively - whether the Ministry has actually done any analysis to see if a significantly similar group of people were the ones who did not top up for the two years, and whether they know the causes for this, so that the help of the grassroots, for instance, could be enlisted much earlier in an effort to reduce the number. Another question I would like to ask the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance is whether the Ministry also works closely with the grassroots who have been asked to assist in helping those who have not topped up to top up on the information that they gather. For instance, in my constituency, we found that there was a man who was supposed to be 106 years old. When we went there, he had actually passed away eight years ago. Could such information be gleaned to update the records?”
“I am greatly encouraged by the many studies that have recently been initiated by the Ministry to further improve the system and allow greater flexibility and innovation so as to better prepare our young for an increasingly challenging future. I hope that the Examinations and Assessment Board will contribute effectively towards this end and be open to feedback and suggestions. Sir, with this, I support the Bill.”
“Hence, it is unlikely to be an adequate nor even accurate yardstick to gauge our students' abilities. Furthermore, even in America, the SAT has been criticised to be a poor predictor of success of the student in his first year of university; that too much weight has been given to SAT for admissions, which causes students to focus on preparing for the test at the expense of more important academic learning, and that SAT favours students from wealthier families who can afford test-preparation courses. Needless to say, in Singapore, even if the weightage for SAT is reduced to 5%, like for CCA, everyone worth his salt and is a true blue kiasu Singaporean would still go all out to slog and prepare for the test. A student from one of the top junior colleges whom I recently met told me as a matter of fact that students also try to ace their CCA, as not getting good marks would tarnish their otherwise perfect grades, and they fear that this could in turn jeopardise their chances of getting a scholarship, a place in the unversity and a course of their choice. Come 2005, the English section of the SAT would be revamped to include a written section. There is concern that Singaporeans would be negatively affected as they largely do better in the Mathematics section. Moreover, the usefulness of the SAT would then be even more questionable as it is seen to duplicate the "A" levels. Since we will have our very own Examinations Board, and given the feedback thus far on the SAT, the Examinations Board could consider if the "A" level examinations format could be further refined to test students' reasoned ability, as defined in the SAT, and to do away with the SAT for university admission altogether, or to come up with its own assessment method, in place of SAT.”
“" A Straits Times survey of 112 first-year JC students in September 2003 reported the shocking grasp of the English language among JC students. Some of these shortcomings will no doubt be carried forward into their university lives and beyond into their careers, to their own detriment. Sir, we certainly do not need undergraduates whose standard of spoken and written English mirrors what I once saw written on a T-shirt that says: "I is a university student." Or in an examination script that I actually once marked as a university lecturer that says: "Cabbage in, cabbage out" instead of "Garbage in, garbage out". Such industry feedback and observations are indeed cause for concern as we aim to be an education hub and a global entrepolis. One of the primary tasks of the Singapore Examinations and Assessment Board should be to look into how, together with changes to the syllabus and teaching methodologies, the examination formats and assessment methods can be modified to further test the written and oral skills of our students. Sir, a final concern I would like to highlight relates to the requirement of SAT as one of the university admission criteria. No doubt, this has only been implemented last year, and there is currently a review to determine if the SAT weightage for university admission should be further lowered. There has been much debate and controversy over the requirement of SAT for university admission. According to the College Board of the US, where SAT originated, the SAT is supposed to measure "developed reasoning" which is described as the skills that students develop not only in school but also outside school. However, the SAT is primarily formulated with the linguistic and mathematical skills of American students and not Singaporean students.”
“The Acting Minister for Education, Mr Tharman Shanmugaratnam, noted in his speech at the recent MOE Workplan Seminar, as well as in this House, that some amount of stress, if well managed, is positive and challenges the students to excel. Indeed, this is absolutely critical, if the standards of the examination systems are to be equal to, if not surpass, the internationally acclaimed standards of the Singapore-Cambridge system that many generations of Singaporean students have grown up with. But while I agree with this view that there should be some rigour in our education system to allow students to fully develop their potential, we must also leave students time to pursue their interests and passion, discover themselves and their talent outside of the classroom. As recently as yesterday, one JC student noted in the Straits Times that a typical day in junior college starts at 8.00 am and ends between 3.00 pm and 5.00 pm. Students then go to compulsory co-curricular activities that can last until 8.00 pm. She then asked, "How do you expect students to do anything other than what is necessary for them to graduate?" In other words, we should adopt a holistic view of education beyond the confines of the classroom, and our assessment and examination system should likewise reflect this broader emphasis. Examination questions should therefore give more stress on testing the understanding, analytical and thinking skills of the students, rather than the size of their memory banks and the speed of their retrieval. The Acting Minister for Education also noted in the same speech that "Almost all industry leaders feel Singaporeans can do much better in communication and persuasion.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I understand that the intention of establishing an Examination Board is to build up our own capabilities and expertise in educational assessment and examination services. This bodes well for our education system and signals a coming of age of the system. It is also congruent with our efforts to develop ourselves as a regional education hub. However, instead of setting up a separate statutory board to undertake this task, could not these duties be fulfilled under the current system where it is under a Division of the MOE, especially at a time when the Government is mindful of cutting waste in the public sector so that the public would not be saddled with unnecessary costs? But that aside, I am pleased that the policy direction is to ensure that school examinations would be better aligned with our national manpower objectives, and we can be leaders instead of followers in introducing new and innovative examination formats and techniques. With the changes to be made to the upper secondary and Pre-U sectors, the introduction of a revised JC curriculum, through-train education and so on to promote independent thinking and creativity, examination formats, tests and assessments must change in tandem. Our students, especially the more able ones, must learn to steer away from mere rote learning and acquire higher order skills. Open-book examinations, project work and presentations could be given even more emphasis. Questions set in examinations should also take on a more "what if" instead of "what is" format. At the same time, the examination formats must take cognisance of the different learning abilities of our students, so that the weaker ones are not unduly stressed by the more extensive assessment methodologies employed.”
“First, I would like to thank the Minister for his comprehensive reply. On a point of clarification as regards the legal entitlement, my point is that, from the landowner's perspective, based on the current legislation, he would be entitled, if in future there is an increase in plot ratio. So it is from the landowner's perspective. The second point relates to Temporary Development Levy. My understanding would be it is temporary as the Development Charge payable is for a temporary period of time. It is not necessarily related to the length of the structure. So the idea would be that you may have a privately-held freehold land, but you want a temporary use, so short leases may not be applicable. But I appreciate the Minister's point that we could use some other mechanism.”
“Thus, I fear that while the intention of the temporary levy is laudable, the change does not go far enough. For instance, why only 10 years as a maximum length of time for the temporary permission? To cater to a potentially large pool of businesses, perhaps a longer fixed period should be prescribed, or more generous extensions be allowed. After all, the landowner is not getting a free lunch here. His Temporary Development Levy is pegged to the length of the term. Moreover, he bears the risks of future increases in Development Charge rates. Furthermore, I understand that the temporary levy is not applicable for new erections of buildings. Again, I think this could unnecessarily restrict the type of businesses that can benefit from this scheme. There could be businesses which require custom-built premises and yet such premises may suffer from functional and economic obsolescence very quickly even if the building is physically sound. I would like to urge the Minister to consider widening the scope under which temporary levy is applicable to make this initiative truly helpful to aspiring entrepreneurs. With these comments, Sir, I support the Bill.”
“While this can be construed as a good idea to provide more transparency and reduce confusion as regards the applicable Development Baseline, especially during the transitionary period, I hope that the cost of developing this Register, which is initiated solely on the part of the authority, would not be unfairly passed on to users in the form of higher search fees or development application fees. Again, Sir, one wonders about the amount of manpower that would have to be put in to determine the Development Baseline of every plot of land in Singapore, if this task were to be carried out. Also, landowners should be allowed to check and challenge the Development Baseline published in the Register within a stipulated timeframe since the authority cannot be assumed to be infallible. The second major change in the Bill is the introduction of the Temporary Development Levy intended to lower costs for entrepreneurs seeking to use land on a temporary basis for a period not exceeding 10 years. The motivation for this change came from the ERC Land Working Group which examined ways to lower the cost barriers for doing businesses, thus encouraging entrepreneurship. I think this is clearly a positive step and I commend the authority for being proactive and pro-enterprise in accepting and implementing this ERC recommendation. Businesses, such as those setting up kiosks at places like Orchard Road, would benefit from this scheme, as the building owners now only need to pay Development Charge for the duration of the intended use and not based on the property's freehold value. However, as a member of the Land Working Group, I feel that the ERC's recommendation on this matter is a pay-as-you-go arrangement, which is far more flexible than what the amendment Bill envisages.”
“As the Government is now preaching enterprise and flexibility, and with foreseeable future increases in population, the higher plot ratio or use accorded in the 1958 or 1980 Master Plan which may be unrealisable now, may well be appropriate in the future when the plot ratio may be increased or the use of the land enhanced in view of changed circumstances. This is already clearly shown in Figure 3 of the handouts provided by the Minister. The transitionary provisions allowed until 31st December 2007 will not address the sense of injustice felt by such affected landowners since they will only be allowed to preserve the baseline for their properties in the Historical Lock-in Register to be set up by the authority, up to what is currently allowable in the prevailing Master Plan, and not the highest allowed in the 1958 or 1980 Master Plan. They would have to pay Development Charge, if in future the URA were to increase the plot ratio and/or use in the Master Plan over and above what is currently permissible in the prevailing Master Plan, and they wish then to redevelop their land to the stipulated intensity. Under the current rules, they would not have to pay Development Charge or pay a much lower Development Charge. As regards the proposed Historical Baseline Register, which I understand the authority would set up during the 4-year transitionary period, it is presumed that the URA will publish the baseline applicable to every development site in Singapore.”
“Even if they have not suffered a direct loss but merely a reduction in potential gains, in effect, this change can be construed as a form of "value" destruction directed at a group of unfortunate land owners in which the Government planners have stapled higher value planning provisions on their land at one time, but have since reversed this. And, from their perspective, this has happened through no fault of theirs. Sir, I think the outcome resulting from the changes made to the Act is rather odd, given that the Government has been preaching the virtues of value creation as part of our overall economic strategy. The analogy is compulsory land acquisition which does not offer any choice to the affected landowners. The State gazettes land to be acquired for some public purpose and dictates compensation which, for all practical purposes, is statutorily pegged at historical values, although ex-gratia payments are often made for some deserving cases to make up the compensation to full current market value. The change in the baseline definition is a case of someone being theoretically made worse off without anyone being made better before the change. This is because the transitionary provisions of a historical lock-in baseline essentially means that the baseline for all other cases would remain the same, except for the "anomaly" cases. There is a potential lowering of overall private gains, although some of these will flow back to the State. Sir, the present system of determining the Development Baseline is well understood and accepted by the industry. Why does the Government want to deny the original "gains" accruing to these landowners, even if these may be unrealisable under current planning parameters?”
“As the Minister clearly highlighted in his speech, after the amendment, if the Government upgrades the development potential of these sites in the future over and above what is currently allowable in the 2003 Master Plan, the enhanced land value will be subject to Development Charge. Whereas if the Act remains status quo, then no Development Charge will be payable for the future enhanced land value, as long as this is below what is allowable under the 1958 Master Plan. On the surface, this sounds very reasonable and equitable. Indeed, from a socio-economic perspective, since it is the State that has created value through its action of zoning, re-zoning or enhancement of land use intensity, it is perfectly legitimate to require landowners who so benefit from such positive externalities to give back a portion of the realisable gains to the State by way of the Development Charge. So, the State should have the prerogative to change the rules of the game and shift the basis of the Development Baseline calculation from time to time where circumstances so dictate. One wonders how many plots of land in Singapore would fall under this category to warrant such an amendment to the Act. I would like to ask the Minister whether, before deciding to amend the Act, the URA has undertaken a study to determine how many plots of land in Singapore would fall under this "anomaly" category and what percentage is this of all privately-held land in Singapore. Whatever the case, landowners of affected sites will most surely feel aggrieved by this change even if the higher plot ratio and/or use accorded in the historical 1958 or 1980 Master Plan is not realisable under current planning parameters.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, as highlighted by the Minister, the two key changes effected by the Bill are a change in the basis of calculating the Development Baseline, which determines the amount of levy the Government charges a landowner for any approved change of use, re-zoning or enhancement of plot ratio, and the introduction of a Temporary Development Levy. I would like to comment on each of these main changes in turn. As explained by the Minister, before the amendment, a landowner who wishes to develop his land can, under the Act, use the highest of the three methods prescribed in the Act to compute the Development Baseline. A higher Development Baseline means a lower Development Charge or no Development Charge, if the baseline is higher than the ceiling. These are as illustrated in Figures 1(a) and (b) of the handouts given by the Minister. Again, as noted by the Minister, two of these existing methods for calculating the baseline take reference from the 1958 and 1980 Master Plans. For some sites, due to various historical reasons, the 1958 Master Plan and the 1980 Master Plan may prescribe higher plot ratios and more valuable land use and density parameters than later Master Plans. This means that some landowners pay little or no Development Charge to develop his land, while other owners of neighbouring land with less generous provisions in the 1958 or 1980 Master Plan may pay more for the same or similar development rights granted by the URA. From the Minister's speech, I am given to understand that one of the rationale for the first change is to correct such an anomaly, as the one that I have just described.”
“Firstly, could the Minister comment on the performance of the Normal (Technical) students who get transferred to the Normal (Academic) stream? Secondly, I would like to ask the Minister if he could confirm that it would be difficult, if not, impossible to get transferred from the Normal (Technical) to Normal (Academic) at the Secondary 2 level even if at Secondary 2 level, the student actually complies with the 70% pass mark for all subjects.”
“Sir, as a mum, like many others who have sons who would go to the Army in the future, in the light of the unfortunate incident of Sergeant Hu, I would like the Minister to comment on the effectiveness of the current system of reporting of feedback by NSmen for possible breaches in training exercises that may endanger the lives of the NSmen and whether he would look into ways to improve this feedback system. RAdm Teo Chee Hean: Dr Khor has raised a very useful comment here. The more open the organisation is and the more receptive the organisation is towards reporting of safety breaches, the better the organisation would be in terms of planning for safety requirements and eliminating safety breaches. Yes, Dr Khor has a point there. I will ask the Army to have a look to see how we can develop a more open system of reporting potential safety breaches because we have to report not just actual safety breaches, but potential safety breaches in order to reduce and eliminate the possibility of some violation of safety regulations resulting in accidents.”
“Sir, at the end of the day, to be able to discharge one's duties, it has got to do with one's character - that of the incumbents. In putting the instructors and trainers in these jobs, other than their competencies at their jobs, would the selection criteria of putting these men in these jobs, in order to balance their job competencies of having to be tough and mean as commandos, include a test and evaluation of their character traits? RAdm Teo Chee Hean: Sir, instructors have to be competent, as in this case. The conducting officer is 44 years old and has had 10 years of experience in the School of Commando Training. He is an experienced commando and an experienced Warrant Officer. Others have had experience as Company Commanders and so on. We select our officers carefully through a process by which they go through BMT. If they are selected, some of them go through as Specialists and Warrant Officers before they become Officers. They go through a 9-month OCS where their strengths and weaknesses can be seen, where their character can be seen where they are tested, and they have to pass. And before they become instructors, they have had to hold other sorts of appointments to prepare them, particularly instructors in a place like the School of Commando Training. So, they are tested and evaluated in a number of different ways before they become senior instructors, as in this case, in the School of Commando Training.”
“Sir, I would like to ask the Minister when was the programme for supervisory staff started and how well subscribed it is.”
“Sir, I would like to ask the Acting Minister that whilst mortgage is not under the purview of MAS, could the CPF Board work with the financial institutions with regard to asking them to advise, especially first-time home owners, on their mortgage sum because the understanding of how long before they exhaust their limit is very important, since it will impact on their housing affordability and the amount of loan that they should borrow from the bank. Because my understanding is that there is no standardised procedure now.”
“Sir, I would like to ask the Deputy Prime Minister, besides having the MAS portal to centralise the information and programmes available on financial education, if the Ministry would also consider other ways of dissemination of the availability of such programmes, for instance, even through Rediffusion, because of the segment of people who are less educated and they may not access the portal and so on. Another question is this. Besides giving educational programmes, could the MAS, for instance, also give guidelines as to the comparison of different financial products, because the large variety of financial products may be very confusing and there may not be full disclosure of information to the potential investors?”
“This is because whilst registering a company is relatively inexpensive, it is all the attendant additional regulations and compliance costs that come with registering a company that pose a hindrance. Sir, I realise that there are major fiscal implications if many statutory charges, such as maid levy, etc, are reduced, and this could well worsen the budget deficit, but following the principle of equal misery, this might well be the price the Government has to pay in order to signal its empathy with the people. Sir, some of the measures announced go even beyond the ERC recommendations which were only released about a year ago. The mantra then was "re-focusing" the CPF. Now, it is "retuning". What is evident though is that the CPF is destined to remain a major plank of Singapore's social as well as economic policy, a sacred cow slaughtered, but also resurrected in a slightly modified form. That some austerity is called for now will inflict pain on the population and even a sense of betrayal on the part of workers, especially the middle aged and middle income workers, although I must add, a sense of relief as well that the cut in the CPF rate was not as much as feared. Sir, while I fully support these changes which the Prime Minister has announced in order to restore our competitiveness, I urge the Government to exercise great compassion and understanding, and to be sensitive to the people's concern and feedback. I note that this is precisely what has been attempted both by the announcement itself as well as the help package DPM Lee has put to this House. Sir, I therefore support the changes. 6.15 pm”
“We are ahead of many highly-regarded cities, like Sydney and Melbourne and even several American cities, like LA and San Francisco as well as Stockholm. Furthermore, there are genuine worries that the Government's plan to proceed with the increase in the GST by a further 1% in 2004 may raise the cost of living, and could even be contractionary. I am comforted that DPM Lee has announced that the Ministry of Finance has launched a civil service-wide Economy Drive to review all discretionary expenditure. Furthermore, the civil service strives to cut waste through a Cut Waste Panel. While these are laudable efforts in response to calls for the Government to do its part to cut fees and charges, to make a real, tangible difference to the people on the ground, these efforts must translate to actual reduction of costs to workers and businesses. Hence, the Government should, in tandem, also review its fees and charges, such as ERP charges, taxes on cars, licences and even maid levy with a view to realigning them to what would now be tantamount to a lower wage regime. This would go some way to lowering our cost of living and doing business, which would benefit all. To illustrate, the current maid levy was set during a period of strong wage growth. Since the CPF cut is de facto a wage cut, the maid levy could be cut in tandem, even though we all understand the aim of the levy was to employ a market mechanism to regulate the foreign maid population with its attendant social problems. Another example would be for the Government to further review its vehicle ownership policy. For instance, one of my grassroots recently told me that now only businesses are allowed to buy panel vans. He says that this is against the move to encourage entrepreneurship.”
“This is what I raised in my Budget speech regarding the ERC's proposed CPF changes in July 2002 that older workers be given special treatment in the next wealth sharing exercise. While this would go some way to mitigate their anguish and sense of betrayal many middle-aged, middle-income earners are feeling, more tangible and immediate measures should be considered to address their concerns, help them cope and lift their spirits. After all, the proportion of workers in the 50 to 59 years age group, which has been increasing over the years from 9.3% in 1991 to 14.5% in 2002, is set to increase further as our population ages. This, coupled with the fact that, as at the end of 2002, professionals, managerial, executive and technical staff comprise approximately 42% of the total workforce, implies that there is a sizeable middle aged, middle class workers category who is bearing the brunt of the recent wage cut, retrenchment and CPF cut regime. The older worker phenomenon is here to stay, both as a demographic reality, and as more and more Singaporeans are compelled to work beyond 55 to support their own retirement. As analysts have rightly pointed out, while CPF cuts hurt every Singaporean directly, the relief package is targeted, comes with strings attached and may not benefit all. This leads me to my next and final point, that is, lowering costs. For the middle aged, middle income workers, what would be a more concrete and effective relief would be to try and lower the cost of living to offset the fall in income they are currently facing. Reducing the cost of living is a point which many of my parliamentary colleagues before me have urged the Government to look into. According to the latest EIU report, Singapore remains one of the 15th most expensive cities to live in.”
“They are also likely to be the ones with the heaviest financial commitments - school-going children, some in tertiary institutions, housing mortgage commitments, car loans and ageing parents taking a bigger and bigger chunk of their monthly budgets, and eating into their own Medisave accounts. Many could be living in 5-room HDB or private properties and are thus unlikely to have benefited, if any, from the utilities rebate, GST top-up or New Singapore Shares. Many of them are probably white collar workers who are also subjected to increasingly higher risk of retrenchment if they have not already been retrenched. This is small wonder why a recent Straits Times survey found that the older Singaporeans aged 45 years and above are least confident about the future of Singapore. In fact, of late, they are quite a disillusioned lot, judging from the feedback from my residents and friends who are in this age group and income level. As a recent feedback session participant lamented, "Becoming old is becoming a sin in Singapore!" Thoughts of migrating also seem to be most acutely felt by this group of Singaporeans. With the proceeds from selling their assets, they are able to migrate to countries, such as Australia and New Zealand, which have a lower cost of living. In fact, I personally know of two of my grassroots volunteers whose wives and children are living in Australia with no thoughts of returning, and at least three friends who have recently migrated to New Zealand. All of them are in the age 45 years and above category and are professionals. Sir, I am pleased that DPM Lee has announced that older workers will get extra when the Government gives back surpluses to the people in the future.”
“But notwithstanding this, it is vital that future adjustments, which PM has noted, will only be made when necessary, should be made as timely as possible, and in this regard, inputs from the private sector, who are closer to the ground, would be helpful. Like my parliamentary colleague, Mr Inderjit Singh, I urge the Government to pay heed to private sector feedback and not do so only when a crisis occurs. Hence, in view of this, I would propose that the Government look at having a panel comprising mostly private sector businessmen and economists to review the CPF rates on a periodic basis so that it can more accurately and in a more timely fashion determine the need for any rate change. The CPF Advisory Council can then make the appropriate recommendations to the Government for consideration, much like what the NWC does. My second point relates to the aggrieved middle aged, middle income workers. Sir, as my parliamentary colleagues before me, Mdm Ho and Mr Sin Boon Ann, have noted, the aid package announced by DPM Lee, in terms of utilities rebate, public transport funds, etc, would soothe the pain of the lower income earners and unemployed. Businesses, particularly those in the construction, tourism and transport sectors and SMEs, in general, will also welcome the reprieve. But the group that will have to bear the brunt of the CPF cuts are the middle aged, middle income earners, particularly those aged 50 years and above. This is the baby boomer generation who have lived through the tumultuous 50s and 60s, and who perhaps have contributed the most to the economic progress we have enjoyed. But this is also the group who will see their CPF contribution rates fall from 33% to 27% in 2006 with the possibility of falling even further to 24%.”
“In supplying such information periodically, MOM would be able to moderate the unions' and workers' salary expectations. We can then avoid having to jam our brakes suddenly again in future and throw everyone else off balance. Now, I will comment briefly on three points related to implications and concerns of CPF changes and the relief package. Firstly, the floating CPF rate. Using the CPF as a macro-economic cost cutting tool is not new, as this was first done in the 1985/1986 recession and then, again, in 1999. What is different this time is that the Government has decided that the CPF rate would be a range, instead of a single target rate. Although it gives rise to uncertainties, I concur that this is a good strategy as it gives more flexibility to our overall wage system. After all, the mantra for success in this era of shifting global competition, fraught with uncertainties, must be "Flexibility, Flexibility and more Flexibility" - agility and deftness to adjust to the rapidly changing circumstances. In the past, analysts, economists and businessmen have commented that the CPF rate cuts lagged behind the broader economy. For instance, by the time the CPF cut was implemented in 1986, the US economy was already in recovery mode. This again happened in 1999. Analysts noted that the market recovery had already started way before the CPF cut was announced in 1998. Of course, I believe that the Government should never rush into such changes, given the many and complex linkages between CPF and the major social needs of the population, like housing, healthcare and retirement. Any tinkering will have ramifications on all of these, in ways we may be unable to foresee.”
“How is it that we have now, 18 years later, come to this belated conclusion that CPF is the same culprit causing mischief, so much so that we need again to take such drastic measures as to cut CPF rates? Sir, I appreciate DPM Lee's explanation as to how events unfolded so quickly and unexpectedly that the Government had to agonise over the decision for two months, and led to a major rethink. Nonetheless, Sir, I believe that wages and wage levels do not change overnight and the levels we are at today not only reflect the good economic conditions of the past but also the consequences of previous actions and policies. Sir, I and, no doubt, many other Singaporeans would like to know how the Government keeps track or intends to keep track of Singapore's labour costs to ensure that these are not out of sync with our competitors. Does not the National Wages Council also have such information? How else would it make recommendations about wages if the Council does not have access to such information? This is especially important in Singapore as, over the years, the pervasive civil service and statutory boards' pay structure has become the barometer of wage levels for the private sector. The private sector has to compete with the public sector for employees and can only attract the best talent, all else being equal, if they pay comparable salaries. Going forward, Sir, I urge the Government to keep a close watch on our wage and other costs to ensure that Singapore remains competitive, if this is not already being done. Better still, MOM can publish this information for our workers at different levels and in key sectors (as some HR and recruitment agencies do and as what MOH plans to do for health costs) so that they are aware of how we fare against the competition.”
“When according to PERC's calculations, it is more expensive to hire a worker in Singapore as compared to hiring a similar worker in the US, or Australia, we have a major economic problem." Given PERC's high standing in international circles, I have no reason to doubt that their conclusions would likely bear up to MOM's scrutiny. But, for this very reason, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I am deeply troubled by this latest revelation. This is so even though Minister Lim Boon Heng has clarified in his speech on 29th August that, according to the IMD's World Competitiveness Yearbook 2003, it is in specific managerial, executive and professional jobs in engineering and human resource, etc, and not manufacturing itself where the Singaporean worker's wages are comparable to first world levels, but without the corresponding levels of productivity. The question troubling me, and I am sure many others, is: does the Government not keep close track of our labour costs in comparison with those of our international competitors in order to ensure that we do not price ourselves out of the market? To reiterate, was not high labour cost one of the chief causes of our recession in 1985/1986? To quote Prime Minister Goh in 1986, when he was then First Deputy Prime Minister, he had said during the debate on the Presidential Address regarding a cut in the CPF contribution that ". When confronted with the sobering thought that our wage costs are so high that we are going to lose our international competitiveness, we have no choice but to thaw our position." The position then DPM Goh was referring was the sacred cow of our high CPF contribution rates. Sir, history seems to have come one full circle.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, many Singaporeans are indeed relieved by the light touch the Prime Minister has applied to the CPF retuning and also generally pleased with the good dose of pain reliever prescribed by DPM Lee. It seems that the Cabinet has taken note of the anxieties at the ground when the subject of CPF retuning was first broached and offered a finely balanced policy package. While some analysts have expressed disappointment that the changes do not go far enough to cut costs and bring in or, at least, retain investments and jobs, the social dimensions of the CPF retuning must not be forgotten. Before commenting on the details of the CPF changes and the aid package, I would like to comment more broadly on our wage cost. After all, an uncompetitive wage structure has been identified by the Government as the key reason for the current changes to the CPF system. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, complaints by local and foreign businesses of our high cost of doing business have been bandied around for some time now. As DPM Lee reminded us, back in 1985, CPF rates were seen as one of the main culprits for our economic predicament then. Eighteen years on, the Government has again named it as a major source of our economic woes. DPM Tan recently brought to attention a PERC report dated 2nd July 2003 on "Comparing Business Costs in Asia". In this report, Singapore is not only perceived to rank as the fourth highest labour cost country among the expatriates surveyed, its labour cost is also rated higher than those of Australia and US, which is the largest and strongest economy in the world. To quote DPM Tan, ".”
“Sir, implementing the flexible wage system is supposed to help us adjust to the economic situation. So if we are on the flexible wage system and 85% of the companies are on the flexible wage system, how is it that our wage levels are still considered high?”
“Sir, I would like to ask the Parliamentary Secretary on whether the civil service is already fully on a flexible wage system. Assuming that it is, considering that the civil service is largely used as a barometer of our wage levels, because GLCs and statutory boards largely follow them, how is it, for instance, from the PERC's survey, we are perceived to have very high wage levels in comparison to other countries?”
“Sir, I would like to ask the Minister how many security agencies have actually come forward to subscribe to the NSRS for security guards, and if there are any plans to incentivise these security agencies to come forward to submit themselves to the NSRS training.”
“The plight of these workers has to be championed as this problem is likely to remain with us for a long time. There was a time not too long ago when Singaporeans were enjoying high economic growth and, in the process, became asset-rich and cash-rich. Then came the unprecedented and prolonged period of uncertainty starting from the Asian financial crisis, followed by a series of shocks. Singaporeans have, in the last few years, lamented that they are both asset-less and cash-less, or perhaps now more appropriately, "asset-loss" and "cash-loss". Now, for the typical Singaporean, there is the added dread of yet another loss, "job-loss", if they are not already in this state. Helping Singaporeans to get jobs, retain jobs and remain employable over their working life should clearly be one of the Government's key objectives. Hitherto, other than defence and national development, education takes up the biggest share of our national budget. Without minimising the importance of training of our young for the future, brutal global competition is hammering home the point that the adult workforce, by sheer numbers and current contribution to the economy, deserves as much, if not more, attention and the collective efforts of the Government, employers and employees. Madam, I therefore support the setting up of the Singapore Workforce Development Agency. This signals the Government's commitment to ensure that Singaporeans will remain employable in the face of dramatic changes in the employment landscape.”
“Outsourcing, so widely practised by the private sector, should be the norm rather than the exception. Already, there have been murmurings about what SPRING is doing in conducting educational courses in alliance with overseas institutes, something which the private education industry has been carrying out for a long time. Secondly, like my colleagues before me, I would like to talk about training of older workers. Adult continuing education and training would provide useful learning opportunities for older workers, especially the lowly educated ones whose livelihoods are more at risk. This is particularly crucial in the light of an ageing population and a longer life expectancy. In fact, a special task force within the proposed Agency should be set up to focus on this group of older workers who have not been adequately prepared to meet the drastically changed circumstances. Their fishing skills are outmoded. As testimony of the urgency to help older workers, based on MOM's data as at the first quarter of 2003, amongst the 75,000 unemployed then, those aged 40 and above formed the largest group at 43%. Moreover, of these, more than half (15,900) have below secondary school education. The task force can work together with the private and people sectors as well as Government Ministries to identify and/or re-engineer jobs to make them suitable and more attractive for older workers. Training courses to help older workers obtain the skills for jobs in these sectors can then be designed and promoted. The task force should look at ways to encourage employers to hire these older workers, but nonetheless competent and able. It should also look into ways to prevent age discrimination of such workers.”
“I would now like to highlight two key issues under the Agency's second strategic thrust of adult continuing education and training. Firstly, industry consultation and collaboration. Reading Part III of the Singapore Workforce Development Agency Bill gives the impression, rightly or wrongly, that the Agency will be in competition with private sector organisations offering education, training and upgrading programmes, as well as with professional groups like the Singapore Human Resource Institute which seeks to develop HR best practices. Enough has been said about public sector crowding out private sector initiatives when this House debated the Temasek Charter last year. I urge the Minister to assure the public that this is more perception than reality. Efforts should therefore be made whenever possible to collaborate with professional bodies, course providers and other appropriate organisations in the training of the workforce. These specialised bodies would know the state of the industry and understand the needs of the workforce much better than a Government agency tasked with a diverse range of functions. In the real estate industry with which I am familiar, I have previously come across instances where attempts to initiate standards and training for the continuing education of real estate practitioners by a Government agency have been based on inadequate feedback from the ground because not all relevant organisations were identified and consulted. This would lead to time wasted, unnecessary costs incurred, and less than desirable outcomes. In its efforts to develop training programmes, the Agency should be mindful not to duplicate and compete with private sector efforts and initiatives but, rather, to facilitate any on-going programmes and courses.”
“Tales also abound of employers who prefer to employ foreigners as they work longer hours, do not have to go for reservist training and are not entitled to CPF. A participant in a feedback group I chaired shared that in the media industry she works in, she feels that between a Singaporean and a foreigner with similar qualifications, the foreigner is usually preferred. As evidenced by the recent Straits Times poll, most Singaporeans acknowledge that foreign talent has a role to play in Singapore. So, they are not saying "Foreigners - no entry". Furthermore, we do not want to impose labour market rigidity by limiting foreign workers, especially for the higher skilled jobs and, in the process, make Singapore unattractive to business. But in a period of an all-time 15-year high unemployment rate, there is a real need to relook at our foreign worker policies to balance the legitimate concerns of the citizens as against those of businesses, the economy and, yes, foreigners. Without compromising on the premise that foreign talent is necessary to supplement our local talent and boost Singapore's economy, I think drastic times call for drastic relook at existing measures, at least on a temporary basis. For instance, the foreign worker quota could be reviewed and varied during periods of high unemployment where there should be an adequate number of locals for hire. The ratio, for example, could be tied somehow to the rate of unemployment, within a certain band, to give policy flexibility, but generally moving up when unemployment is low and moving down when the opposite happens. I note the Minister did say yesterday that the quota would be monitored and reviewed periodically.”
“For instance, a resident in my constituency whom we had successfully placed in a firm, came back to tell me that she had quit her job after one week as she found working at a computer, for which she is unfamiliar with, too difficult. And this was in an air-conditioned office. She asked me to help her get a stall in a school canteen instead, as she had figured that this would be much easier work. Fortunately, anecdotal evidence suggests that many laid off Singaporeans are now willing to change their expectations, take significant pay cuts, and work in industries which they might have previously shunned. For instance, I came across a 50-year-old resident who has diplomas in both computer studies and industrial relations and was previously a computer support staff. He now works as a security guard earning about $1,000 a month. He said that he has been rejected for many jobs because of his age. He has encountered numerous prospective employers who tell him over the phone that they need someone much younger. He was not even given a chance to be interviewed! MOM has tried to encourage employers to employ older workers by providing a subsidy for six months, if the firm hires a worker above 40 years old. However, there are still employers who are averse to hiring older workers even with the subsidy. In this respect, Mdm Deputy Speaker, I would like to ask the Minister what further plans the Ministry has to encourage employers to give older workers a fair chance to secure jobs. For a start, the Agency could work together with all the Government Ministries and agencies to encourage them to employ older workers whenever possible. Does the Minister know how many older retrenched workers the Government Ministries and agencies have employed in the last two years?”
“Besides job redesign, Singaporeans may be encouraged to take up such jobs and, at least, catch some of the fish themselves, if the Agency could work together with the MCDS and tie a subsidy or financial assistance scheme to the job placement of the worker. Additionally, feedback from one of my residents who had been retrenched and recently found a job is that, while the job-matching efforts of the CareerLink Centres are commendable, they could perhaps learn from the private sector job placement agencies to improve the success rate. This resident shared with me that he had eventually gotten a job through a private sector job agency. He said that the agency, no doubt incentivised by a commission for successful placement, was very proactive in helping him identify a suitable job. In fact, they had taken an active role and even helped him negotiate with the prospective employer to consider a slightly higher salary as a delivery driver, even before the interview. Perhaps, the Agency should consider outsourcing at least part of the job- matching efforts to private sector job agencies. These agencies already have the expertise to handle job matching, and their skills and experience should be tapped. Why re-invent the wheel? Outsourcing could help to minimise the necessity for the various CareerLink Centres with limited budget to expand their staff strength and increase resources for job matching. Secondly, the Agency should continue to help change the mindsets of both employers and employees to match the current employment landscape. The Government and the employers have constantly cited the poor attitude of our workers for the job mismatch and high unemployment rate even while we have more foreign workers than unemployed Singaporeans. There is obviously truth to this.”
“Firstly, the Agency should look at ways to further improve its job-matching schemes and optimise the use of limited resources available. Despite the tremendous resources poured in for job matching, the success rate of such efforts has remained low, at less than 20%. The ends do not seem to have justified the means. As the Agency is to become the coordinating body for job-matching efforts, I would like to find out from the Minister how the Agency plans to undertake such coordination with the various CareerLink Centres. What would be their roles and duties as against those of the Agency? I understand, for instance, that each of the centres has different job databases. One of my grassroots members, who was recently retrenched, told me that he was given different listings when he went to different centres. It appears that many job applicants are now going all over the island to the different centres to apply for jobs. So, the number of job requests recorded at the different CareerLink Centres may be significantly lower, if these multiple visits are discounted. I urge the Agency to set up a centralised national job database, so that an applicant need only to go to one centre to apply for a job. This would not only save the time, effort and money of the applicant, but also avoid duplication of work, wastage of scarce resources, as well as improve efficiency. This centralised database can also be used to help the CDCs better link financial assistance to job placements. Those who repeatedly reject jobs must be counselled to find out their reasons for rejecting jobs. Some jobs, which have traditionally been the domain of foreign workers, are shunned by Singaporeans because of the low pay, which is deemed insufficient for the worker to support even himself, let alone his family.”