Arthur Beng Kian Lam
Singapore
“Sir, the aim of the Electronic Road Pricing (ERP) is to encourage optimal road usage so that car ownership can be increased. My questions to the Minister are (1) what is the estimated cost to a motorist, ie, the median, that the Ministry of Communications is expecting?”
“Sir, one point of clarification, please. I am very pleased to hear the announcement made by the Senior Minister of State about the very comprehensive way in which IT is going to be applied in schools. I am also very glad to hear that six more computers are going to be added to the existing five for administration.”
“Sir, my topic is on public transport in mature HDB estates. Sir, we are all excited about the plans to achieve a world-class public transport system. However, as many of the mature towns have little or no reserve land, it would seem that the bus will still be the mainstay of transportation. I would like to ask the Minister two questions.”
“The Minister has implemented a paradigm shift in his approach to personnel management. The new salary scales announced are welcomed and will do much to raise the morale of the teachers. I am glad to hear that the Minister recognises the principal as the CEO of a school. This gives a significant recognition to the role of the principal.”
“Sir, I am glad to know that the Minister will be taking active steps to implement the IMC and that he himself will be chairing the Ministerial Steering Committee which will include the Minister for Education and the Minister for Home Affairs.”
“However, upgrading is necessary as the business of the centre will be affected if the town is not upgraded, and experience has shown that the business in upgraded town centres indeed improves. Sir, the HDB or MND earns from the sale of shops. Should not a sum from this be allocated to town councils for the upgrading process?”
The complete record
Every one of 722 lines we hold for Arthur Beng Kian Lam, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 15.
“Of course, what we are enjoying now would not have materialised if not for another important factor, that is, the strong emotional bonds between the Senior Minister and his generation of political leaders have managed to establish with the people of Singapore. In building modern Singapore, SM Lee and his team have made great personal sacrifices and have more than discharged their responsibilities towards our people. Such sacrifices also apply to Prime Minister Goh and our current political leaders to ensure Singapore's survival for many more years to come. Bearing in mind what I have just said, does it make sense for SM Lee and DPM Lee to undermine their standing and stature not only within Singapore but also in the eyes of the international community? If we are rational and level-headed, the answer then is obvious. Sir, it is indeed absurd for us to accept that what is a normal commercial transaction has turned into a controversy. The decision to have this debate is a right move and I share the view that there are more pros than cons in debating this issue. It reflects the level of political maturity that has evolved in our nation's short history of slightly over three decades. It augurs well for the future of our country because it demonstrates clearly the PAP Government consistent stand on being open and transparent on issues which affect public interest, no matter how politically sensitive it is and irrespective of who is involved. Now that we have had a full debate on this issue and all lingering doubts and uncertainties have been clarified, it is only logical for Singaporeans to see this issue in the right perspective and decant themselves of any emotional hang-up and put it behind us. 4.02 pm”
“If Singaporeans are still not convinced by the explanations given, then there is a great cause for concern as the honesty, integrity, credibility and honour of, not only the two Ministers, but also of our Government, is at stake. That this property issue had led some Singaporeans to question the credibility and the moral authority of Senior Minister Lee and DPM Lee is a sad day in our nation's history. Every Singaporean should be honest to admit that this would not have happened if it does not involve prominent public figures. What this episode proves yet again is the never ending vulnerability of those who hold high political office, in particular Ministers. Sir, as a nation, I sincerely hope that Singaporeans have not lost their bearing and orientation. Have we forgotten the trials and tribulations that SM Lee and our pioneer political leaders had gone through in the early years of nationhood? Thirty years ago, when we had independence thrusted upon us, very few people had the confidence that we could survive or progress. History has proven our critics wrong because today our country is in good shape, our economy is sound and we have a strong defence system. Most important of all our people are well looked after -- they have good education and job opportunities, they are adequately housed, and they enjoy a world-class standard of living. Would all these achievements, which have been painstakingly built up over the years, be possible without the able, honest, dedicated and courageous leadership of our Senior Minister, who together with his contemporaries, had made hard-headed decisions in the crucial years of our nation's independence for the long-term good of Singapore.”
“EXEMPTED BUSINESS (Motion) Resolved, That the debate on the Prime Minister's Statement be exempted from the provisions of Standing Order No. 1 at this day's sitting. -- [Mr Wong Kan Seng]. PURCHASE OF PROPERTIES BY SENIOR MINISTER AND DEPUTY PRIME MINISTER BG LEE HSIEN LOONG Debate resumed. Mr Zulkifli bin Mohammed (Jalan Besar GRC)( In Malay): Mr Speaker, Sir, earlier this month when the Prime Minister declared open the Tampines East Community Club, he reminded Singaporeans that the challenge faced by Singapore (be it the last three decades when we first achieved independence, today or in the future) remains the same, that is, to fulfil the hopes and aspirations of Singaporeans. High on the list of aspirations and hopes among successful Singaporeans, mainly the young professionals, is to have better private housing and to own a bigger house. This can only be achieved when there is political stability, strong political leadership and buoyant economic growth. The current excitement on the purchases of HPL condominium units by SM Lee and DPM Lee must be seen against this scenario. Yesterday, all the facts and circumstances pertaining to this issue were laid bare by the Prime Minister, the Senior Minister and Deputy Prime Minister Lee before this House to clear any doubts and misgivings surrounding this issue. The Prime Minister had also disclosed to this House that a proper investigation had been conducted and it was firmly established that there was no impropriety or cover-up in the matter. Both Senior Minister Lee and DPM Lee had also given detailed account of their purchases of what should rightly be a private matter for which they were not obliged to tell the public.”
“It is my hope that out of this debate will come better guidelines that will encourage other able and capable Singaporeans to serve in public life The saddest outcome is one that onlookers will say, "If this can happen to SM with his track record, and DPM Lee with all his capabilities, sacrifice and tragedy, then I want no part of politics." Then the able will shun politics. Yesterday, Mr Chiam spoke of commitment. We all agree with him. There must be commitment. But I believe what is implied in his message was that PAP MPs or Ministers lack this commitment because of the matter of money. I hope that he will seriously take the advice of SM and think again on what this would mean for Singapore and the future. Sir, we need to have in place guideposts, and institutionalise certain procedures to protect our leaders and all those in public office: politicians, civil servants, and maybe even those holding key positions in public listed companies. They need to be protected from frivolous complaints arising out of envy, jealousy, and sometimes even for malicious reasons. It is only when these persons in position of public responsibility can discharge their duties without "looking around and seeing ghosts" to discredit them that they can discharge their duties of state with conviction. We should give these issues careful thought. Of course, at the end of the day, no matter what is put in place, the personal integrity of the person is what counts. Sir, to me, today, the issue is clear: SM and DPM Lee did not do anything wrong, legally or morally. The purchase of the properties was in accordance with current market practice, and there is no question of unfair advantage.”
“SM and DPM Lee have not only the legal, but they have the moral right to lead us after all that they have done in this House, after the way in which they have to bare themselves and their whole families to all of us - something which they never need to have done. Mr Speaker, Sir, politics is the most uncertain of careers. Those in full-time appointments, or part-time, that is, Backbenchers, still have to plan for their "other" life, that is, a life out of politics. It may not be prudent for me to say this, but the fact is that all of us still need to take care of the family, take care of our livelihood and plan for a life independent of politics. It is sheer hypocrisy if we do not admit this, that these are important issues also in the life of all of us who are politicians. We are also mere mortals!. While we are in politics, we have a dual responsibility, and are expected to responsibly manage our public life without taking advantage of our public appointment for pecuniary or selfish gains. Here the line between "black" and "white" is a thick line, many, many shades of grey, and it is here that we become most vulnerable. As the saying goes, if we are afraid of criticism, then, say nothing, do nothing, and be nothing. Once we go into the public political arena, criticisms there will be, and we will expect to be. However, criticisms are very different from what we hear today -- accusations against the Senior Minister and Deputy Prime Minister Lee.”
“He had just gone through a period of personal tragedy, and he was starting most of all in the shadow of his father: the fact that he was the Prime Minister's son. As the saying goes, you can choose your friends but not your relatives. An easy task? The full weight of his responsibility came to the fore when we learnt of his lymphoma and that it was in a very advanced stage. He went through a period of intense setback, and it must have been a time of soul searching for him and the whole family. What DPM faced is the same for all of us in this generation. The difference, of course, is that he happens to be DPM and son of SM! We all work to provide for ourselves and our family. As a responsible father, he needs to plan, especially carefully for his family, and he has to live in the shadow of his lymphoma even though he is now in remission. How much he cares for his family is shown by the fact that in his statement he mentioned that his children, aged 7 to 15, all read the newspapers. What does this tell us? This tells us that this episode must have affected him, his wife and his children. He has also mentioned in his speech that his son is in the School for Visually Handicapped, and SM told us further that his son has more than just visual handicaps. Are these not real concerns for a responsible head of household? Is his investment, and here, not speculation, in property seen in this context morally wrong? PM has shown that legally there is nothing wrong and nobody in this House has disagreed on this. Mr Chiam is wrong.”
“79, three-quarter million dollars. All honorariums earned by him over the last five years were given to the public! Any reason to suspect that he intended to "pocket" the $400,000 from property speculation? Add on to this, donations from "damages" from libel suits -- $1.37 million. And here, again, we forget that he could have lost the case, he would have to pay out from his pocket, as neither the PAP nor the Government would pay for these personal libel suits. However, when he is awarded damages which rightfully belong to him, he donates it to charity and it is, again, because it is from SM -- expected, non-event. Donations from royalties from Lianhe Zaobao for Book of Speeches, Pictorial Biography, CD-ROMs -- $483,938.72. Of this, $310,610 has been disbursed and the remaining awaiting disbursement. In all, SM's secretary, who gave these figures to me, estimated that he has given more than $2 million to charity! Does this tally up with the profile of a man who would take advantage of his position to amass some $400,000 from "wheeling and dealing" in property? Let us be more objective! Let others not laugh at the intelligence of Singaporeans! It is because of this very high expectation of the conduct of SM that the slightest "ink smudge" (caused in my view by the SES' first statement as I mentioned earlier), that it is now exaggerated as an "international oil-spill" by those envious of the "spotless" career of SM. We do him, and we do Singapore, a great injustice if we allow any of this unjust talk to continue. BG Lee -- many of us, approximately, I think, 24 of us, started together with him in the Class of `84. All of us started from zero base. He, however, had to start on the negative.”
“Like the other founding fathers of Singapore, Dr Goh Keng Swee, Dr Toh Chin Chye, Mr Ong Pang Boon, Mr Lim Kim San, Mr Othman Wok, amongst others from that era, they are not quitters. They are "officers", in the words of SM, who believe in the code of conduct and integrity. From them, we have inherited modern day Singapore. Yesterday, SM said that he was astonished when the PM told him about the public reactions to the property purchases. This is because of the expectations of SM. Our problem when it comes to SM is that because he has done so much, that we often take it for granted the things he has done. He wins a law suit, he will donate to charity. A foregone conclusion, a non-event. However, if a business organisation gives $10,000 to a charity, it is a big social event, and there may be an MP or a Minister in attendance to receive an over-sized cheque. Little is it known that over the last five years (1992-1996), since stepping down as Prime Minister, SM has donated a sizable sum from the honoraria that he has received from attending overseas conferences, meetings of international advisory boards, and participating in forums. Again, as the person involved is SM, we take it for granted. However, we forget that effort is required to prepare for these events. We forget that at his age, even at our age, it is tiring to travel and that participation in these international events can be exhausting. What magnitude of sacrifice does this add up to? Sir, in 1992, from six events, he donated $216,372.30. In 1993, 12 events, $294,776.03. In 1994, five events, $95,804.26. In 1995, seven events, $94,568.82. In 1996, four events, $74,013.38. Altogether, 34 events that he had to prepare and work for, and he gave away to charity. How much? 100% -- $775,534.”
“So, conversely, for those who hate him, this is the best time to attack him and discredit the PAP and Singapore. Yesterday, to see SM having to explain his actions pained me, and I am sure, many of you. Just imagine. If he was your father, recovering from a heart problem, and having to explain his actions in Parliament, what would you say to him? I would say, "Enough is enough! You should quit! If after all that you have done for the country, they could believe that you are on the take for some $400,000, then you should quit. What about the millions of dollars that you have donated to charity from the libel suits, the CD-ROM, your lecture honorariums, etc? What about the billions of dollars that you have been managing under GIC?" I can fully empathise with Mrs Lee Kuan Yew when she asked SM, "Why did you have to care so much for Singapore when the people are so ungrateful?" Remember, it was after the second angioplasty when he had to defend his own integrity and his family's integrity. Now, nine weeks after his stent was inserted, he is back here on the floor in Parliament to explain to all of us. A loving wife must despise these proceedings. He puts his life at risk in doing this. She subsidised him. She subsidised the whole family. She gave them the emotional support. And this is our payment back to him. I think this is very unfair. But will SM quit? We all know the answer. Before he started the speech he said that he would give us a robust presentation, and indeed he did, and not only a presentation, but also a very good lesson to any of us. He has said before that he would rise from his grave if he saw things going wrong. His spirit and love for Singapore will spur him on, maybe sometimes to his own detriment.”
“" The Straits Times report of the 16th May, front page and in bold, ended with these two paragraphs: `The Exchange is satisfied that HPL has not tried to conceal Mr Lee's purchase of its property units.' `The Exchange had no concerns over HPL's sales to Mr Lee and BG Lee.' Yes, the Stock Exchange realised some three weeks too late that its 2nd April statement may have "created the wrong impression". The perception of "wrongdoing" had already been sown. There is a very important lesson to be learnt from this. Regulatory bodies have to be very careful in their presentation of a case, as public perception of technical issues, and this was indeed a very technical issue, can be very different. Yes, they must do their job. It is right for them to do so. But they have to be sensitive in presentation. Election Year Fever Sir, any potential candidate is easy target for his foes, either personal or political, at this point of time when we all know that the general election must be held before April 1997. The unhappiness regarding higher property prices and the HPL/SES issue has given ammunition to those who are not fans of SM, DPM or the PAP. SM has unrelentlessly pursued his vision of a prosperous, corruption free Singapore, with leaders who are capable, unselfish and willing to do work for the common good. He has single-mindedly pursued this vision, without compromise. He applies this very high standard also to himself. Yesterday, he said, "I am liked by some, disliked intensely by others." I would go further to say that for a person like SM, one either admires him or hates his guts. We, many of us in the PAP, admire him. Many of us would go into battle and die for him or with him.”
“Now that the Government and REDAS have announced new guidelines, this equity factor has been addressed, but there is also unhappiness in others. The Government can never hope to please all. Here we see the politics of envy come into play in a very real way. My other colleagues in the House have alluded to this. It now becomes not only a matter of the transaction, but who were the people who bought. In this case, it happened to be two people in very high office in Government. HPL and SES The SES is an institution taken very seriously by Singaporeans and especially by the business community. The 22nd April SES statement accused HPL for its "tardiness" in delaying the disclosure of its sales of two units at Nassim Jade to Dr Lee Suan Yew and Mrs Mary Fu, and in obtaining shareholders' approval for the sale. As Dr Lee is the brother of SM and the uncle of DPM Lee, this of course set all the tongues wagging. This statement became the basis on which many Singaporeans drew the conclusion that there was something wrong in the whole affair. It was only on 15th May that the SES made a statement that was carried in the media on 16th May saying, "The Exchange has become aware that this statement may have created the wrong impression that the Exchange was also concerned about HPL's delay in disclosing the sale of the two units at Nassim Jade to Mr Lee Kuan Yew and BG Lee Hsien Loong." Now we learn from this 15th May statement that there was in fact no need at all to have implicated either SM or DPM as "Mr Lee is not a connected person because he is financially independent of Dr Lee Suan Yew in respect of the purchase" and that "BG Lee was not a connected person under clause 1010 of the Listing Manual.”
“The proprietor of a cake shop in my constituency and the Vice-Chairman of the Shopkeepers' Association said that he regularly gives discounts to his friends and regular customers. Another member of the Bedok Centre Merchants' Association, an optometrist, was equally amused when I asked for his opinion. He dismissed it as "ridiculous", as discounts are a part of daily transactions. Have we all not at some time or other, accepted or even bargained for discounts? After our CCC meeting, when we went for supper, another very astute observation was made by another member. He said: "Dr Beng, the people who are making a big fuss are those who are the rich, who can afford to buy those properties, not people like us. This is a case of envy among those who did not get a chance to buy those units in Nassim Jade and Scotts 28. We have no problem at all with the purchases by SM and DPM." Discounts are an everyday fact of life. In the property market, discounts are used to gauge public response to a project. The more the demand, the less the discount. It is used to benchmark the sale price. Earlier speakers have spoken on this, and I will not labour on this point. Sir, the reaction of the public is very much related to the interest of the person involved. If the property market had gone down since the purchase of these properties, the issue may never have arisen. Conversely, another equally vicious set of rumours may have arisen. SM and DPM have lost a lot of money. Can they be trusted to be custodians of our reserves? The point of course is that there are envious people who feel that they have been deprived. The profits could have been realised by them personally if they had the chance to buy the properties.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the focus of this debate in Parliament is whether any wrongdoing has been committed by the Senior Minister or Deputy Prime Minister Lee in this matter of purchase of properties. The fact that this House is debating an issue involving none other than SM and DPM Lee shows the courage and fearlessness of the PAP and the Government to open itself to scrutiny. SM and DPM have also shown that they have nothing to hide as it was they who had asked for this debate. Mr Chiam has said that the Opposition did not ask for this debate. Many have mentioned to me that there is actually no need for such a debate. Mr Ling How Doong also agrees on this. Others have even said that this is a waste of parliamentary time and taxpayers' money. However, debate we must, to show our commitment to a transparent Government. This is not over-reaction. The facts placed before the House yesterday clearly shows that legally there has been no wrongdoing. It is good to know that in the minds of both Mr Chiam and Mr Ling that this is also confirmed. The whole affair is clouded by many other issues. These include (a) a buoyant property market; (b) HPL and the SES involvement; (c) the fact that this is an election year, "Election Year Fever"; and (d) the standing of the Senior Minister. These issues affect the reactions and the perceptions of the public to these property transactions. Buoyant property market Sir, if the property market this year has not been as buoyant, I believe that this issue may not even have arisen. Why do I say this? When I discussed this with my grassroots leaders, I was pleasantly surprised that it was a non-issue. The first point that was made was that "discounts" are an everyday fact of life.”
“Sir, my topic is on public transport in mature HDB estates. Sir, we are all excited about the plans to achieve a world-class public transport system. However, as many of the mature towns have little or no reserve land, it would seem that the bus will still be the mainstay of transportation. I would like to ask the Minister two questions. (1) What are the plans to improve bus services in mature HDB estates? (2) Is it possible for the light rail transport (LRT) to be implemented in mature towns? Which are the towns that are being considered?”
“Sir, the aim of the Electronic Road Pricing (ERP) is to encourage optimal road usage so that car ownership can be increased. My questions to the Minister are (1) what is the estimated cost to a motorist, ie, the median, that the Ministry of Communications is expecting? I am sure that such studies must have been conducted by this stage of development. (2) How will the implementation of ERP affect other ownership disincentive schemes, eg, ARF, import duties, duty on petrol, etc? (3) How will road tax be adjusted? Will it be linked to engine capacity? Will there still be a need for road tax? This calls for a paradigm shift in thinking for ERP, like road tax is also a charge on road usage.”
“Sir, one point of clarification, please. I am very pleased to hear the announcement made by the Senior Minister of State about the very comprehensive way in which IT is going to be applied in schools. I am also very glad to hear that six more computers are going to be added to the existing five for administration. I would just like to ask the Senior Minister of State whether she would like to consider including one laptop or notebook computer from the additional six computers so that the principal can use it both at home and in school, ie, five plus five, plus one.”
“Sir, on a point of clarification. When I brought up the case of a Primary 1 boy who came back from overseas, the understanding that I got from the Ministry of Education was that this child has got many years to catch up with. But I am sure the Minister will agree that having missed K1 and K2 in Singapore and going straight into Mandarin in the bilingual system at Primary 1, it would be a problem for the child. The parents are trying hard and the child is trying hard. I also received a reply from the Ministry of Education that the principal and teachers are helping the child. But what I am asking the Minister is, if the child is still not able to make it by the time he reaches Primary 3 or Primary 4, will he be given some consideration. There should be some flexibility in the system. The parents are definitely trying hard and they want their child to fit into the bilingual system. Mr Lee Yock Suan: While I sympathise with this case, I am not sure how Members feel about it. This child is starting right from the beginning in our formal school system at Primary 1 and he has the full six years to master the language. Special help can be given but I am not sure whether there is a case for special consideration. In this particular case, I understand that one of the parents is an Eurasian, so maybe there is some difficulty in the family background. And for children of mixed marriages, our rules do provide some flexibility. But in this particular case, having missed out K1 and K2, I think it is not really a very big hurdle because K1 and K2 are basically more like play-schools.”
“I am sure that Malay and Indian families will also face a similar problem. Will the Minister please comment?”
“I would like to suggest that the Government assist in the problem of finance by urging Singapore companies to pay for the fees of the children of their employees and provide an incentive to the companies to do this. Here I must point out also that some Singapore companies are only paying for the first and second child, with nothing for the poor third child. This is something against our own procreation policy. Next, allow for an incentive scheme to allow for tax deduction when the parent has to personally pay for the child's education overseas (be it pre-school, primary or secondary) when he is posted overseas. Problems of returning families Sir, the next set of problems faced is when they return to Singapore. I must commend the Ministry and many principals who now promise the parents a place back in the same school when they return. I would like to cite one family who saw me at my meet-the-people session to share the magnitude of the problem of returning families. Parents, both English-speaking, have spent some five years in the United States. Children studied in an international school. Elder child 10 years old (Primary 3). He was exempted from the second language (Mandarin) by the Ministry of Education. Father is a Chinese, and mother Eurasian. Second child is seven years old (Primary 1); not exempted from second language (Mandarin). Both children are unable to cope with Mathematics and Mandarin, and the younger child with Mandarin. The third child, six years old (K2) is unable to cope with Mandarin and Mathematics also. Sir, this is typical of the problems faced by "returning" families with children. Perhaps a school or schools should be designated to assist these families or whether they can have just a few classes within certain schools.”
“Sir, I would first like to declare that I have a personal interest in education. Sir, in the Government's regionalisation effort, the education of children of Singaporeans working overseas is a cause for concern. The Government has made its position clear and has done much. (1) The Singapore International School in Hong Kong is a model international school by any standard. I congratulate the Ministry and the creativity and dedication of the staff is something that all Singaporeans can be proud of. (2) The provision of hostel facilities in Singapore Schools. (3) The offer to provide second language assistance to Singaporeans overseas wherever there is a critical mass; and (4) The assistance of the Student Placement Unit of the Ministry of Education to returning families. Sir, the problem of education is coupled with that of the desire and importance of having the family together. Dr Soin has raised the problem of second families overseas. It is a real problem. Sir, the common approach would be to put the child in the International School existing in the city where the father is posted to. The problems here are: (a) there may not be sufficient vacancies; (b) the curriculum may not be similar to Singapore's education system, for example, second language and streaming; (c) most International Schools provide only pre-school and primary school classes and not secondary; (d) the standards of the International Schools may be lower than that of the Singapore education system; and (e) the problem of costs. With respect to these problems, the Government has already made its commitment to the teaching of second language and has provided hostel facilities in Singapore for secondary school students.”
“The Minister has implemented a paradigm shift in his approach to personnel management. The new salary scales announced are welcomed and will do much to raise the morale of the teachers. I am glad to hear that the Minister recognises the principal as the CEO of a school. This gives a significant recognition to the role of the principal. Sir, as a comparison of the principal as the CEO of a school and that of the HODs and Senior Teachers as Managers takes place, we must not forget that in a commercial workplace, there is also the Chief Information Officer (CIO). I hope that the Ministry of Education will keep this in mind.”
“Sir, I would like to raise four points with the Minister. (1) As it is essential that a student who completes 10 years of formal education in school is IT literate, I would like to ask the Minister what the Ministry is doing to achieve this aim. By "IT literate", I refer to a standard achieved whereby the student will be an effective end-user and probably also able to do basic programming. (2) Is there a basic provision to schools of IT software and hardware, that is, some sort of skill? We know of many enterprising principals who are able to get donations for their schools. These principals are to be commended. My concern is for the neighbourhood schools. Is there a basic entitlement and whether this entitlement is adequate? (3) Is there a provision of adequate software and hardware for teachers to use IT for (a) classroom instruction, that is, is the classroom of today or to come going to be a multi-media interactive classroom; and (b) is there enough hardware and software for teachers in their administrative work? What is the ratio of PCs to teachers for this administrative role? (4) The students learn IT in schools. Is there any larger plan, probably with the National Computer Board, whereby every secondary school student can own his or her own PC? This could be in terms of loans to the students. I remember one conversation with Mr Philip Yeo, Chairman of EDB and the founder Chairman of NCB. He felt that the best present that the Government can give to Singaporeans is to make it possible for every household to own a PC. The result will be that all entering the workforce will be totally comfortable with the computer at the workplace. Will the Minister please comment? Sir, today is a milestone day for the Ministry of Education.”
“Sir, I am glad to know that the Minister will be taking active steps to implement the IMC and that he himself will be chairing the Ministerial Steering Committee which will include the Minister for Education and the Minister for Home Affairs. However, he has not mentioned whether he agrees with me that a dedicated team is required to tackle this problem of juvenile delinquency, besides mentioning that he will be focusing on early detection and early intervention. Sir, I am not quite satisfied with this reply because the problem is of increasing immensity. I first brought up the problem of female gangs on 16th March 1993 [Hansard, Vol. 60, Col. 1268] and I again highlighted the problem of juvenile delinquency on 9th March 1994 [Hansard, Vol. 62, Col. 710]. I think this is a serious problem requiring more resources. May I have the Minister's comments, please?”
“They benefitted, and in a controlled study, it was found that those going through the course became "much less disruptive in class, had more positive feelings about themselves, and were less likely to drink or take drugs. And, the longer they had been in the programme, the less aggressive they were as teenagers." Sir, my purpose in bringing up this issue of "EQ" is to highlight that early intervention and assistance can help the individual and society. Our Prime Minister referred to this on 22nd December 1995 when he said, "Character determines whether a person succeeds in life or not. High IQ alone is not enough." He then referred to the book by Daniel Goleman entitled "Emotional Intelligence - Why It Can Matter More Than IQ" and the Straits Times had this to report about the Prime Minister: `He had not heard of the term "Emotional Intelligence" when he was at school, he said, but on looking back, he realised that he had absorbed "a heavy dose of emotional intelligence" at RI. "It built my character. It gave me the emotional gravitas to lead."'. Sir, the MCD needs to initiate such a programme, probably in conjunction with the Ministry of Education, Ministry of Health and the Ministry of Home Affairs. Special attention needs to be given to the problem of the girls. The 400% rise in female juvenile delinquents deserves special attention.”
“In 1990, compared to the previous two decades, the US saw the highest juvenile arrest rate for violent crimes ever; teen arrests for forcible rape had doubled; teen murder rates quadrupled; suicide rate for teenagers tripled; and murders of children under the age of 14 tripled. American experts have pointed out that the dropping levels of "emotional competence" seem to have a very direct bearing on these alarming statistics. The whole issue of "EQ" or emotional intelligence or emotional competence in our teenagers needs to be addressed. A Cornell University study did an international comparison of children's well-being. Its conclusion: 'In the absence of good support systems, external stresses have become so great that even strong families are falling apart. The hecticness, instability, and inconsistency of daily family life are rampant in all segments of our society, including the well-educated and well-to-do. What is at stake is nothing less than the next generation ...'. Sir, in the US, the profile has also been studied, and the conclusion is that the "pathway to violence and criminality starts with children who are aggressive and hard to handle in first and second grades [ie, ages 7 - 8 years]." Is there hope for these children? Some success has been attained. Timely help can change attitudes and help aggressive kids learn to control anti-social behaviour before it leads them to more serious trouble. One such programme at Duke University worked with anger-ridden grade-school trouble makers. They were put through sessions for 40 minutes, twice a week, for 6-12 weeks.”
“I believe that the formation of CSGs is a step in the right direction, but to be effective, the volunteers must be given the tools to do their job. Sir, the explosive problem of juvenile delinquency (or young offenders) needs to be addressed very seriously and urgently. Juvenile delinquents (aged 7 - 16 years) who took to crime doubled between 1980 and 1990. The figure rose another 74.4% between 1990 and 1994. The number of female offenders rose 413% from 1984 to 1993. Sir, the problem is serious enough now for the MCD to form a team solely dedicated to tackling this problem. Mobilising other agencies, such as the family service centres and other voluntary groups and agencies (eg, the Police and the People's Association) should be supplementary to the main effort. Will the Minister comment on this? To me, the whole of Singapore's society, workforce, social and economic progress will be jeopardised if this problem is not given the highest of priority, not to mention the waste of the individual's life. Ad-hoc programmes and the mobilisation of existing resources will not be able to give the focused attention and additional resources that this important problem requires. Sir, the Inter-Ministry Committee's Report has identified the high-risk cases and has made many recommendations for tackling this problem. Here I would like to bring up the issue of "EQ" or emotional intelligence or competence and juvenile delinquency. If we take the experience in the US, we will be even more motivated to do more and now.”
“Sir, I wish to address the issues of dysfunctional families and juvenile delinquency. First, I would like to congratulate the authors on a very thorough and frank report. Sir, the Report of the Inter-Ministry Committee has shown that divorces doubled between 1980 and 1990. Divorces were 0.71 per 1,000 residents in 1980 and rose to 1.34 per 1,000 residents. Although this figure, termed the crude divorce rate, is much lower than the 4.7 in the US and 2.9 in the UK in 1990, there is no room for complacency. Sir, we all accept that the family is the basic building block of our society. The consequences of marital failure affect also the children. I note the many measures recommended by the Committee. I, however, urge the MCD to give more resources to the family service centres, managed by the voluntary organisations, so that they can be more effective in doing their job rather than spending the majority of their time on fund-raising. Next, I would like to focus on the preventive aspects. Many religious groups already make it compulsory that the couple whose marriage is to be solemnised by their religious leader has to attend some formal instruction or classes before the marriage is solemnised. I believe that the Registry of Marriages should now make it compulsory for every Singaporean who wants to be married to attend a similar course and accredited pre-marital counselling courses organised by other agencies. The marriage certificate carries with it far greater responsibility than a driving licence or a COE. On community support groups (CSGs), I understand that the Residents' Committees (RCs) are being asked to form CSGs to address many of the problems mentioned in this report. Is the MCD going to provide training and guidance to these CSGs? How will they be funded?”
“Will the Minister consider providing for the cost of rewiring and upgrading of electrical supplies to these older blocks and to the Interim Upgrading Programme.”
“Sir, I would like to highlight only two problems of mature estates. Firstly, the sale of flats. The sale of flats in mature estates is by ballot. In old estates like those in Bedok, the new flats that come up for sale are usually isolated redeveloped blocks. Thus, there are few in number. Again many of those staying in these estates have family, or extended families staying in the vicinity. These estates are coming to around 20 years old. The children of the initial occupants are getting married. They want to stay near their parents. This is in line with Government policy and is indeed to be encouraged. They of course also want to stay in a town or neighbourhood where they grew up in. In Fengshan, my experience last year of one block, ie, Block 140, being redeveloped and sold really saddens me. Many of those who came to see me were considering their first upgrading, ie, they had stayed in their flats ever since moving to Bedok for the last 18 to 20 years, or were first-time applicants, ie, they were children who had grown up in the estate and wish to set up their own homes near to their parents. They were not exploiting the generosity of the HDB and they are not by any way speculators. Can the HDB not have a more rational way of allocation of flats in mature estates to allow (1) families to stay nearby each other; and (2) for greater social cohesion? At least the application of a resident first-time applicant and a resident first-time upgrader in a mature estate should be given heavier weightage in allocation. Sir, with growing affluence, many homes want to install airconditioners. In the residential units, the cost of rewiring of electrical supplies is also not included in the Interim Upgrading Programme.”
“However, upgrading is necessary as the business of the centre will be affected if the town is not upgraded, and experience has shown that the business in upgraded town centres indeed improves. Sir, the HDB or MND earns from the sale of shops. Should not a sum from this be allocated to town councils for the upgrading process?”
“Sir, I have four points to raise with the Minister regarding the sale of HDB shops. (1) The sale of HDB shops has been going on in batches. As the sale of each batch proceeds, because of the buoyant property market, the prices are increasing. We, therefore, can understand the fear of those who are awaiting their chance to buy. Will the Minister consider a fair system of discounting so that those offered their shops later need not fear that they cannot afford to buy the shops? (2) Sir, it would also help if the shop-owners are given broad time-frames, eg, 5-year time frames, to know when their shops will be sold to them. This is because in the older estates some of the shop-owners are elderly, and their children or relatives may not want to continue in the business, eg, grocery and provision shops. Some may also want to make other business decisions. Knowing when the shops will be sold will give them the ability to plan. Can the Minister enlighten us? (3) In relation to shops having been sold, quite a significant number of these shops are subsequently leased or rented out. These lessees tend to be less cooperative in working with Town Councils in matters of common interest. The Government should insert into the contract on selling the units a clause to give the town councils more control so that the owner can be held accountable to the town council without the town council having to incur excessive legal expenses. (4) Lastly, when town centres were managed by the HDB, and units rented to shop-owners, the Government through HDB managed these estates or town centres. Now, some of them are very old. Upgrading a whole town centre is a multi-million dollar affair.”
“We as community leaders and MPs can also do this. The PAP Community Foundation has done this for many years by granting book grants. In December 1995, the PCF Executive Committee and Management Council approved 360 grants to students in the polytechnics (50 in each of the polytechnics) and universities (80 in each of the two universities) at $200 per student. The total cost of this is $72,000. Yes, Sir, we all can do something. The PAP, through the PAP Community Foundation, is doing something. What is the SDP doing? Sir, I support the motion.”
“Very doubtful, as the property owners themselves are complaining of higher operating costs. Has the Minister any figures to show that previous property tax rebates have been passed on to tenants? Sir, I would like to refer to Table A3.1 on page 121 of the Budget book entitled "Consumer Price Index, 1990-1995". I am especially concerned as the steepest increases in CPI are in: (1) Education, 4.2% (annual percentage increase); (2) Cooked food, 3%; (3) Seafood (uncooked), 2.8%. Numbers (2) and (3) refer to food items. As we know, many Singaporeans eat out daily and this is an important cause of concern as the cost of uncooked food is number two in the increase in CPI for 1995. In 1994 the top three were: (1) Seafood (uncooked), 7.7%; (2) Transport and communication, 6.7%; and (3) Cooked food, 4%. Sir, education, food (especially cooked food) and transportation are daily necessities. We can eat less, but eat we must. We can travel less or use cheaper modes of transport, but travel we must, at least to and from work. We must continue to educate our children, and give them the very best. Many grassroots organisations and non-profit organisations are providing good quality tuition classes and managing other educational programmes. What are the Minister's plans to assist in these areas? Sir, if I may just spend a short moment on what Mr Ling How Doong touched on, and that is, the book grants. He touched on a wide range of topics but I would like to just dwell a little bit on this matter of book grants. Sir, we as MPs and community leaders can do things on our own when we see a need. A good example is what Mr Ling has mentioned about book grants and education matters. The grassroots organisations and other charitable and non-profit organisations can do this.”
“However, the recent high escalation of home ownership is causing anxiety, especially to the young who want to start up their families. In two successful weeks in January 1996, two HDB flats were sold for more than $700,000 each: the Bishan executive maisonette for $770,000 and the Tampines flat for $745,000. According to one housing agency, agents are now "knocking on doors" in these two estates and urging owners to sell. It was also estimated that 1995 was a very good year for public housing as prices increased on average by 25% over 1994 (open market sales), while prices of private residential property increased by between 6-12%. The concern for this House must, of course, be to focus on HDB flats, especially for the first-timer and for the first time upgrader. Can the Government provide longer mortgage loans, eg, up to 30 years and also "ballooning schemes" to make it easier for young couples to own their homes, ie, they pay less now when they are earning a lesser salary and more later on when they have a bigger salary? The MAS and the Ministry of National Development need to relook into financing for the HDB units in the face of rising costs. It has also been said that when the Government sells land in a tender, there is always a "reserved price" - a minimum expectation. The question that is raised is that if the Government expects developers to reduce price, then true market values can only be reflected if there is no reserved price. Will the Minister comment on this? Rising business costs and rising cost of living Sir, higher rentals, higher salaries, higher cost of transportation are the main causes of rising business costs and rising cost of living. Will the property tax rebate be passed on as rental rebate by the private sector?”
“These managers and professionals are a mobile lot, and while many are loyal Singaporeans, the temptation or lure to "greener pastures" overseas cannot be excluded. Perhaps, the Minister, with the large resources that he has, can tell the House whether my observations are valid. I will be most glad to hear from him that the much talked about "middle-income squeeze" is a fallacy. Problems of the retail industry One needs to give no facts or figures to be able to have a feel of what is happening here. This is a problem that has been discussed openly, and received wide publicity in the media. We will need no convincing that Singapore is no longer a shopper's paradise. Many Singaporeans travel overseas, and the weekend shopping spree in Johor Baru reinforces that there is a problem here. The problem can be viewed from the point of view of shops in the city area (including the CBD), and those in HDB town centres and HDB estates. It seems to be more acute in the city area, showing that the HDB town centres appear to be offering more value for money. However, both are facing similar problems - higher rentals, higher labour cost, difficulty of getting well-trained staff. What is the future of this important sector of the economy? Perhaps the Minister can give his views and also advise retailers. Rising cost of home ownership Sir, a successful Swiss friend once told me that he could not make his Singapore wife happy until he bought an apartment for the family. The Swiss, he explained to me, were very happy to rent a home. Yes, the PAP Government has achieved the almost impossible by providing home ownership to the majority. Now, some 95% or more of Singaporeans own their own home.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, this Budget is a budget for all. The Minister for Finance must be congratulated for presenting a Government Budget that is really one that has something for every Singaporean. Singaporeans welcome this Budget. This reflects the Government's policy of enhancing the personal assets of all Singaporeans, and redistribution of wealth through schemes that in the long-term will not lead to a welfare state or develop dependence on the state, ie, developing a crutch mentality. What I would like to bring up at this time are some issues, which though not new, need more focused attention by the Government. Indirect taxation The Government's policy is to achieve a broad-based taxation system which will reinforce the work ethic, by decreasing personal and company taxes, whilst the GST will discourage unnecessary expenditure and encourage savings. There are other taxes which take into account social and economic factors, eg, the foreign workers levy and the COE to control motor vehicle population. The Minister has taken great pains in this Budget to try to make sure that all benefit in some way. It is my view, that the middle income have felt most painfully the indirect taxes imposed. For example, the maid levy, the COE, the GST are areas that affect all, but perhaps hit hardest the middle income earner, who is most likely the family to have one or more maids, because both parents are working, they want a larger car, and will probably contribute more in the GST. Those staying in non-HDB estates will also not benefit from either the MUP or IUP. The Edusave Merit Bursary Scheme does not apply to families earning more than $3,000 per month.”
“Private Sector Involvement Coming back to the rail system in general, I would also like to ask the Minister to hasten the implementation of the projects by letting the private sector build and operate some parts of the rail network. I am sure that as the new financing package is applicable to SMRT, it will also be applicable to other private operators. Thus, there will be other interested parties in the private sector. We must not have a situation whereby there is only one operator, the SMRT. We can then have a jump start with the implementation of several systems at one go. Let me end by saying that this concept of partnership between the people, the Government and the service providers is a recipe for success. However, whether the partnership survives will depend not only on words but also on action. Given the political will, it can and must be a win-win situation for all. EXEMPTED BUSINESS (Motion) Resolved, That the proceedings on item 6 on the Order Paper for today be exempted at this day's sitting from the provisions of Standing Order No. 1. - [Mr Wong Kan Seng]. WORLD CLASS LAND TRANSPORT SYSTEM Debate resumed.”
“Financing of Rail Systems Mr Speaker, Sir, the change in policy to define operating costs to cover not full replacement cost but only depreciation of existing assets shows our Government's commitment to make rail fares affordable. Philosophically, it means that each generation will pay for the services and assets it consumes. As applied to the present existing rail system, it translates into an immediate fare increase of 30 cents across the board if the old financing system is retained. This is our Government's commitment. This is considerable and a generous and welcome gesture as it will also mean that the implementation of the rail system can be brought forward by a few years. This is indeed good news. Can the Minister be more specific with reference to the rail extension mentioned in the White Paper, both MRT and LRT? With this new financing scheme, how many of these projects will be realisable and can commence work in the next two years? North-East Line Sir, I would now like to dwell a little on the much debated North-East Line. I hope that with this new financing scheme, it would be possible to start work on the North-East Line immediately. Now, assuming that the new financing scheme still does not give the LTA enough comfort level, what about the other suggestions to make it feasible? One option discussed is that of higher fares for the North-East Line till a break-even point is reached. I believe that many will support this proposal. If the Members of Parliament whose wards are affected can convince their residents, will the Minister agree? I would like to add another suggestion. The LTA should also come up with a transparent method of calculating these added fares so that all can monitor it. The MPs can then persuade their residents more convincingly.”
“Sir, I have mentioned to the Minister previously that his residents in Tampines, and mine in Bedok, are taking the MRT to Pasir Ris in the morning, just to catch the next train back to the city because of overcrowding during peak hours. This is wastage. The situation has not improved since our discussion about a year ago. As the White Paper states, "These areas need to be addressed", but I would like to have one more word "urgently". These areas need to be addressed urgently. These are the areas that the LTA can address now, while we wait for the vision that will arrive in 10 to 15 years of underground roads, integrated stations, multilevel traffic intersections, etc. These can be done now. Let us attend to it while waiting for a "world class" land transport system. Sir, last night, after my meet-the-people session, I discussed this topic again with my grassroots leaders. I explained that the operators use an index called the crush load. How many can you pack in a cabin? Their response was very telling. There may be a big gap between what the operators expect and what the commuters expect. One of my Chairmen said, "Dr Beng, not only are we in contact, we can even smell each other. Is that close enough for your crush load?" Sir, whilst working on this system of differentiation in bus services, we can also look into the differentiation in MRT services. Could we have services where seating is provided and maybe the commuters will pay more or services where the crush load is less and transportation then becomes more comfortable, a differentiation even within the MRT system?”
“This is a restraint on the part of the LTA that is essential in this interim period. I am sure that the taxi companies will take steps to function more efficiently by using technology such as global positioning to reduce cruising and wastage, which also adds to traffic congestion. Improving Public Transport: Integration Sir, the effectiveness of the LTA is shown by the model of the new Woodlands MRT station where there is integration to allow for private car drop-offs, bus interchange, taxi bays and covered walkways. The LTA must now look into the old stations; an example of a poorly designed one is exemplified by the Buona Vista MRT station. Integration will be the key to success of the public transport system. The Minister has already mentioned about integration between urban planning and transport and we fully endorse his views. Improving Public Transport: Rail Sir, I have left the rail system as the last topic in this debate, not because it is unimportant. Indeed, the White Paper states that it will be a most important mode of transport: the combination of light and heavy rail. I have left it to the last because it will be many years before we see new rail systems come into place after Woodlands and to place too much emphasis on it now will only raise expectations too high, and to feel let down while waiting for routes to be prescribed. However, there is something that can be done immediately to improve the existing MRT system. Take the criticisms of the MRT seriously, as recorded in the White Paper, and these are, (1) overcrowding during peak hours (56%) and, (2) stations not easily accessible (32%), ie, integration.”
“Sir, I read with interest the request by SBS for Government assistance in replacing of assets. What is the Government's response to this? This would have far-reaching implications. If the Government's response is positive then an even-handed approach must be made to all public transport operations. Is this wise? I have my reservations. Improving Public Transport: Taxis Sir, taxis provide 500,000 vehicular trips per day compared to 700,000 by the MRT, not far different. I am glad that the Government recognises that "taxi is a form of public transport" and that "it will therefore not treat taxis completely like cars in terms of tax." It did not say it will not treat taxis differently from cars. I guess there must be some implication in these wordings. However, this reassurance is welcomed by all commuters. These are two very important statements. I can understand the concern that an "excessive demand" for taxis should not arise. It is stated in the White Paper that our taxi fares are low by international standards. I, however, submit that in view of our less than perfect public transport system that taxis today are a "key component" in our public transport system. Taxis are the bridge in our not yet integrated public transport system. We have a good system. It is comprehensive. But it is not yet integrated. In the transition period of the next 10 to 15 years, to price taxis very high will increase car ownership and stifle the desired trend to shift towards public transportation. In the call to partnership, the LTA must also be understanding and patient. Allow for time for the integration process, allow for time for the building of light rail as a nexus in public transportation before raising taxi fares. The public is often asked to restrain car ownership and usage.”
“Improving Public Transport: Buses Sir, every day 51% of all motorised trips are by public transport: 3 million by bus, and another 700,000 by MRT. It will take another three to four years for the first Light Rail Transit (LRT) to be completed if we start today, while an MRT extension like the North-East Line would take seven to eight years to complete if we start today. Therefore, for the next five years or more, buses will play a key role in the public transport system. However, we are also told that "buses cannot be the solution for a compact city like Singapore" and that the "only acceptable solution is a good rail network" which takes time to build. When I put all these together, I was very concerned for the immediate future - the next five to eight years. However, when we examine our bus industry structure we realise that we have two very successful service providers, viz SBS and TIBS. Can they play a bigger role? They must play a bigger role. Government has made the commitment of an infrastructure by setting aside bus lanes, giving priority to buses at traffic lights with the installation of "intelligent" traffic lights and provided modern integrated bus interchanges, as we have seen in the new Woodlands depot. More choices will be offered to commuters, such as BusPlus services, air-conditioned express services, etc. In addition to these, I would urge the bus companies to improve quickly intra-town services and feeder services from the MRT stations to major office buildings scattered all around them. Perhaps, the bus companies should work closely with building developers and owners and tenants to "market" and understand their needs. A more pro-active approach is required to provide for good integration.”
“Singaporeans, being pragmatic, I am also confident that this figure will fall as the policy shifts towards control over usage coupled with a more user-friendly public transport network. However, the anxieties that have been expressed concern the intervening period or the transition period between ownership controls, or the Vehicle Quota System on the one hand, and the implementation of the user-pay system, the RPS, and subsequently the ERP. The White Paper calls for a "partnership". For the partnership to succeed, the interim period must be fair. The White Paper states, and I quote: `as we introduce ERP, we will concurrently rationalise the current road tax structure"; `We aim for a more consistent vehicle tax structure, based on road space occupied, after giving proper regard to social and equity considerations'. Sir, these are very loaded statements, and one requires not only to have a good command of English but also very strong intuition to translate this to simple understandable English. Can the Minister please explain in simple terms: What will the new road tax structure be? Will it be lower which we expect it to be? Will it be based on engine capacity, car size or tonnage? What will it be based? What is the system? Furthermore, we are told that there is a need to "extend RPS to CTE and PIE within the next two years"; "we cannot wait for ERP to be ready, because by then the traffic would have deteriorated even further". Sir, in this transition period, is it not unfair to penalise those who have paid upfront for their vehicles? For a partnership to be forged, attention to "fairness" must be paid in this interim period while public transport is being upgraded. The element of choices is not widely available now.”
“Qualitatively, it will offer high quality service - convenient, accessible, comfortable, safe, speedy and, most importantly, affordable. Very importantly, the commuter will be provided with "a spectrum of choices". All these objectives are most welcomed and will indeed enhance the quality of life of Singaporeans. The White Paper is not what Mr Chiam has called "an election ploy". Indeed, it is a White Paper that will have a resounding impact on the quality of all our lives. Private Vehicle Ownership Vs Usage Sir, firstly, on the issue of privately owned vehicles versus usage. Sir, one of the most basic objectives is to have a shift from private transport, ie, private cars to public transport, to decrease road congestion. The aim, in measurable terms, is to reach the goal whereby 75% of trips into the city centre will be by public transport as is in Zurich today. Before we accuse Singaporeans of being obsessed by car ownership, let us compare Zurich and Singapore. Our hot and humid weather for one is definitely less inviting for walking. Singaporeans are also very pragmatic people. The system today is one where the upfront cost of owning a car comprises 59.4% of a medium sized car to 68.5% of a luxury car. Therefore, if you own a car, you will want to use it. Therefore, it should come as no surprise to anyone that the mileage clocked by a car in Singapore averages 18,600 km per year - very high by international standards. I also suspect that this is because the car is often shared and therefore maximally utilized by several members (or drivers) in a family. I will not be unduly perturbed by this figure.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the GPC fully supports and endorses this White Paper. Sir, this thought-provoking White Paper brings to dawn on Singapore and Singaporeans a vision which we will all want to see come true: "A World Class Land Transport System". Through the pages are colourful charts, graphs, maps and photographs which make the visualisation of a difficult futuristic concept possible and simple. It fires us to want to achieve it, not years down the road, but very soon, and hopefully tomorrow. However, the White Paper reminds us that it will take us 10-15 years to attain this vision. Two questions then arise: What happens in the intervening period? Can we not shorten this period? As the initial excitement and euphoria ebbs, impatience begins to set in. Yes, Mr Speaker, Sir, the White Paper was received with a lot of excitement. Friends and grassroots leaders asked for copies of it. I understand that even Parliament House Library is running short of copies. Later, many asked: Why does it take so long to achieve? Are we not known to achieve great strides in a short time? Expectations run extremely high! Then over the last few days, anxiety has set in. How much will it cost? What happens in the intervening period? Is this a signal to impending increases to bus, taxi and MRT fares? The rumours begin. Sir, the White Paper has comprehensively covered all aspects of land transportation in Singapore, from environmental issues to integration, to financing issues. The authors must be congratulated. The Paper has set measurable goals and standards, eg, a target of 75% of trips into the city by public transport and a rail system with a 160 km network.”
“If a case before the High Court cannot be considered in accordance with the law concerning such a decision, it means that the aggrieved party has no recourse for appeal if he truly believes that there had been no consistency in the compensation awarded. Subject to these qualifications, I support the Land Transport Authority of Singapore Bill.”
“It is more equitable to fix a single time limit, say, three years for all claims. Secondly, although the Board of Compensation has the discretion to allow an extension, this applies only in the case of a mistake of fact or of law and if the Authority is not prejudiced by the delay. The Board's discretion is thus restricted. This should not be the case; the Board ought to be given full discretion to allow an extension. On clause 23(1), the procedure for claims might be too technical and complex for the layman to follow. The layman might be prevented from obtaining a fair compensation if he fails to follow the procedure. Thus the procedure should be simplified for the benefit of the public. On clause 25(3), the power given to the Board of Compensation to penalise a party with costs for not settling a claim earlier, leading to an award which is lower than the offer by LTA, is unfair to the claimant. A party may be forced to accept an offer he deems unsatisfactory for fear of being penalised with the cost of the proceedings. To allay this fear, the Board of Compensation should be given the discretion to determine the cost it deems appropriate and reasonable, "unless for special reasons the Board thinks it not proper to do so". Under clause 26(10), a professional valuer cannot represent a claimant in a matter and be paid for his professional services, unless the valuer is treated as an agent appointed by the claimant under clause 26(10)(c), and he will not be paid as a professional. Finally, Mr Speaker, under clause 31(2), the power of review of the High Court does not extend beyond the decision on the quantum of compensation awarded by the Board of Compensation.”
“It also seeks to vest all responsibility for the administration of the land transport system in Singapore in a single body that will coordinate its maintenance and management, in contrast to the present situation where various Government agencies and statutory bodies are involved, like the Registry of Vehicles (ROV), Mass Rapid Transit Corporation (MRTC), Housing and Development Board (HDB), Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA) and the Police. A safe and efficient land transport system is important for us to meet future challenges and ensure our further economic and social advancement. May I ask the Minister to consider the following points. For instance, with regard to clause 7(1)(e), (f), (g) and (h), could the Minister consider whether LTA should be empowered to engage in business. I think this might not be compatible with the Authority's status as a statutory board whose function is to mana ge and maintain the land transport system in Singapore. Even if LTA is to be allowed to do this, the type of business it may engage in must be related to its objectives. Next, on clause 7(1)(n), as LTA will be having its own source of revenue through the collection of fees, I feel it should not be receiving donations as well for its operations. Collecting donations is more appropriate for a non-profit social or charitable organisation. As regards clause 22(1), the period for making claims, may I ask the Minister to reconsider this. Under this clause, those who suffer damage or loss as a result of the functions of LTA are entitled to claim compensation. Under the Fourth Schedule, Part I of the Bill, the period for making such a claim varies from one to six years. Firstly, these different periods are confusing.”
“So if the Land Transport Authority can succeed in this integration, that is, to link together the bus services and the MRT services so as to cut down the waiting time of the commuters and to improve the efficiency of the public transport, I think that will be in keeping with the wishes of the great majority of people in Singapore. Finally, Sir, I hope that with the establishment of the Land Transport Authority, the North-East MRT line and the road network can be completed as soon as possible without any further delay. In this way, we will not only be able to improve the transport system for this part of the island, but will also help people whose properties are affected. As far as I know, the properties along these roads were zoned by red or yellow lines five or six years ago. As a result, the property owners along these roads are not able to sell their property because there are no takers for fear that they will be affected by road construction. As a result, property owners are in a dilemma. If our road construction work and MRT construction work can be undertaken as soon as possible, I think those property owners affected will be able to have a better picture of where they stand, ie, whether their land or property will be acquired or not. I hope that the Minister will consider the plight of the people concerned and proceed to build the North-East MRT line and carry out the road development there as soon as possible. Encik Harun bin A. Ghani (Hong Kah GRC)( In Malay): Mr Speaker, I rise in support of the Bill. Looking at its objectives, we would find that the Bill is aimed at promoting policies and allocating resources towards achieving a safe and well-administered, maintained and managed land transport system in Singapore.”
“I will support this concept, although the cost will be much higher. I believe that in the long term, this is worth it. As in other great cities which are densely populated, Singapore should plan its future MRT systems underground rather than above ground, because this is the only way to reserve above-ground space for other development purposes. Right now, Sir, Serangoon Road and Upper Serangoon Road are the main trunk roads in the north east sector of Singapore. In order to meet the needs of future development and the transport requirements, I think these main trunk roads will have to be expanded. If the North-East MRT line can be properly coordinated with the development of the main trunk roads, that is, to build it under the main trunk roads, then the widening of the roads will not need to be so extensive. In this way, we will not only be able to save the land space above ground, but also help to alleviate any effect on the properties along this line. The second point is the improvement to the public transport services. I hope that the Land Transport Authority will be able to operate in such a way that they can integrate the bus and the MRT services to ensure that the public can have a better overall public transport system. They will find that with the system in place, the need for owning cars will be less. After the operation of this MRT, we find that the bus companies have already undertaken a very comprehensive adjustment to the bus routes. The impression given to the people is that the bus companies are there to make money and they cut down the less viable routes and services, resulting in great inconvenience to the bus commuters.”