Augustine H.H. Tan
Singapore
“There are instances when reserves should be used, but the govern- ment has to make a case to the President and if good arguments are used, the President is expected to concur. I therefore end by asking you, as you have done in your speeches, to support this Bill with a very loud "Aye" when it comes to the vote. [Applause].”
“We must have confidence that in the end, as Singaporeans, we know what is overall best for ourselves. We are a community of free citizens committed to making Singapore a great city to live in and for foreigners to come visit and admire.”
“There is such a thing as initiative. Who initiated the project? What was the objective of the project? And there is such a thing as economies of scale, the benefits of which are passed on to the taxi drivers. Let us not forget those elements. An hon. Member: They do not pay tax on their income.”
“They can still enjoy the seafood regardless of the indigestion. They can do the shopping and do other things in Johor Baru. I believe that what is important for us is that we do not preclude ourselves the option of setting our own national policies.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the Minister stated that it is undesirable to employ foreigners to run child care centres because they affect the values of our children. Is it not also true that by having foreign maids in our homes that they too directly impact upon the values of our children?”
“It was a point which I brought out much earlier when a similar matter was debated here in Parliament. Because the government could borrow on the basis of the reserves even though the President has one key to the reserves because there is such a thing as credit-worthiness of the country.”
The complete record
Every one of 1,269 lines we hold for Augustine H.H. Tan, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 7 of 26.
“Earlier on I was outside this Chamber and I overhead a conversation and somebody was saying "that man (meaning the Member for Anson) is as slippery as an eel." To me, Sir, it is worse than that. His behaviour is reminiscent of a snake.”
“There you are. When it suits him, he will point to certain procedures.”
“Where does that leave anybody who has to be appointed by the Prime Minister?”
“The people are extremely intelligent and the sensible way to do it, if one wanted to do it, would be to wait a year or so and quietly transfer the person and not to do it like that. Furthermore, Sir, we have the written testimony of the Chief Justice stating that he was personally responsible for the transfer. Unfortunately, Sir, yesterday the Prime Minister was moved, impelled to reveal to this House the contents of the judgment regarding Mr Michael Khoo's errors of judgment and errors of law. To me, as a layman, those points made by the Prime Minister and the letter of the Chief Justice make abundantly clear the reasons that must have been behind the decision of the Chief Justice to transfer this man. I say, like my colleague, the Member for Ulu Pandan, "poor Mr Michael Khoo." Poor man. I would not like to be in his shoes. What has he done to deserve having his name dragged through the mud. He is a professional man. It is bad enough to have made the errors of judgment that caused the transfer, but to have his name dragged through the newspapers day in and day out, and in this Chamber, that is not a very pleasant thing to have done to one's reputation. It is a gross abuse of parliamentary privilege. It is not the first time that we have seen this in this House. It is not going to be the last time. And today we heard another outrageous statement, and if we were to extrapolate from that statement, then we will infer from what the Member for Anson said, that therefore any appointment made by the Prime Minister of Singapore is immediately suspect; anybody appointed by the Prime Minister of Singapore to any position must be beholden to him. Therefore, where does that leave us in Singapore? Where does that leave the civil servants?”
“Then obviously the counsel for the Commission of Inquiry did not call the various people up as witnesses. Furthermore, Sir, on page 71 of the same Report, paragraph 7.9, it says: 'There is another fundamental rule of evidence which Counsel referred to in his submission. It is a rule of presumption based also on commonsense that where a person who makes an allegation, when called upon, does not give the evidence on which the allegation was based, then it is reasonable to infer that either he does not have the evidence or if he does have any evidence that evidence would be adverse to or against him. Once again, by choosing not to give evidence on the allegations he made, I find that Mr Jeyaretnam not only did not have the evidence but that any evidence he could have given would under cross-examination be shown to be against him.' So there we have the facts of the matter, that quite clearly what this man set out to do in this House was entirely baseless. He had nothing to support his allegations. He was out to make political capital out of an unfortunate incident. And consider, Sir, the sequence of events leading to the transfer of Mr Michael Khoo, if the Executive had indeed wanted to persecute Mr Michael Khoo, then anyone who is not stupid would certainly not do it in that blatant way. In so short a time, after giving that judgment acquitting the Member for Anson and his colleague on four out of five counts, he was transferred. It is too obvious a way to do things. If there is anything that we can hold against the Government or credit the Government with, it is that it is not a Government that is stupid.”
“--- so much so that he did not have to give evidence. Sir, I am not a lawyer. But as I read through this Report of the Commission of Inquiry, I was enlightened on two legal procedures or principles. On page 33, I quote: 'Where a witness wishes to call other material witnesses, then [quoting from the Salmon Report], a statement of the further evidence should be taken by the Treasury Solicitor. If the Tribunal in its discretion after seeing this statement considers that the evidence it contains may be material and that it is reasonably practicable to obtain it, that evidence should be called by counsel for the Tribunal. This matter must be left to the discretion of the Tribunal in each case, since it is not impossible that a plea for further evidence might be put forward merely for the purposes of delay or some other purpose irrelevant to the inquiry.' Sir, the Member for Anson at the inquiry insisted on calling four or five witnesses. But when he was called upon to give in writing the grounds upon which he was calling these witnesses, he did not do so.”
“To me that is a very telling point. The Member for Anson made a lot of allegations in this House. But he too refused to give evidence and the way he did it was somewhat cleverer than he usually is. He imposed impossible conditions ---”
“I will make things abundantly clear. Mr Speaker, Sir, it is also with a sense of sadness and outrage that I rise to support the motion standing in the name of the Minister for Home Affairs. Sir, when the Commission of Inquiry was set up, I realized that there were two very important objectives that it sought to accomplish. First, to find out if there is something really wrong with our Judiciary and the system of appointments and transfer of people within the system. Secondly, what can be done to improve it. Unfortu- nately, Sir, as the Report makes it abundantly clear, no members of the public came forward to offer evidence. No proposals were received either on what is wrong with the system or on how we can improve the system.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, is the Minister of State aware of a reported interview in the Business Times, today's date, page 8? The interview was conducted with a Mr Stanley Ho, better known to many as Macau's casino king, and I quote Mr Stanley Ho: 'Tourists generally travel on a budget and are unlikely to spend much time in the casinos. You need the support of the locals to survive. Casino and industry do not mix, said Mr Ho.'”
“Sir, a point of clarification on this table of investible funds. If you look at the note at the bottom, you will see that it virtually excludes the use of the special account balance. So only the ordinary account may be used. That is quite a restriction.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I believe members of the public will welcome this Bill as it enables them to invest their CPF funds more flexibly contrary to what the Member for Potong Pasir has said and, to reiterate the point made by the Member for Jalan Kayu, there is nothing in this Bill that forces any CPF member to invest any of their funds in gold or securities or non-residential property. Sir, the point made by the Member for Potong Pasir is completely wrong. I would like to seek clarification on a number of issues from the Minister. One is that in the event that dividends or interest are payable on the securities, are these to be enjoyed by the CPF members or are they to be credited to their CPF account? Another question I have is with regard to the purchase of precious metals. Why has he limited the purchase to only gold? What about silver and platinum and any of the precious metals that may be on the market? I welcome the provision for the purchase of non-residential properties because I believe this will benefit particularly those CPF members who own HDB flats. As the present regulation stands, such members cannot buy a second property, whether it be HDB or private residential property, so that if they wish to make such purchases on the private market they will have to leave their HDB flats whereas this provision in this Bill which allows them to buy non-residential properties allows them to continue staying in their HDB flats and yet make an investment that may prove to be worthwhile over the long term. So I would like to support this Bill.”
“Or is it because of the thinness of the market that we have. These are questions that we need to address if we want to protect our investors from manipulation in the future.”
“I have heard of fund managers who do this as a matter of routine in collaboration with the stockbrokers that any purchases made on behalf of the manager's clients can be ascribed to the fund manager himself if it is favourable enough. So I would urge that a provision be made for the time of transaction to be written into the contract so as to prevent any such abuses in future. Then, Sir, the Minister mentioned the integration of our securities market with markets elsehwere. I would like to draw particular attention to the integration between our market and the Kuala Lumpur Stock Exchange. We have drawn up this very elaborate Bill. But the question is, hasthere been consultation with the authorities in Malaysia? And how is this going to work in relation to the Kuala Lumpur Stock Exchange? The Pan-El crisis came about because of manipulation across the causeway. What is there to prevent future manipulation in future? If the regulations governing the KLSE are less onerous than ours, then a lot of malpractices could be instigated or could be initiated across the causeway, again to our detriment. Is it time to separate the two stock exchanges? It is a question which the Minister might well have to consider. The other thing which I would like to draw attention to is the nature of our stock market here in Singapore. Anybody who has made a comparison between our market and the markets in the advanced countries would notice the very high price earnings ratio here. Is it due to the fact that we do not have a capital gains tax and therefore people are going more for capital gains, or the prospects of capital gains rather than investing for returns by way of dividends? Is it because of the more speculative nature of our market?”
“Clause 110, for example, protects the MAS from any prosecution arising out of neglect or default in the performance of its duties provided such neglect or default is done in good faith. I do not know what that means. Whereas the clause following 110, ie, clause 111, says that where a body corporate is guilty of an offence under the Act, then any of its officers, director, employee, and so on, directly or indirectly is a party to the offence, is also deemed to be guilty of that offfence. You can see the asymmetry there. Everybody else is guilty but where an MAS officer is negligent provided he demonstrates good faith, he is protected from any prosecution. I do not think that is desirable. And if we are going to project ourselves as a financial centre of integrity and invite investors from the advanced countries, then we ought to have laws which are fair to everybody concerned. The requirement that every contract note written by a stockbroker should have sufficient information. This is on pages 45 and 46. I think it is a good one but there is one omission which I would like to draw the attention of the Minister to, and that is the time of the transaction is not required to be specified on the contract note. I think this is important because there have been examples of cases of abuse. Suppose somebody calls on the phone to his stock- broker. He buys a stock early in the morning or when the Stock Exchange opens in the morning and the note is not executed until later in the afternoon, by which time if the price of the stock had gone up the broker could claim the transaction to be his personal transaction and benefit thereby. If the price is the same or had even gone down, he would then write it as belonging to the client in question.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to support my colleague when he calls for the Bill to be referred to a Select Committee. I support this recommendation because although the Minister mentioned that the MAS had consulted the Stock Exchange members, I feel that stockbrokers at this stage are not able to think very clearly. They are under great pressure, financial and otherwise, some of them are going out of business altogether. And when you are under pressure you can accept anything. So I think in fairness and for the good of the orderly development of the financial institutions in Singapore, we should not be in a hurry to enact a Bill like this without proper consultation. The objections which I lodge against the Futures Trading Bill are also applicable to this Bill, namely, that the MAS has got such sweeping powers that any of its officers can virtually revoke any licence or cancel any licence on the grounds that the firm in question is not operating efficiently or justly or fairly, whatever. Furthermore, whereas this particular Bill, the Securities Industry Bill, allows for appeal to the High Court, the Futures Trading Bill does not allow any such recourse. So the two Bills seem to have been drafted by different people altogether. The point which the Minister made earlier in reply to my drawing his attention to the lack of recourse to the High Court for futures trading seems to be besides the point, because he is allowing such recourse in the Securities Industry Bill. One example of the lack of consultation is the asymmetry in the treatment of the MAS itself and offences by the trading community.”
“What I am afraid of, Sir, is that with the availability of such a wide-range of instruments for speculation, a lot of time, energy and resources might be diverted from productive endeavours towards speculative endeavours to the detriment of Singapore's economy. With the exception of these qualifications, Sir, I support the Bill.”
“All that is required is the judgment of an officer of the MAS. Then in clause 23, there is provision for appeal to the Minister in case a licence is not granted or renewed or where a licence is revoked or suspended. There is no provision for appeal to a court. Normally, Ministers tend to listen to the civil servants who work under them. To safeguard the interests of those who set up futures trading houses, it might be desirable to have ultimate recourse to a court of appeal in addition to appealing to the Minister. Another point has to do with whether the penalties which are specified in the Act are sufficient to deter wrongdoing. There are many penalties prescribed, most of them very small. But I would like to draw attention to page 39, clause 56, where a fine not exceeding $100,000 or imprisonment not exceeding seven years or both can be placed upon persons who violate offences under Part VII which include false trading, bucketing, dissemination of false information and the like. Sir, we are talking in terms of contracts which may be worth millions of dollars. So the fine of $100,000 appears to be rather small in relation to what unscrupulous operators can get away with. Finally, Sir, the warning by the Minister on the dangers of engaging in the futures market by novices ought to be driven home. With the proliferation of financial instruments in Singapore, investment opportunities, particularly opportunities for speculation, not only in the futures market but also in stocks and shares and other markets as well, we should really have educational efforts to inform people about the merits and demerits of different types of investments and the dangers of speculation.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, hon. Members will surely welcome this Bill as another step to safeguard the integrity of our financial system. As a small developing country, we have to build up confidence in our financial system if investors are going to put their money in Singapore and also if our own people are going to keep their profits and their savings in Singapore. The regulations set out in this Bill are many and varied. I have one question in regard to the regulations and, that is, whether or not we have overdone it. For example, the licence is given only for one year at a time. Is it sufficient to induce people to set up the houses which are necessary to do the trading, especially if some fixed investments are required? On page 17, under clause 20, sub- clause (2) paragraph (a), the Authority can revoke a licence for a number of reasons but I take objection to sub-paragraphs (v) and (vi) and this also applies to sub-clause (2) (b), sub-paragraphs (vi) and (vii). They are analogous. One applies to a person and the other to a corporation. Clause 20 (2)(a)(v) says: 'if the Authority has reason to believe that the licensed person has not performed his duties efficiently, honestly or fairly;' It depends on interpretation, surely, what one means by "efficiently" or "fairly". "Honestly", I think, one can understand but this could lead to arbitrary exercise of powers by the MAS. Similarly sub-paragraph (vi) says that the licence can be revoked: 'if the licensed person contravenes or fails to comply with any condition or restriction applicable in respect of the licence;' I would have thought that if such a person had been convicted of an offence under the Act, then that should be grounds for revocation of a licence. But, as it appears, no conviction is necessary.”
“On a point of clarification, Sir. The notion of cost-effectiveness involves the comparison between benefits and costs, and the Acting Minister has simply looked at the cost without looking at the benefits. He must think in terms of these young minds that we want to develop for the benefit of the future of Singapore. Who knows, among them there may be another Acting Minister for Community Development?”
“Sir, the Acting Minister referred to cost-effectiveness and he used the number of loans of books per staff member. I believe that that is not a complete criterion to use in this case because a branch library affords facilities for reference books which are not taken out of the library and it is also a nice and quiet place to study in. Furthermore, the Toa Payoh Library, although as the crow flies, is only 1(r) km away, but in order for residents to get from Whampoa to Toa Payoh Library it involves a couple of buses and there are transportation costs involved. Furthermore, in the evening hours, it is not desirable that young children travel that far for the purpose of using a library. So I would appeal to him to provide the necessary staff to operate the Whampoa branch library on a full-time basis.”
“Sir, I file my amendment to lodge a complaint about the Whampoa branch library. Actually I should have lodged this complaint last year but I missed the session. The opening hours of the Whampoa branch library have been curtailed rather drastically, and it is open now only on Mondays, Wednesdays and Saturdays for a few hours each day. I would like to appeal to the Acting Minister to restore the times of opening of the branch library to the original hours because libraries are very important places of study and access to source materials for students, especially those from poor families. And this particular branch library is sited in a former void deck of 1-room flats and it is right next to my community centre. So I hope that the Acting Minister will take steps towards the restoration of the times of opening.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, earlier on when I made reference to the protectionist policies of countries like Malaysia and the problems that we are faced with, I expected support from all Members in this House. But instead the Member for Potong Pasir attacked me and stated that Singapore should humble itself and accept all these protectionist policies. Therefore, I consulted my colleagues and I was shown this particular report in the Utusan Malaysia. In fact, it was also published in the Utusan Melayu of the same date on page 7 that there was such a meeting and there was financial support. These are not my allegations, Sir. These are allegations reported by Bernama newsagency from Malaysia, and I suppose it is a reputable newsagency. BG Lee Hsien Loong: Mr Speaker, Sir, if I may continue. I am happy to hear that the Member for Potong Pasir suggested we humble ourselves purely out of conviction and not at all out of personal interest. Nevertheless, we have no intention of doing so. It is our duty to protect our traders and we shall do whatever is necessary.”
“On a point of clarification, Sir. I have here a copy of a newspaper called Utusan Malaysia dated 27th January 1986. On page 2 of this newspaper, there is a report from the newsagency Bernama which included an allegation by several MCA leaders that Mr Tan Koon Swan's detention in Singapore was linked to his financial support to a Singapore Opposition leader, Mr Chiam See Tong who is the Secretary-General of the Singapore Democratic Party and MP for Potong Pasir. Sir, I seek clarification from the Member for Potong Pasir, and I question his loyalty to Singapore on the basis of this report.”
“Is the EDB equipped sufficiently to deal with both these additional burdens? At the same time, I am encouraged to note that the development expenditure for EDB has gone up from about $40 million to $85 million this year to give capital assistance to industry. It is all to the good. I notice too, Sir, a provision of $25.5 million for financing the joint-industrial training centres. My question to the Minister is very simple: how cost-effective are these centres? What are they producing? Are they producing people of the right skills? Finally, a word on the Trade Development Board (TDB). I notice a reduction in overall expenditure from $16.5 million to $15 million and a corresponding reduction of the Government subsidy from $9.3 million to $7.9 million. At a time when the TDB should be working harder, why is expenditure being reduced?”
“We should try to identify cases of dumping in the Singapore market so that we can give suitable incentives and help to our domestic producers and consumers. We cannot be throwing up our hands all the time and say, "Well, if these guys cannot compete, what can we do about it?" I mean, we have got to do something. The Japanese government is very good at this. In fact, the whole Japanese psychology is geared towards Buying Japan, buying things made in Japan. If this were Japan and in a recession like we are in right now, we would be seeing banners all over the place, "Buy Singapore goods and services", and Government will be taking the lead in the process. Of course, we can do this to a far less extent than the Japanese can do. But to do nothing is also wrong. So I urge the Government to take my point seriously. Now a comment on the Jurong Town Corporation (JTC). Why is it that for 1985 the provision of $111 million was largely not spent, and only $19.3 million was spent? Why is it there is a provision in 1986 of $117 million? What is the JTC going to do with this money in 1986 when there is so much excess capacity of factories and of warehouses? Further, is the JTC considering a further reduction in factory rentals? I am told through the grapevine that about 900 factories are in arrears of their rentals to JTC. If this is so, then it portends trouble ahead unless we do something about it. On the Economic Development Board, I notice an increased provision, from $17.8 million to $20.8 million for this financial year. Is this enough? Because there are two additional burdens that the EDB has to bear from this year onwards: (a) the Small Enterprises Bureau; and (b) the promotion of companies that are service-oriented. So I foresee a much greater workload.”
“Government could consciously encourage the purchase of domestic goods and services through the various Government departments and statutory boards. We had a recent exampleof the HDB wanting to furnish its new offices. Practically all the tenders specified furniture which were to be imported. I asked the question, "Why can't Singapore carpenters do the job?" And the answer was, "They lack the technology." But I said, "It is quite simple technology. Why can't you show them exactly what you need? Ask them to produce some mock-ups and give them preferential treatment so that we can generate employment domestically." We have a lot of foreign contractors in Singapore. Contracts above $20 million each have over the past years gone to foreign contractors. And I am told that these contractors do not pay taxes in Singapore at all. They come to Singapore with financial packages virtually subsidized by their governments. Now, I know we benefit by the lower tenders but at the same time we should recognize a device called "dumping". What is dumping? If a country wanted to dump its goods and services abroad, what it typically does is to offer these goods and services at lower prices than their competitors. Then, having captured the market, they later will raise these prices, and then there is no way of escape. This is the practice of dumping. If we are operating in an entirely free market, it makes sense to do nothing about the situation. But if there is conscious dumping being done and problems of economies of scale and subsidies via government's financial arrangements for their contractors, then it is time that our Government does something in response. And when the time comes to promote the exports of our services and goods, we too should present a package to help our exporters.”
“So I urge the Acting Minister to look into the staffing requirements, especially in the Statistics Department. I mentioned GATT earlier. I saw that the provision of $738,000 for GATT for 1985 was not fully utilized; only $533,000 was spent, and that for the current financial year, only $596,000 is budgetted. I want to know the reason why. I want to know the extent of support that the Ministry is giving to GATT. I want to reiterate and re-emphasize the need for Singapore to take the lead in international fora on free trade and protectionism. We need to sponsor conferences located in Singapore. We may want to have some of these international agencies that are fighting for free trade, perhaps, to be located in Singapore or at least to have some of their branches located here in Singapore. Because we live by free trade, we ought to give all the support necessary to professionals and international agencies that are propagating the idea of free trade. Then, Sir, as I look at the input/output Table of our economy, here again there is a deficiency. The latest published Table is that for 1978. When one is trying to make policy decisions in 1986, it would not do to have to rely upon input/output coefficients which are eight years old. Furthermore, as I look at the Tables, I find that our economy is truly very open, in that so little of any expenditure is on local goods and services. Can we do something about it? Can we encourage the formation of a greater domestic economy so that we are then less vulnerable to external forces? We can see that, over the years, the proportion of external demand to domestic demand has been changing towards greater dependence upon external demand. Can we not encourage greater purchase of Singapore goods and services through Government?”
“At the moment we only have a survey of the service sector every two years. We need to have annual surveys done. Then we need to de-seasonalize our data. This is quite a complicated procedure and requires a lot of expertise; it requires a team put on the job, and to do it properly. We lack data on flow of funds. We need to know how funds are utilized in our economy, efficiently or inefficiently, and the relationship between various sectors in the financial network. We need data on sectoral accounts and the relationship between sectors; for example, the relationship between the hotel sector and the corporate sector, and how the external sector impinges upon domestic sectors. We need to have national income accounts on the income side. I understand that while these may be available, they have not been published for certain reasons. We need to know certain components, like disposable income, if we want to make a proper analysis of the impact, say, of tax changes and other policy changes upon the economy of Singapore. These data are vital and necessary. We need to have data on personal savings, on marginal propensities to import, marginal propensities to save. We need to know what a multiplier looks like for an economy like ours. Right now, we only have guesstimates. We need to have balance of payments data, at least on a quarterly basis. If they are available, I have not seen them in a published form. We need to have public sector accounts, integrated with Government accounts, to show what the impact of the public sector is from year to year. Sir, these needs are quite pressing and, in addition to this, we have the need to generate an econometric model and that takes additional manpower.”
“And to the credit of our workers, they have responded remarkably well, and we have got to ensure that industrial peace continues. But that can only happen if our trade unions continue to be constructive. Fifthly, Sir, the risk premium is also affected by comparative tax rates because in the ultimate analysis investors are interested in after-tax returns. That is why we had the recent tax revisions, in both income and corporate taxes. Government is trying to make after-tax returns more attractive to foreign investors. I hope these considerations would help our workers to understand the need for wage restraint, so that if they should happen to be working in a company that is showing profits at this time of recession, they should not be greedy and try to grab as much of those profits as possible because the idea is that we should allow companies to generate rates of return which are favourable compared to alternative investments elsewhere. If we fail to heed this all-important lesson, then I think our future may well be jeopardized. Sir, may I now move on to the question of statistics, that we need to do better forecasting, better monitoring of what is happening in our economy. First of all, may I express my appreciation for the improvement that I have seen, especially over the last 5 or 10 years, in the quality and in the range of statistics that have been published. Having said this, as I look at the manpower provisions for the Statistics Department, I find that there are only nine senior staff (statistical staff) that are handling national accounts, only 10 senior staff dealing with economic statistics, and only seven senior staff dealing with coordination and demography. Sir, our need for additional data is very pressing, particularly in the service sector.”
“Sir, we are currently discussing in the National Wages Council and in the National Trades Union Congress the question of wage restraint for our workers in Singapore. This is a painful subject. This is not something which anybody likes to talk about and is something which our workers have to bear. But I would like to make a couple of points here that might aid the discussion. One of the many principles enunciated by the Economic Committee's Report is that foreign investors would only come to Singapore if they find the rate of return here is greater than they find elsewhere. How much greater, it depends on the risk premia. What are the risks involved? Firstly, any investors, whether foreign or local, have to contend with market risk. After setting up the factory, they have got to market their produce, they have got to market their services, and if the market demand turns against them, then of course it would be a failure. Secondly, there is the risk of exchange rate changing against them, and that often happens in investments in developing countries. And exchange rate changes are something which is really quite beyond the control of governments. Thirdly, there is the question of whether political stability will continue. One finds that in countries where there is greater political instability, the risk premium demanded by investors is understandably greater. Fourthly, there is the risk premium that is paid for the possibility of industrial strife. That is why, Sir, in Singapore over the last 20 or 25 years, we have emphasized tripartism, a climate of cooperation between Government, employers and employees. Getting our workers to realize that a climate of industrial peace is necessary in order to attract foreign investors into Singapore.”
“I might, Sir, with your indulgence. But I will not.”
“Furthermore, protectionism is a double-edged sword. If a country like Malaysia becomes protectionistic, this would encourage retaliation by other countries. I am not advocating that we should start retaliating. But we should look at the trade figures. I read in today's Straits Times that we are the No. 2 export market of Malaysia. I referred to the 1985 trade figures for Singapore, and I find that we imported $8.3 billion from Malaysia last year and exported only $7.8 billion to Malaysia. In other words, there was a trade surplus in their favour of $500 million. As I said, I am not advocating protectionism in retaliation against Malaysia, but I believe that our neighbours should wake up and realize that we are not going to take things lying down. Unfortunately, Sir, the foreign press and others have often accused Singapore of being aloof towards ASEAN, of holding back in terms of regional cooperation. But in the last few years, we have seen policy after policy acting to the detriment of ASEAN cooperation. My colleague, the Member for Alexandra, has drawn attention to some of these policies. Therefore, I would appeal to our ASEAN neighbours that instead of going the route of protectionism, why do we not go forward towards greater economic cooperation and all of us can benefit as a result. And not only that, we need to make a common stand together against the developed countries to show that we are sincere about advocating free trade in the world economy to our mutual benefit. Sir, if I may move on to another subject since I have seven amendments on this particular ministry. The Chairman: You are not going to take 70 minutes, are you?”
“Sir, first of all, may I express my support for the sentiments expressed by the Member for Alexandra, especially in regard to the issue of protectionism by our neighbours. Sir, I think it behoves developing countries like Singapore, Malaysia, Indonesia, Philippines and Thailand to support the free trade principles enunciated by GATT, the General Agreement on Trade and Tariffs. We are in an era when protectionism is on the rise, particularly in the developed countries, and if developing countries want to be taken seriously by the developed countries then they ought to work together to prevent protectionism from occurring and increasing. If neighbouring countries like Malaysia were to take steps which are contrary to the GATT spirit and, even worse, contrary to the ASEAN spirit, then we shall surely lose the larger battle against protectionism by the developed countries. Sir, let us not forget that protectionism is, first of all, a very short-sighted policy. It can give any country that is imposing the protectionist policy only very short-term gains and at very high cost because eventually the industries that are fostered through tariffs and quotas are very inefficient, very small scale in nature and have little or no export potential. Ultimately, the ones who are going to be hurt most are the people of the country itself that has introduced protectionism. In fact, big countries with larger domestic markets have found in the course of time that protectionism is no route to prosperity, and surely the lessons of the Great Depression should have been driven home to many countries in the world that it is a zero sum game. If all countries in the world were to play this game, then we are going to drag everybody down into another great depression.”
“Would the Acting Minister agree with me that this question under consideration is becoming more critical as HDB is phasing out rental flats? In trying to encourage more people to purchase their own flats, if parents do not have sufficient CPF, then it will be a great help to them if part of their children's CPF could be used for this purpose.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, will the Acting Minister agree with me that in a recession it is the duty of Government to analyse all the causes behind the recession and to suggest remedial measures? And one of the first things to look at will be the state of the hotel industry. And if the pricing is wrong, the distribution of rooms is wrong according to the star categories, then something should be done about it; perhaps not directly but by informing the hotel sector about it and by preventing further foolishness in future. BG Lee Hsien Loong: Mr Speaker, Sir, we either believe in the invisible hand or we believe in a command economy. If we believe in the invisible hand, then it is the Government's duty to make information available on prices, on occupancy rates, on trends, and it is up to entrepreneurs to decide whether on that basis they want to venture their money. I have had it said to me by a hotel entrepreneur who built a hotel about five years ago, on the strength of the Government's projections of tourist arrivals, "That is all the Government's fault. You said the tourists would come. Now the tourists have not come. I have an empty hotel. So what are you going to do about it?" Well, the answer is, the Government cannot do anything about it. Whatever data we provide, where they are factual, you can take it that we have tried our best to get it right; and where there are projections we have tried our best to look into a cloudy crystal ball. That is all that the Government can assure.”
“Does the Minister of State have any idea what is the occupancy rate below which hotels are not viable?”
“Does the Minister of State foresee the closure of some of these hotels because of lower occupancy rates?”
“Does the Minister of State agree with me that perhaps we have built too many four and five star hotels, and if we are going to promote tourism in the places where people do not have too much money, then we have to provide lower grade hotels?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, does the STPB monitor the prices of food and drinks in hotels?”
“Sir, will the Acting Minister promise to release all data that are required by academic economists and others who wish to analyze the state of the Singapore economy? BG Lee Hsien Loong: Mr Speaker, Sir, all data which can be released without detriment to the public interest will be released.”
“I would not be surprised if many of these cars end up in accidents. Sir, these statistics are statistics of shame for the whole of Singapore, and the whole process began with the Abortion Act of 1969. Greater impetus was given to abortion by the Abortion Act of 1974 because in 1975 the statistics on abortion went up by 79% in one year as a result of the liberalization of the Abortion Act, 1974. There were three key provisions of the Act of 1969 which were relaxed in 1974. Firstly, the Pregnancy Termination Board was abolished. Hitherto, a woman had to appeal to this Board in order to get an abortion. Secondly, the maximum period of gestation was extended from 16 weeks to 24 weeks. Thirdly, the specific age of consent of 18 years old for unmarried women was removed. Sir, it is time to tighten legislation on abortion.”
“It is not a question of people being unable to afford to have these children. In fact, the biggest group of women who had abortions involved those earning between $800 per month and $1,499 per month. 46% of the cases were in this income group. If one were to study the detailed reasons given by the women for having an abortion, we find the following reasons given: Those who felt they have completed their family size,36%; Unmarried mothers, 27%; Too close to the last confinement, 15%; Not ready to start a family, 12%; Unable to afford the child, only 5%; Failed contraception, 1.6%; and Medical reasons, 1.5%. From all these reasons and relavant percentages, one can see that the original rationale for the Abortion Act is completely wrong. Further, Sir, if one were to look at the distribution between abortions undertaken privately, that means by private doctors and clinics, and those in Government hospitals, we find that in 1985, 69% or 16,177 cases were undertaken in private clinics. I am told that the average cost for having a private abortion is somewhere between $200 and $500 whereas in the Government hospital the charge is $5. From this, one can see that the private clinics make somewhere between $3.2 million and $8.1 million out of abortions. There were some 57 clinics involving 86 doctors. The average earnings per clinic range from $56,000 to $142,000 and the average earnings per doctor range from $37,200 to $95,350. The top three clinics earned together about $1.5 million between them in 1985. The top three doctors earned about $1.3 million between them. It is no wonder that one hears about some of the doctors going about in Mercedes 280 cars. This is blood money which is used for these luxurious Mercedes cars.”
“Other Members have pointed out that people may become too liberal in the use of Medisave funds by placing their relatives and perhaps themselves in wards that are rather too expensive for them simply because as I said, the funds are available, so that over the longer term they may have insufficient funds for their use. The third issue is the one which I have raised year after year and, that is, the question of abortion. In 1985, the figure went up to 23,512. This means one abortion for every two live births. Of these cases, repeat abortions constituted 39%, or nearly 40%. 9,120 cases were repeat abortions. Sir, quite clearly, abortion is now being used widely as a means of contraception. Further, about 26.6% of all the cases of abortion involved unmarried mothers. This points to increasing immorality that the abortion law has brought about. Some two-thirds of the abortions involved women below the age of 29 years. In other words, two-thirds of the abortion cases involved the most fertile of our women. This has serious consequences because later when these women would like to have children, they find themselves infertile because, as doctors can point out, one of the side consequences of abortion is infertility. Furthermore, Sir, when one looks at the educational level of the women who have abortions we find that nearly 47% involved those with 'O' level and above education. On the one hand, we have the Government decrying the fact that our better educated women are not reproducing themselves sufficiently and, on the other, we have the Abortion Law which allows these women to have abortions so liberally. In terms of income level, so far as the married women who had abortions are concerned, 75% of them had incomes above $800 per month.”
“Sir, I filed two amendments in order to speak on three issues. The first one concerns a complaint by some nurses whom I met last year at a conference on human resource development organized by the National Productivity Board. These nurses told me that they were attending this conference without being given any leave by the authorities concerned. They had to use their vacation leave and, secondly, that they had to pay their own expenses. So I wrote to the Minister for Health about this, I think the issue should be made known so that nurses, in future, would know what they can expect on it. The second point that I wish to speak about concerns Medisave. First of all, about the limit of $15,000 that has been set. I feel that although over the longer term this may be a desirable target to aim at, but for the next two or three years, because of the recession, this is an unrealistic figure and that, by having this figure of $15,000, we are freezing funds unnecessarily, especially for those people who need extra funds to finance their housing in view of the 15% CPF cut. In connection with Medisave too, I view with some alarm the recent extension of the use of this fund to private hospitals and for the use by relatives or next-of- kin. I am afraid, Sir, that if insufficient controls are placed upon the use of Medisave, then in time to come, we may end up with the problem that hospitals and medical services in other countries, such as the US, have encountered, namely, escalating medical costs simply because the money is there. In America, it is because of health insurance being available, whereas here we have Medisave.”
“Does the Hon. Minister of State not agree with me that we should be concerned about the cost-effectiveness of our offices abroad, because he mentioned the figure of new export sales of $76 million? I did a little calculation and found that, if our exporters make 5% on that, it would only be about $3 1/2 million. But if we spent much more than that, in terms of the overseas offices, then obviously we are not being cost-effective. Dr Lee Boon Yang: Mr Speaker, Sir, trade promotion and market development takes time to achieve the full results. As I have indicated, the immediate sale from these marketing efforts was $76 million but there are another $320 million worth of exports sale in the pipeline, and our local exporters will have to continue to pursue these opportunities which have been made available through the TDB's overseas offices. I agree entirely with the Member for Whampoa that we must not forget cost-effectiveness in promoting our exports, and I can assure the Member that TDB will keep on emphasizing cost-effectiveness in its marketing and promotional efforts.”
“Two supplementary questions, Mr Speaker, Sir. What was the expenditure last year on the 30 or so overseas offices of the Trade Development Board? The second question is: of the 69 fairs and missions, how many were abroad and how many were in Singapore?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, is it not the greater aim to prevent the dependence upon the people at large, through taxation or increased taxation, to bear the cost of medical bills? But if the children of an elderly person have adequate Medisave funds and they are still relatively young and have future earnings to come and future balances to build up in their Medisave accounts, surely the Minister of State should consider favourably this particular request. And surely also he should consider the fact that while many old people under the present scheme will have adequate money in their Medisave accounts to finance the last few months of their lives here on earth, but at the same time they will be miserable and without food for the last few years of their lives.”
“Does not the Minister of State agree with me that if the children of an elderly person have adequate or more than adequate funds in their Medisave and are willing to use those funds for this elderly person, and furthermore they are ready to give a written undertaking to that effect, then should he not therefore allow the elderly person to withdraw his or her own Medisave funds?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, would the Hon. Senior Parliamentary Secretary answer my question specifically, namely, that if an existing hawker centre is to be demolished, provision should be made to allow for another hawker centre to be established?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, would he agree with me that relocation will cause considerable hardship to hawkers who have to be dispersed, relocated in different locations far away from their homes when they already have a comfortable means of livelihood close by so that, when their existing stalls are demolished, it would be in their interest to have an alternative source of livelihood close by their homes?”