Bernard Chen
Singapore
“The increase in health expenditure is as inevitable as the sun rises. The major part of this expenditure is on manpower. Doctors and nurses and other operational staff have to be paid at market level wages. They have to compete with other demands for the scarce labour resources.”
“Question No. 12, Sir. Assoc. Prof. Ho Peng Kee (for the Minister for Home Affairs): Sir, investigations into the case are still in progress. When investigations are completed, a Coroner's Inquiry will be held during which the full facts of the case will be presented.”
“Question No. 16, Sir. Assoc. Prof. Ho Peng Kee (for the Minister for Home Affairs): Mr Speaker, Sir, Police is investigating the incident which occurred outside the Kallang Theatre, not at the Singapore Recreation Club, as stated in the Question. Investigations are in progress.”
“If you can license dogs, what is the difference for licensing cats? Dr John Chen Seow Phun: If something is not necessary, why do you want to create that machinery and system, just to do something which some people want. SINGLE SESSION SECONDARY SCHOOLS (Adjustment to reporting time) 5.”
“Although cat is not my problem, I am asking on behalf of somebody else. If the Minister of State is in agreement that we should control cats, why do you not license them so that at least we do not shoot the wrong cats, to begin with, and whoever is the owner will have a responsibility in making sure that the cat does not stray around, but…”
“I agree with the Minister on the need to retain flexibility. I think we should leave it to the patient. But can the Minister confirm that the rates that the patients are paying to the specialists are, in fact, market rates so that there is no subsidy by the Government on all these consultations and there is no impact on the cost efficienc…”
The complete record
Every one of 363 lines we hold for Bernard Chen, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 3 of 8.
“Mr Speaker, Sir, based on what Mr Ling said just now in his letter to President Ramos, is he saying that the SDP and he are prepared to sacrifice principles, facts and instead resort to political statements to placate a third party outside the country? And is his party prepared to take the same step again, in future cases, where you just ignore the facts, principles and play politics?”
“I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head K of the Main Estimates be reduced by $10 in respect of Code KA 1500. The issue of facilitating national servicemen to travel abroad to pursue their business interest has been raised in every Defence Budget debate in the past several years. With the Government's drive in regionalisation, there is now a further need to relax restrictions on national servicemen's travels. The nature of these overseas trips has also changed over the years. National servicemen will now find that they will have to spend longer periods of time abroad as investments are being realised into actual operations. The frequency of travel will also increase with the inclusion of more countries and markets. This will have an impact on annual in-camp training schedules. Sometimes, the need to travel to troubleshoot or to clinch new businesses may mean that the national servicemen may not be able to alert the units too far in advance of their travel plans. The Ministry, as it has done in the past, should look at ways and means of helping these national servicemen to earn their living and, at the same time, fulfil their national service obligations, in particular, increasing flexibility would be needed to tackle the new situations that the national servicemen will find themselves in. The key problem at hand is how a large bureaucracy, like the SAF, can respond readily to individual needs and circumstances.”
“I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the total sum to be allocated for Head K of the Main Estimates be reduced by $100. Last year, in this House, when we debated on the Ministry of Defence budget, we touched on the importance of maintaining good bilateral relations with our neighbours, not only in terms of foreign relations but also in matters of defence. Since then I am pleased to note that these relations have continued to improve. This has been further enhanced by the new Defence Minister's visit to ASEAN and Australia last year. Efforts to secure more training areas, including joint training, are also being stepped up. This will help to relieve the strain on the increasingly limited training areas that we have in Singapore. It will be useful for the Minister to brief the House on the state of bilateral relations between us and ASEAN as well as other countries with which we have defence relations. In particular, I would also like to know what is the progress of the joint production of certain defence equipment as expressed in the MOU signed between Malaysia and Singapore last year.”
“I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The sum of $115,404,600 for Head O ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. The sum of $39,137,800 for Head O ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. Head Q -”
“How this regional arrangement can work to the benefit of the respective members and yet promote free trade for the whole world is one key area where the United Nations can exercise its role as a world policeman that it is often trying to do in the political sphere. We will be interested to hear the Minister's comments. On regionalisation, the Government has put in a lot of emphasis on the drive to regionalisation to create a second wing to our economy. Our own Prime Minister has given his personal support by making extensive trips to the region. In the past year, the Prime Minister has been to many countries, including Vietnam, India, Myanmar as well as ASEAN. I would like to know how the Prime Minister's visits are supported by our missions in these countries, especially in the area of follow-up required to realise the objectives and programmes agreed between our Prime Minister and the leaders of these countries whom he met during the visits. Last year, we discussed about the role that Government organisations such as the EDB, TDB and our foreign missions can play in regionalisation. Could we be informed of the progress made so far?”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the total sum to be allocated for Head O of the Main Estimates be reduced by $100. Sir, the ending of the cold war several years ago with the consequential de-escalation of confrontation between the super powers raised the hope for world peace to be realised for the balance of this century. There was euphoria all round boosted by most countries' preoccupation now with getting on with the economic and social development programmes. The reality, however, produces quite a different picture. Global tensions have given way to regional conflicts by civil wars waged in countries in several continents. With the super powers on the side lines, the United Nations has been increasingly called upon to send peace keeping missions, especially to the countries where ethnic conflicts have gotten out of control. In this year, which happens to be the 50th anniversary of the United Nations, it will be timely for us to review its role in the post cold war era and how Singapore's membership in this organisation can remain relevant. We belong to the category of small countries. There have been observations that the United Nations is dominated by the big countries which have considerable influence over the way in which the organisation operates. The question before us is whether Singapore, with its limited influence, can derive maximum benefit from its membership in the UN. We have to look at both political and economic considerations. The sovereignty and security of small countries are crucial to our survival. Recent events have shown that the UN has a critical role to play. The issue is how effective this is being done. On the economic front, there is an increasing number of regional trading blocs being established.”
“The only way we can uphold the efficiency of the civil service is to make sure that the best are chosen to run it. Passengers should be discarded as they not only give the service a bad name, but also affect those who work hard to earn their keeps. In this way, top officers in the public sector can justify their treatment on par with the best in the private sector. I am in perfect tune with the Prime Minister in his impassionate plea to have the best to run the Cabinet and the civil service. But we have to convince the public that we do have the best when we pay them, and that the not-so-best, or the bad ones, are in fact removed from the service. Only then can we drive home the message that we run the best civil service and the best Cabinet in the world.”
“The public sector is more protected in this regard and I think the rice bowl is probably more metallic. Firing someone in the private sector is much easier than the public sector. Committees of inquiry have to be convened and they have to establish the cause for dismissal which may take months and, eventually, the cases may fizzle out. I would think that if we were to accord the same remuneration to the senior civil servants and Ministers, we will have to equalise the treatment in all respects. This should include a performance evaluation system that will reward the best performers. I am glad that the Prime Minister has commented that the civil service is now undergoing some changes and that Personnel Boards are being convened to look after the respective services. A very important part of the job of these Boards would be to assess who are the good performers and who are not the performers and make the promotion and revision of salary decisions accordingly. We have to ensure that the ablest people are put to run the Government and the civil service which means that those who do not measure up should be removed. In a speech to the civil servants at the Victoria Theatre on 26th October 1965, the then Prime Minister, Mr Lee, stressed the need to improve the efficiency of the civil service. He made the point that only the good performers should be rewarded with promotions. Automatic promotions were out and officers who thought they could get to the top without working for it, as he put it, should stop dreaming and get to work. It has been 30 years now and I think these admonitions still hold true. One may wonder how come nothing much was done in the last 30 years to address this issue. Perhaps, we should accelerate the process.”
“While we can accept that yardsticks for measuring performance in the public sector may not be as specific as those in the private sector, I believe that we should at least try to have an evaluation system that approximates the private sector practice as far as possible. As an example, when the salaries of certain grades are revised on a service wide basis, all officers in that grade enjoy the revision. In other words, individual performance is not taken into account. It is only during promotion exercises that the officer's performance becomes relevant. We should have a performance evaluation system that can take into account his performance for the year. If the officer's performance is outstanding, he should get more than average increase. Conversely, if he performs badly, he should take a pay cut. If he really makes a mess of it, he should be fired. This may sound extreme. But if we were to equate apples with apples, we should also match conditions in the public sector to those in the private sector. In the private sector, individual performance is set according to targets laid down by the board and this is the basis for assessing pay increases. This direct accountability puts considerable stress on those occupying senior positions. I can assure the House that this stress can be very substantial. Members will know that I sell cars in my part-time job. My managers have begun to call me COE, instead of CEO, especially on the 15th of each month when the COE prices are about to come up. This stress makes the officer's career a very dangerous one. The fear of not achieving budgeted targets and, worse, losing his job more often than not spurs him to work harder and smarter and that is what he is paid for.”
“More often than not, he may get the marching orders and has to look for another job. Unlike the public sector, there are very much less opportunities for transfer within the corporation. There is no safe haven for those who do not perform to be transferred to places where they cannot do any harm. Secondly, the Chief Executive's remuneration package is often tied to the profitability of the corporation. In good times, he gets more. In bad times, he gets paid considerably less. This happens even when the corporation's decline in profits has nothing to do with him but takes place because of external factors completely outside his control. World recession is no excuse in having lower turnovers. Similarly, losses in investments in countries with wars are not to be blamed for business failures. The Chief Executive's remuneration, therefore, can fluctuate substantially as there are not that many corporations which can sustain their profitability over a long stretch of time. One can probably say that the top three earners in one year will not be the same in the following year. This is an important consideration. If we were to peg the civil service to the best in the private sector in any given year, we are in fact assuming that there are no downsides, which is not the real situation in the private sector as incomes of individuals fluctuate according to their fortunes. The question before us therefore is if senior civil servants and Ministers are to be paid the same remuneration as the best in the private sector, should they also not be subjected to the same accountability?”
“Sir, before I start, I want to dissociate myself from the comments of the previous Member. Obviously, he does not know what a CEO's job is and I do not think he knows what the Minister does either. I think I have the fortune of being in all three places. I can tell him that what the Prime Minister said about getting the best people is the first priority. Mr Speaker, Sir, the business of Government, I think we all know, is getting very complex. With rapid economic and social development over the last two decades, we have covered all the easy things. We have done everything that we could do easily. Since about five years ago, we are encountering more and more difficulties, whether it is traffic control, COEs, rising health cost, or creating a second wing to get export markets and overseas investment opportunities. Just as in private corporations which need the best to manage them in times of difficulties, Singapore needs to be manned by the best Ministers and the civil servants we can get. There is no quarrel that there is a sound argument for Government's proposal to try to match the pay in the public sector to the comparable counterparts in the private sector because they are drawing from the same pool. We cannot fault the argument that running Singapore is any different from managing a large business enterprise. We need the best in both. There is, however, one substantial difference that needs to be taken into account. In the private sector, accountability is direct. The Chief Executive's performance is measured directly by the level of profits he can achieve. Should profits decline or, worse, should losses be incurred, he can get the sack. He shoulders total responsibility for the corporation. Sometimes, tolerant directors may give him some time to redeem himself.”
“My observation during these trips is that we cannot really separate the economic and the political programmes. They are closely linked in many aspects. A good understanding between the political leaders will facilitate the drive for trade and investment. In some countries, in fact, it is essential that we develop a political consensus first before we can facilitate the flow of trade and investments. The Prime Minister and Senior Minister have been working very hard in their travels to establish and consolidate these political linkages. At the operating level, the various economic agencies, such as the EDB and TDB, have also been actively providing the support to both the political leaders and businessmen in the mission in their drive for regionalisation. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs, with the Ambassadors and missions in these countries, is also playing a key role in not only providing the support to build the political bridges, but also together with the economic agencies help the businessmen to realise their trade and investment objectives. In many of these missions and travels to the countries, inevitably because of the shortage of time and the number of agencies involved in helping out to chart the programmes, in arranging to meet the relevant people and so on, a greater amount of coordination would be useful. Would the Minister comment on the on-going cooperation between his Ministry and the various economic agencies and whether such cooperation has been well received by the businessmen themselves and the host countries where they operate?”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the total sum to be allocated for Head O of the Main Estimates be reduced by $100. Sir, in the past two years, the Government has actively promoted the concept of regionalisation to create a second wing to the Singapore economy. Judged by the numerous reports in the newspapers, it appears that most of the efforts have been directed at China and, early this year, India. Some foreign presses have related this emphasis to the ethnic background of Singapore and concluded that it is natural for Chinese businessmen to look to China and the same goes for Singapore Indian businessmen when they look to India. As a businessman myself, I would say that a businessman would normally go to places where he can get good returns for his investments. If these moves can be facilitated by the ease in communication through common languages, they are pluses that should not be ignored. A lesser known fact is that Singapore companies and businessmen have in fact continued to invest in the traditional areas where businesses have been going on for years, for example, Singapore is amongst the prominent investor in the ASEAN countries, Malaysia, Indonesia and even Thailand. In order to dispel the misconception that may be harboured by those in our neighbouring countries, it will be useful for the Minister to clarify our Government's position on regionalisation and restate the Government's objectives in terms of priorities and emphasis. One would imagine that the Government can facilitate but does not decide where the investments go. Ultimately, investments must go to places where they yield the maximum returns. On another subject, as a businessman, I have participated in some of the business missions to China, India and just lately Vietnam.”
“Sir, I withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.”
“Since the five areas of Total Defence are closely linked, the Minister may also wish to enlighten the House on the progress that has been made to the implementation of the Total Defence policy. I know that the Minister will be tempted to ask the other Ministers to answer the other four polices, but I submit that since the Minister for Defence is in overall charge of Total Defence, the Minister may find it more convenient to do on behalf of his colleagues.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the total sum to be allocated for Head K of the Main Estimates be reduced by $100. Sir, in the past several years, the security situation in the world, and in particular in this region, has undergone dramatic changes. While the threat of nuclear wars has abated somewhat, the same cannot be said of the conventional conflicts which have affected many countries in Europe and Africa. A more disturbing trend is that many of these conflicts arose as a result of internal problems relating to ethnic and cultural backgrounds of the people rather than from external sources. We are more blessed in nature where rapid economic development in most countries in the Pacific Rim has brought about prosperity and improved well-being to the people. There is less opportunity for conflicts as everyone is preoccupied with improving the standard of living. To a large extent, many people would hold the view that wars are no longer imminent and we will reduce the emphasis we have placed so far on defence. In Singapore, we have always taken the position that it is far better to be prepared than to be caught unaware no matter how remote the possibility of conflicts that may arise, given the multi-racial and cultural nature of our society. We have for some years now subscribed to the concept of Total Defence encompassing Military, Civil, Economic, Social and Psychological Defence. Each of these aspects is relevant to the particular structure of our society. Each of these policies needs to be reviewed and varied where necessary so that they may remain relevant to our security needs. It would be useful for the Minister to brief the House on the changes that have been brought about in the past year to maintain our military capability.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the Bill provides considerable powers to the CDF and also to the Senior Disciplinary Committee to summarily try and punish relatively senior officers. When senior officers are tried by their peers, there could be opportunities for victimisation, especially when it relates to very senior officers. I wonder whether the Minister can enlighten the House as to whether there are any safeguards against such victimisation. For example, whether the offender has other recourses if he refuses to be tried by the CDF or, in the case of the Senior Disciplinary Committee, whether outside members, apart from military personnel, can be included in the Committee. I am not saying that this is happening but there may be cases where some people may be tempted to do so.”
“The best of policies will fall by the wayside if the people do not see the need and therefore refuse to accept them as necessary and good for them and for the country.”
“I have full respect for all the young Ministers' ability to handle their Ministries without much difficulties. But they will have to work much harder than their predecessors who have more years behind them to explain to the people their Ministries' policies, convince them of the need and carry them through implementation. If, in the implementation of major policies, the Ministers can manage to minimise the confusion and the numerous interpretations these policies generate, then they would have succeeded to carry the people with them. To illustrate this point, I could remember when I was working in the Economic Planning Unit in the Ministry of Finance in 1974, we had to prepare the first Annual Economic Survey to accompany the Budget Statement to be delivered by the late Minister for Finance. We came up with a 120-page document, very detailed in economic explanation, some will call them jargon, and sent it to the Prime Minister for approval. Back came the reply the next day, too long. The second draft went in at 80 pages. The Prime Minister sent the draft without looking at it. "Too long," he said. The third draft was reduced to 60 pages. The Prime Minister sent the draft back and said, "Give you one last chance to shape it up", three days before the Budget Statement. He said we should write it so that even an "A" level student can understand it, because that is what the Survey is for. If the majority of the people do not understand what it is all about, the whole exercise would have been futile. The final survey went in. It was published and was reduced to 35 pages in simple layman's language. I have never forgotten the Prime Minister's advice to this day. Our Ministers can take some lessons in this regard.”
“Others took the opportunity to increase prices in multiples above the 3% GST which has yet to be implemented. Confusion and rumours are symptoms indicating that the people may not have understood fully the implications of the policies. They may also point to deficiencies of policy implementation. For example, the limited ALS, which is $2, or the whole day ALS, which is $3. Would it not have been easier to have a flat rate for the whole day, rather than wondering at what time we go into the CBD and how much we have got to pay. We can conclude that more explanation is necessary. The question is how do we go about doing it. As Dr Henry Kissinger said at the recent forum, the American people have become a nation of viewers rather than readers. The mass media has turned decidedly to visual means via the television and the radio. I am afraid Singaporeans are going the same way. One can in fact say that Singaporeans do not read much these days. We would therefore have to reorientate our approach to the people through TV and radio, apart from going to the ground to meet them. The President of the United States has regular radio talk shows where he would even take questions from listeners. One interesting fact is that the Government Cabinet has also undergone a dramatic shift. In the present Cabinet, only two Ministers, the Prime Minister and the Senior Minister were appointed before 1980. By July this year, when Dr Yeo Ning Hong leaves the Cabinet, there will only be six Ministers appointed in the decade of the 1980s, and half of them were appointed after 1987. Four Ministers were appointed between 1991 and 1993, and two Acting Ministers were appointed at the beginning of this year.”
“We can go on citing more examples to illustrate how complex our problems have become and the increasing trade-offs that we have to accept in order to fulfil the long term objectives of our policies. If we look back to the 60s and 70s, the Government did not seem to have much difficulty in convincing the people that the tough policies were necessary. What was not obvious is that considerable ground work was done by the Ministers. Beginning with the Prime Minister, Ministers, down to the MPs, they explained the policies and carried the people along each step of the way. The job was not easy as the people's political awareness was not as keen as today. One advantage was that the people had faith in the Government's ability to go through with the policies for the benefit of Singapore. The situation today is vastly different. We are no longer in a "life and death" situation. In fact, we are doing rather well. Our people are becoming more discerning in their political outlook. Worse, many of them do not want to pay the price. They want to participate and do not want to blindly follow the Government. In other words, it is going to be a harder job to convince them of the need of increasingly complex policies for which they have to pay a price. In the recent past, several major policies have come to the fore. The proposed GST system, basic health care, COE and even Telecom share flotation have generated much heat, if not confusion. Despite the elaborate explanation in the mass media and seminars held to explain the policies, the people do not seem to be enlightened. I heard of one old man approaching a bank with a bag of money and he told the bank officer that he wanted to buy the A, B, C and D Telecom shares!”
“But go out we must, if we are to survive in this competitive world. Another manifestation of the increasing complexity of policy is our car ownership restraint measures. We all agree that there is a limit to which we can allow the car population to grow. We do not want to wind up like Bangkok. Hence, we have high car taxes and exorbitant COEs. Despite the vast sums of money spent on roads, and the investment in MRT and the Electronic Road Pricing Programme, we are likely to see traffic congestion for a long time to come. What is the answer? Cheaper cars and more congestion or more expensive cars and smoother traffic. We can only choose one option and in each option, there is a heavy price to pay. A third example is health costs. Our population is ageing. Look around the Chamber and you will find that many of the MPs are more than half-way through their lives. Some of us are more than three-quarters. We are going to get sick more often. Our illnesses will become more serious as our bodies experience more wear and tear. There is no limit to the level of health care that we can reach. The only constraint is our ability to pay. The problem is that this ability to pay varies among Singaporeans. Subsidies just mean that someone who is more well off pay for those who are not. There comes a time when everyone's pockets will be squeezed when Government has to increase taxes to finance these subsidies. Hence, the Government has said that those who can afford should as far as possible pay for their own medical care. For Singaporeans who are unfortunate enough not to be able to pay, the Government will look after them. Again, there is a substantial trade-off here. There can never be free medical care without someone else paying for it.”
“The Government of the day was able to carry the people through by explaining the imperatives. When our people's stomachs are not full, they are less inclined to argue the merits of measures as long as they were satisfied that all would come good in the end. The Government was also able to convince the people by its track record that it meant what it said. The results speak for themselves. Singapore stands out in the region as a place that good things can happen and difficult problems can be solved. As we enter the 90s, the journey towards sustained growth has become more arduous. Increasingly, policies are becoming more complicated. Trade-offs have become more frequent. We have to pay a price for whatever we want to do. Worse, the price is becoming heavier. Take the example of regionalisation. We had spent the better part of the last two decades promoting investments at home and operate overseas businesses from our home base in Singapore. However, there comes a point of saturation and we are all being forced to venture abroad to find out not only markets but also employment opportunities. Regionalisation does not only mean that we move out of Singapore. It means that we have to work outside of Singapore to create an external wing. It requires a change of life styles and habits that we are not used to in the past. This attitudinal change is difficult to achieve, given the relative good times that we had in the past in Singapore. The increasing risks of working abroad also mean that failure rates will be high and Singaporeans are not used to accepting failures. They in fact frown on them. Those of us who work in companies with a stringent board of directors will attest to this fact. As a result, less people are willing to venture out.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I join my colleagues in expressing my thanks to the President for the Speech which he delivered on behalf of the Government at the Opening of the Second Session of this Parliament. It is of historical significance that it is the first speech made by a President elected by the people. Innumerable policies spanning a wide range of subjects and issues have been evolved and implemented in the past 29 years since the People's Action Party Government assumed power in 1965. In each Presidential Address, the respective Cabinet had presented policies and proposals for consideration of Parliament. Invariably, they have been successfully implemented. As a result of the targets achieved, Singapore has been able to record consistent economic growth which has led to sustained improvement in the standard of living of all Singaporeans. If we were to examine the evolution of these policies and measures over the years, we could discern changes in the types of policies as well as the style of presentation to the people. More important, we would be able to see how Singaporeans reacted to the changes. In the late 60s and 70s, many of the policies were of the "bread and butter" types. We were striving to provide the basic necessities in housing, education and health. We also spent considerable efforts to build up our defence capability in the midst of regional uncertainty and instability. To finance all these massive spending programmes, we pushed relentlessly for high economic growth, paying special attention to maintaining political stability and industrial peace and harmony. We were able to achieve most of our goals mainly because we had no other alternatives. It was a "do or die" situation.”
“Sir, with the Parliamentary Secretary's permission, I will arrange a meeting of some of his reservists and probably go into a detailed discussion with him. I think that will be very useful. Sir, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.”
“Sir, there have been frequent references in this House and outside to the deployment of reservists while they are in training and such references are made when they come back from their in-camp training every year. There have always been complaints that the reservists were unhappy that they were not doing what they were supposed to do. There are far-fetched stories that the head of a big manufacturing firm is in charge of a transport pool or a highly qualified system analyst is a clerk in the army base. These stories may be very far-fetched. But given the size of the SAF and the size of the reserve forces, there could be some truth although the extent of the truth can be stretched somewhat. We understand that the fit between training demand and the skills of the reservists themselves cannot always be matched. In fact, most often, probably they are not matched. But we have amongst our reservists some pretty highly skilled people with specialised skills which probably could be better used. And in their places some other reservists with lesser skills can be put instead. The Ministry has always assured us that they have done this from time to time. But I wonder whether, in trying to allay the fears of some of these reservists, there are actual examples that the Ministry can come up with to say that indeed people with high skills or skills which are relevant to some of the defence needs have, in fact, been put to good use so that when they go for their in-camp training they could go happily.”
“If such a balance cannot be struck, then the existing limit on defence expenditure will have to be breached. On the other hand, to maintain the limit on expenditures, the quality of the Armed Forces may suffer, unless productivity improvements can overcome the deficiencies. However, productivity improvements may not be able to make up for the lack of advanced weaponry and equipment. The Minister may care to comment on the changing security picture of the Asia-Pacific region and the Ministry's response to these changing times.”
“Several countries have expressed open interest in acquiring these equipment. And there have been unconfirmed reports that such purchases have in fact been made. The issue facing us in Singapore is what these procurements will do to the arms balance in the region. Up until the recent years when the United States was playing the role of the main arms supplier, there was apparently an understanding on parity of technology, so that no country in the region is encouraged to go one up on the other, which, in turn, would have led to an arms race. With the new suppliers, whose main aims are financial gains, this balance would not be of their concern and is very likely to be upset. Will there be a resurgence in the arms race, as each country tries to keep up with the others? The situation would be exacerbated by the absence of a balance of power in the region. With the United States seeming to concentrate on its domestic problems, the question is very much open as to who will fill in the role in the Asia-Pacific region. This will give rise to every country fending for itself, since there will be no dependable ally to rely on. My concern is how will Singapore react to this development and the possible resumption of the arms race. We have a limited budget in defence. I am happy to note that the Ministry has managed to keep within the spending limits all these years. Can this continue, if we have to spend more on military equipment? If we do not, will we be left behind? Events in the recent past have shown that to be effective, our Armed Forces must remain at the forefront of technology. Unfortunately, this does not come cheaply. It requires a delicate balance between operating and development expenditures in order to remain within the given budget.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the total sum to be allocated for Head K of the Main Estimates be reduced by $100. Sir, in the debate on the Ministry of Defence budget last year, I touched on the tumultuous events taking place in Europe and Asia which were altering the security arrangements of virtually every country in the world. Since then, the uncertainties in the world have changed very little. The political power struggle in the Russian Federation is still being intensively waged, even today. Ethnic strife in Europe has become worse. In our part of the world, the Americans have completed their pull-out from the Philippines. But the differences over the Spratly Islands remain. China appears to be concentrating on her economic development programmes while Japan is trying its best to overcome the prolonged recession. It would therefore appear to us that as far as the security front is concerned, the region is relatively safe. The external manifestation of a concentration of efforts on economic development is understandable, given the visibility of any economic programmes or measures. However, movements in security policies are often more covert, and by their very nature do not draw too much public attention. It is therefore easy for us to be lulled into a false sense of well-being. The reality can be quite different. I refer, in particular, to the arms sales which seem to be on the increase in the region. It is no secret that the Commonwealth of Independent States, led by Russia, have been promoting the sales of military equipment, ranging from fighter planes, war ships, small arms, and other sophisticated gadgets. Some of these equipment are very advanced in technology and sophistication. We all know that the best brains in the former Soviet Union were put in the military.”
“If we consider the NCMP in the last Parliament, there is actually only a net increase of two non-government MPs. The need for more non-government and non-opposition views still remains. The appointment of NMPs will therefore fill this gap as was originally intended. Some MPs expressed in the debate on the Bill in 1989 and 1990 their reservations on whether the NMPs could make effective contributions in this House. The two NMPs we have in the last Parliament had just about nine months in this Chamber before Parliament was dissolved for last year's General Elections. This period is surely too short for us to assess the NMPs' effectiveness. I would urge that we should give this new system a further try. It takes away nothing from the proceedings of this Parliament. Far more likely we shall get the benefits of additional views and comments which will help in formulating major Government policies. I would, therefore, lend my support to the motion of having NMPs in this Parliament. 1.45 pm”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, in his Second Reading speech on the Bill made on 29th November 1989, the Prime Minister, then First Deputy Prime Minister, clearly stated the intentions of the Bill and these are, to summarise, firstly, to offer Singaporeans more opportunities for political participation in keeping with his style of consensus government; secondly, to reach out for more alternative views which are non-government and non-opposition which may represent another probably sizeable cross-section of the people; thirdly, to tap those Singaporeans who for one reason or other would not or could not go through the election process and take on the full duties of elected MPs but who, nevertheless, could contribute their experience and points of views on major policy issues; and fourthly, to achieve these objectives with minimum disruption to the present parliamentary system. Subsequently in his Third Reading speech on 29th March 1990, the Prime Minister also elaborated further on the question of whether NMPs should be allowed to hold political office. In his view, the provision will provide future governments the flexibility to secure suitable people to perform specialised complex jobs. This Bill was considered in detail by the Select Committee and passed by Parliament in 1990. In considering the motion tabled before the House today, I think we should consider whether any changes in the past two years have affected the fundamental objectives of this Bill and therefore we need to take a different stand. I would submit that we should maintain the decision to have NMPs in this Parliament. The last General Elections in August last year saw the entry of three more Opposition MPs.”
“Sir, good political relations will go a long way to facilitate economic relations. I am sure our businessmen are anxious to know the level of Singapore's relations with both Vietnam and Laos. To my knowledge, we have yet any formal diplomatic relations with either. What then is the Ministry's plans towards this end? Sir, with Vietnam, Laos and eventually Cambodia opening up, the Indochina states will need help not only from the major powers but also friendly nations in this region. Unlike the major powers with massive foreign aid budgets, our foreign aid is comparatively humble. Singapore is well known for its excellent training facilities and good educational system. One way in which we can assist will obviously be manpower development. Singapore's MFA currently offers some ASEAN training fellowships to the neighbouring countries. Maybe MFA can eventually extend the ASEAN training fellowships to participants from Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia. The Minister has in fact just mentioned the possibility of extending Third Country Training Programmes to them. Not long ago, the United Nations Security Council passed an unprecedented motion for a 22,000 strong peacekeeping force in Cambodia. Our Indonesian and Malaysian neighbours will be participating in this peacekeeping effort. Thus far, we have been rather quiet in this effort. Sir, humanitarian reasons aside, the spin-off from such an effort is better trading relations for our business sector. Could the Minister brief this House on Singapore's role in the Cambodia peacekeeping efforts, if any? Sir, helping to re-integrate the Indochina states into the level of peaceful and developing nation is the best guarantee to ensure stability and peace in this region.”
“I thank the Minister for his reply and I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. Dr Ho Tat Kin (Toa Payoh GRC): Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head O be reduced by $10 in respect of Code OA 1500 of the Main Estimates. Sir, economically, the winds of pessimism is sweeping across the world. Every country in the world is bracing themselves for, at best, an economic slowdown, and, worse, a recession. Consequently, this has caused some countries to be inward looking, and commit themselves less with foreign relations. America is one example. The repercussion is a cut back of spending in foreign affairs. This is nothing surprising. What is surprising is that in a year of anticipated slower growth, we are spending more in foreign affairs, a hefty increase of 71.4%. Sir, ordinarily, in a period of slower growth, Government expenditures are used to expand the economy. I am, however, not sure how this expansion in the budget for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs will help in Singapore's external economic field. Perhaps the Minister could enlighten us on the need for the hefty increase in his Ministry's budget. Sir, I am especially interested to know what is MFA's agenda in Singapore's relation with the Indochina states. The business sector has targeted this part of Southeast Asia as buzzing with business opportunities. Since the Vietnamese invasion of Cambodia, Singapore has not have much political relations with any of the Indochina's states. Moreover, Singapore's relation with Vietnam can hardly be described as cordial. Now that the Vietnamese have withdrawn from Cambodia and self-determination for the latter is around the corner, the onus is on us to repair and better relationship with them.”
“Trading blocs are supposed to have benefits for the members to the exclusion of others. Yet, all of us want to promote free trade. How do we achieve this with the large number of trade groupings? Can the Minister comment on Singapore's position on these groupings and how do they affect our stand on free trade?”
“I would like the Minister to share with us his Ministry's views on this important issue, on our relations with the countries in the Pacific Rim. The economies have become increasingly interdependent. Trade and investment flows have developed strongly. Yet, they are very much dependent on the political stability and security that we can achieve for everyone. Political control, if reinforced by economic domination, can be a very potent combination that we may not want to see in our region. Coming closer to home, the issue of the ownership of Pedra Branca remains unresolved. We have heard Malaysian politicians claiming ownership of Pedra Branca from time to time. The Malaysian Prime Minister, Dr Mahathir, recently told the press in Singapore that the issue should be resolved by legal means. As long as the Malaysian claim remains outstanding, it will put a damper on our bilateral relations. Can the Minister let us know what steps Singapore has taken to resolve this issue? Let me now turn to the ASEAN Summit which was held in Singapore recently. Judging by the various statements made by the Heads of Governments, the Summit had been very successful. Of particular interest is the proposal to form an ASEAN Free Trade Area. This will strengthen the already strong bonds which have been developed among members of ASEAN. One issue that comes to mind, however, is the seeming proliferation of trade groupings in the past several years. We have another group, the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC), which encompasses more countries in the Pacific. We then have the new European Community and the North American Free Trade Area. Both are large trading blocs. The question is: how do these trading blocs relate to one another? There appears to be some contradiction.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the total sum to be allocated for Head O of the Main Estimates be reduced by $100. Sir, the dismantling of the Communist system and the shifts in the balances of power amongst the superpowers have profoundly affected international relations between countries. In particular, in the Pacific Rim, we witness changes that may have lasting and long-term impact on the security of the region. With the easing of tension and the priority on economic development, many countries are now becoming more inward looking. The United States is caught in a dilemma. It is tempting for the Congress to cut down on defence expenditures now that the threats have subsided and direct the resources to the domestic front. In an election year, this would be even more palatable to the government. On the other hand, curtailing defence expenditures will also mean diminishing the role that the United States has played for so long in the Pacific Basin. The Senior Minister has alluded to this issue on many occasions. The United States has played a policeman's role very well all these years, and at some sacrifice in terms of resources devoted to these activities. Should she decide to pull out, not many countries will be able to take her place. One possibility is, of course, Japan which has the resources required to assume this role. Discussions in the various forums on this alternative in the past several months have been rather mixed. Most countries, however, have serious reservations, given Japan's record in the Second World War. In Singapore, we have been reminded of the events which happened half a century ago. For those of our citizens over 60 years of age, the memory remains vivid and painful. The question on most minds is: can we trust Japan to play a peace-keeping role?”
“Sir, I think Mr Chiam obviously is not interested in national service, otherwise he would have submitted an amendment. On that note, I withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.”
“There will always be occasions when one has to give way to the other. I understand that MINDEF has been increasingly flexible in its call up of reservists, but the feedback seems to be that more can be done. In particular, while the reservists do not question the need for the call up, some of them wonder whether their time in the reserve service can be better spent. This applies especially to those reservists who are holding more senior positions in their civilian careers or who are businessmen. They think that sometimes they could be more productive. If the time in the reserve service can be better utilised, there is a possibility that reservist training can be shortened and the time thus made available can be put to better use. I would like to ask whether MINDEF has examined this possibility. There is no better way to motivate our reservists than to convince them that their total welfare is being looked after and indeed that they are spending their time usefully in the reserve service, so that the time in their civilian jobs can be maximized, and if our reservists are convinced that time in the reserve service is well-spent, I think we would have gone a long way to preserve the operational readiness of our reservists. 2.30 pm”
“In this regard, I would like to ask the Minister to share with us his comments on the following. First, how is the operational readiness of the SAF being maintained, in particular, given the tight labour situation? With so many competing demands from so many different sources, coupled with the decreasing population that we are facing in the coming years, how will the SAF obtain and keep its fair share of manpower and other resources to implement the various programmes? Second, the Total Defence Programme seems to have achieved some degree of success so far judging by the various mobilisation programmes and other activities which appear on TV from time to time. Is it the Ministry's intention to reinforce its efforts, together with other Ministries, to make Total Defence a part of every citizen's responsibility? More important, the various programmes have no doubt caused quite a series of inconveniences and sacrifices on many of our civilians, whether some of these have been looked at and improvements made to make the sacrifice more worthwhile and minimize the discomfort and inconvenience they experience. Sir, the other matter which I would like to touch on is reservists, and I am not touching on the tax relief. I think too much has been said about it by now. The bulk of our Armed Forces is manned by reservists. In the past two decades, the SAF would have accumulated quite a lot of experience in how to operate the reserve forces. There is an inherent conflict in the time which a reservist can devote to his various duties in the reserve service and in his civilian occupation. All our reservists have full-time jobs. They also have to make time for the reservist training. It is therefore inevitable that these demands on time are not often well matched.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the total sum to be allocated for Head K of the Main Estimates be reduced by $100. Sir, may I first congratulate the Minister for sending the Army, Navy and Air Force into this Chamber. I am glad the SAF recognizes the importance of these proceedings and we should also feel very well protected. Sir, in the past two years, the tumultuous events in Europe and Asia have radically altered the security arrangements for virtually every country in the world. The collapse of the Communist regimes in the East European countries eventually led to the disintegration of the Russian Communist Party itself and with it the Warsaw Pact. In Asia, the settlement of the Cambodian problem and the apparent change of emphasis by Vietnam to pursue economic development perhaps have eased tensions. Despite the Gulf War, it appears that most countries are now more preoccupied with getting their economies going than preparing for war. Indeed, many of us in Singapore have questioned the need to further build up our defence forces. There is now a real danger of our population being lulled into a false sense of security. I am in full agreement with the Minister for Defence's recent statements that, irrespective of the apparent changes that may have taken place, we should not deviate from the central objective of building and maintaining a credible self-defence force. Such a build-up has taken us a long time, because not only the Armed Forces have to be given the attention, it is even more important for our own people to be reminded and prepared through the Total Defence programme to be always alert to changing security conditions. Once we slacken, it would take us a very long time to recover.”
“Perhaps Mr Low could enlighten us on this topic at the next sitting of Parliament. Unfortunately, we have a small population. To expand our economy, we have to depend on foreign workers. But personally, I feel that the import of foreign workers must be controlled. The number of foreign workers cannot be increased without limit. Furthermore, we must be selective. For this reason, I agree with what was said by the Minister for Labour on this matter. I will give you another example. In our Jalan Besar GRC, we have a place which is quite famous. Not the place that you may have in mind, but the "Little India". One Sunday night, I went to attend a dinner function. I drove to Little India. There was complete darkness, not because there was no light, but because there were too many Indians around there. [Interruption]. No, I am not trying to play on communal lines. Sorry, we have Indian compatriots in this House. But I can tell you, the moment you open your eyes, you can see straightaway that they are not Singaporean Indians. Because their behaviour and expression are different from the Singapore --”
“When a thing is scarce it becomes precious. If any cost is related to land and people, then in the long run, the value will appreciate. This is inevitable! So think about it. If the workers in Singapore are not supported and assisted by our National Trades Union Congress (NTUC), it is most unlikely that they will have the kind of good life that they are enjoying today. Their wages, as compared to 20 years ago, have been increased many times over. Their standard of living has improved. Twenty or thirty years ago, could the Singapore workers afford to subscribe to the telephone service at home? Did they have television at home? No, not possible. Very few indeed! I came from a poor family. Thirty years ago, we did not have television at home. I had to go to my neighbour's house to watch television programmes. Today, my younger brother is a labourer, but he has television at home. Has the standard of living been improved? However, this is a very personal matter. We have to talk about the standard of living of the average workers. Generally, the standard of living has definitely gone up. From another perspective, how does the Singapore Government protect the interests of the workers? We control the influx of foreign workers through the foreign worker levy. So this is one measure that we use to control the increase in the number of foreign workers coming into Singapore. But if we look at it from another angle, this is one way to protect and ensure the wages of Singapore workers are not dragged down. That is right, is it not? Now, we say that Singapore is a small economy. If Singapore does not have foreign workers but only local workers, then what would happen to our industrial and commercial sector?”
“The Opposition Members should ask themselves: in the circumstances, should we or should we not implement a welfare state policy? Mr Speaker, Sir, let me talk about subsidies, rebate of HDB service and conservancy charges and tax relief for the reservists. I think it is a very good gesture on the part of the Government to pay the December 1992 conservancy charges for those who live in the 1-room, 2-room and 3-room HDB flats, and to grant a tax relief to the reservists. This can be said to be a good deed. Many Singapore citizens rejoice over this announcement. However, there are some people who criticize the Government and complain that it is inadequate. Some said in dialect (Teochew): "A 5-cent coin is bigger than the wheel of a bullock cart". They simply do not bother about this good gesture on the part of the Government. Apart from that, those who live in 4-room flats and above grumble and complain: "Why are we not included in this benefit?" So it is quite clear that it is difficult for the Government to govern. When you give, you are wrong. When you do not give, you are also wrong. I feel that henceforth the Government should consider very carefully before they decide to hand out any goodies. Mr Speaker, Sir, let me now deal with the issue that Mr Low Thia Khiang mentioned a while ago about the cost of doing business in Singapore. When he talked about the cost of doing business, I began to wonder whether he was a member of the Workers' Party because a member of the Workers' Party would normally talk about the interest of the workers, not that of the businessmen. Since he mentioned about cost of doing business, let me express my views on it. He mentioned that Singapore is a small country. However, he must also agree that Singapore has a small population.”
“The existing organisations such as MENDAKI for the Malay compatriots, SINDA for the Indians and the proposed CDAC (Chinese Development Assistance Council) for the Chinese will be able to take on this role. I would urge all Singaporeans to give these organisations greater support in order to ensure that the basic standard of living of the people of Singapore will not be threatened. Mr Speaker, Sir, in a good society and a good economic system, the most important thing is to stimulate and encourage the people to maximize their potential in economic development in order to create more wealth. If wealth and knowledge are concentrated on a small group of people, then so long as they are acquired in a proper and legitimate manner through their outstanding talents and efforts, then there is nothing wrong in it, and we should not try to suppress it. Therefore, in the process of creating wealth, so long as we can ensure that every citizen can have a basic standard of living, that they will be free from cold and hunger, then that will be good enough. Beyond this protected standard, then we should allow freedom for everybody to seek his own wealth, and create more wealth within the legitimate limits. In my view, we must first of all establish the need for a basic standard of living for the people. The Government must take up this responsibility to ensure that such basic standard of living is maintained. Over the past few years in Europe, because of excessive implementation of a welfare state policy, many countries are suffering grave consequences, such as much too heavy financial burden. Many people do not want to work. They rather stay at home and enjoy public assistance, resulting in extremely low productivity.”
“" I hope Members of the Opposition and, for that matter, all the people in Singapore would continue to support our Government's financial policy of striving to make more surpluses and to increase our reserves. Yesterday, the Members of the Opposition, Mr Ling and Mr Chiam, said that we should increase our subsidies and move towards a system which provides for more social welfare. Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to take this opportunity to express my views on this. I feel that in the process of pursuing our target of becoming a modern society, the most important thing to do is not in moving towards social welfarism but more towards achieving social justice. What is social justice? By this, I mean that a society in which everybody has equal opportunity to compete in a fair and square manner. Behind this competition, we have equal opportunity for education, which is a very important criterion. So given the equal opportunity to be educated, everybody will have to work hard according to his own ability to make money. Of course, there are bound to be some people who are, unfortunately, unable to keep pace with the progress of the society. In this regard, I think the Government should do something to help them maintain a basic level of income and a minimum standard of living. However, I must stress once again that we should not be reduced to a welfare state, like the United Kingdom. Mr Speaker, Sir, helping the less fortunate, the poor people, the aged and the helpless is something which the Government should take the lead, with associations and civic organisations being encouraged to participate in its actual implementation.”
“To me, the reserves which have been built up by our people and the country through all the hard work over the years will henceforth be given another safeguard. This will further ensure that our national reserves will be put to optimal use, and prevent the reserves from being abused. For example, the Opposition Members from the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP), Mr Chiam, Mr Ling and perhaps even Mr Cheo, have suggested for more and more subsidies: more subsidy for education, for housing and, in the end, perhaps for the sake of getting more votes, they may even ask for subsidy for everything - telephone, transport and what have you. Then, inevitably our reserves will have to be raided. Fortunately, we have the establishment of the Elected President. The Elected President will decide whether they should be allowed to use the reserves. During the past two days, many Members in the House have discussed the question of reserves. My view is that so long as our economy is growing, we must increase our reserves because if the country has surpluses, strong reserves, then in the long run it will contribute to our prosperity and stability. Just imagine, if we do not have such huge reserves we would not be able to enjoy such prosperity, progress and stability as we do today. The war in Kuwait. By now, people have come to understand the kind of damage and liability war can bring about. If there were no huge reserves, then how was the country going to fight the war? How was the country going to re-build itself after the war? It would be impossible! There is this saying: "We are not afraid of cases, but we are afraid of `just in case'". Another saying goes: "When you have to use your money you'll know that it is insufficient.”
“However, it is interesting to note that, for the first time in history, the Government has announced that it will set aside a certain amount from the budget surplus to set up an Edusave Fund, and to continue allocating a certain amount from future surpluses to enrich this Fund which will look after the interest of the people. In the last General Elections, Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong promised that he would withdraw from the reserves to establish this Fund. I am aware of the importance of the reserves to our nation. It cannot be used indiscriminately. But at the General Elections, the Prime Minister said that he was going to make use of the reserves. Yet now, the Minister for Finance said that only when there is a budget surplus would he allocate some money to set up the Edusave fund. No surplus, no fund! Now, what is happening? Mr Speaker, Sir, in this year's Budget, the Government promises to pay the conservancy fees for the month of December on behalf of the owners of the 1-room, 2-room and 3-room HDB flats. This is also an unprecedented move. Although this represents the Government's new direction in the "Next Lap", the Government should continue to work harder in lightening the burden of the people. Mr Choo Wee Khiang (Jalan Besar GRC)( In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, first of all, I would like to say that I support the motion standing in the name of the Finance Minister. In the speech by the Finance Minister, Dr Richard Hu, when he presented this year's Budget, the one point that strikes me most, or shall I say the one point that has got the greatest impact on me is that this year's Budget will, for the first time ever, be subjected to approval by the Elected President.”
“Furthermore, the Minister for Trade and Industry has indicated that the wage increase of Singapore workers has exceeded productivity growth for many successive years. It looks as if the era of huge wage increases is going to be a thing of the past. Yet, cost of living is going up and never coming down. How are we going to improve the standard of living of our people? Mr Speaker, Sir, in his speech, the Finance Minister expressed his worry that members of the family may fight over their shares in the pie, and forget that they should be working harder to make the pie larger instead. I think all Singaporeans know that the only resource we have in Singapore is our human resource. We also know that for our living, we have to use our hands, legs and mind together, and every trick in the book. However, Singaporeans are also aware that it would not do "if you want the horse to run well and you would not allow it to eat the grass". Nobody is advocating that we do not need to work hard to enjoy a good life, and no one is against "Majullah Singapore". We need to work hard, and we want the economy to continue growing. However, we also need to discuss what will the people get after they have worked hard. While our coffer is rich, when we are having budget surplus every year, has the burden of our people been lightened? Are those people who are struggling for survival getting any better? In this year's Budget, when our economic growth is not as good as before, there is no incentive given to further help our local enterprises to develop, to lighten their burden, and to cope with the setback brought about by market instability. This is very disappointing, just like the way the share market responded to this Budget. Very disappointing indeed!”