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 6 of 8.
“Mr Chairman, just before lunch I was commenting that the Minister has not answered my question on the effectiveness of some of the legislations governing crime detection, prevention and resolution. He has also not answered the question on the situation of crime in Singapore with regard to the statistics of various major crimes. I would be grateful if the Minister could enlighten the House.”
“Sir, the Minister has not touched on some of the points which I raised and one of which is whether the legislation ---”
“Have we been able to reverse this trend? In other words, have the Police improved their image with the public? Judging by the survey conducted recently, it would seem that the Police came out tops among civil servants covered in the survey in the public relations image with the public. Have these results been translated into the fulfilment of objectives of crime prevention as well as detection? I would be grateful if the Minister can give an update on the various Neighbourhood policing schemes now being enforced as well as their effectiveness and of course he may well have to answer the Member for Jalan Kayu's request for a Neighbourhood Police Post in his constituency.”
“In fact, it is well-nigh impossible given the constraint of manpower in Singapore where the pool of labour is finite for the Police to do this role effectively. The alternative to this is public involvement and participation. One used to get away from the idea that crime prevention and detection and subsequent resolution is solely the responsibility of the Police. Experience in other countries, for example, in Japan, shows that contribution by the public is equally important, first, in volunteering information leading to the apprehension of suspects. It goes without saying that such volunteers themselves have to be protected from being intimidated. Secondly, to be the eyes and the ears of the police, especially in densely populated housing estates, both private and public, shopping centres and other areas where conditions are conducive for criminal offences, such as construction sites and so on, where the frequency of such crimes could be high. And thirdly, for the public to be watching on behalf of the neighbours and, in so doing, deter potential criminals from committing their offences. I believe this is one of the major reasons why the Government several years ago implemented the Neighbourhood Policing policy as well as the Neighbourhood Watch Scheme. Neighbourhood Police Posts have been established in many constituencies. The infrastructure is being laid and the required increase in Police personnel, I understand, is being made available. The question is how effective has this scheme been so far in fulfilling the objectives of reducing the incidence of crime. Is the Police Force getting the expected cooperation of the public as envisaged in the plans? It is well-known that Asians, by and large, are quite shy of close association with the Police.”
“In this regard, there are two major areas of policies that are of concern. Firstly, the effectiveness of our legislations to empower the Police to carry out their duties effectively. Presently there are 15 Acts covering criminal law, including the Penal Code, and another 12 Acts covering criminal procedures, including the Criminal Procedure Code, making a total of 27 Acts. We in Singapore have often been accused of having draconian Acts covering a wide variety of offences, some of which carry mandatory sentences. The issue we would like to examine is whether our legislations are adequate to provide the kind of deterrence and enable our Police Force to curb the increase or, even better, reduce the rate of various criminal offences. For example, the Criminal Law (Temporary Provisions) Act would appear to have succeeded in virtually wiping out our major secret society activities. Could a case be made out to justify, in most of these instances, the severity of the legislations, especially in serving as deterrence for serious crimes involving human lives? It would be useful if the Minister could give a brief review of the crime situation that we have in Singapore at the moment in so far as it relates to the major crimes and those which affect a substantial number of our citizens. There could be areas where legislation may have to be tightened or additions needed to make them more effective, especially in serving as a strong deterrent to potential offenders. Secondly, the nature and the frequency of some of these crimes such as housebreaking, crime in lifts and even vehicle thefts, make it almost impossible for the Police to provide extensive coverage and protection to all unless one is prepared to accept the very high cost that comes with such protection.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head Q be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead QA-01-1100 of the Main Estimates*. Sir, by way of introduction the Members of the Government Parliamentary Committee on Home Affairs include the Members for Chua Chu Kang, Eunos, Jalan Kayu, Toa Payoh and myself. We will be concentrating our efforts in the coming months to examine the major policies of the Ministry and the legislations that govern the work of the Ministry rather than going into the minute details. We have had several meetings with the Minister and his officials and I am happy to report that we are having a more cooperative approach rather than a confrontational one in these meetings, and we look forward to more productive work in the months to come. Sir, one of the primary roles of the Ministry of Home Affairs is the maintenance of law and order. The Police Force is responsible, of course, for the implementation of preventive measures and also enforcement of the various Acts and legislations. In Singapore the rapid economic and social development have tended to accentuate the crime situation and this has been the experience of most major urban centres in the world where rapid development brought about a host of problems. In Singapore we are afflicted further by the kind of high-rise living in densely populated HDB estates. They have contributed to specific crimes, including house breaking, car theft, motor vehicle theft and various crimes in lifts. Bearing in mind that more than 80% of our population now stay in these estates and with the prospect that this percentage is likely to increase in the coming years, one can assume that unless there are adequate enforcement efforts, the incidence of crime must increase at times.”
“When the construction sector goes down and with shrinkage of volume, one can imagine the real impact this will have on this category of skills. If we look beyond the construction sector, there are also the supporting services - the hardware stores, industries that supply paint, cement and so on. The multiplier effect of the construction industry is substantial. All told, we are going to have, I am afraid, quite a glut in skilled and semi-skilled manpower in industrial establishments which are used to support a very highly active construction sector. As we all know, the lead time in training manpower is a long one and we have to act early to arrest any alarming developments and I consider this manpower surplus an alarming one because it affects all levels of skills. It is better for us to inform those who are going to be affected now that they may have to seek alternative employment or get themselves retrained or diverted to other sector's activities. For highly skilled people such as architects and engineers, they may have to go abroad beyond Singapore to look for jobs to occupy their time. As I mentioned on Friday, the Government could devise incentives of some sort to help them along the way. I think the Construction Industry Development Board which looks after the manpower aspect for the construction sector should address themselves these important questions and plans made to anticipate what is likely to come about in the next two to three years. The Ministry of National Development should, being in charge of the construction sector, look into the various excesses in terms of manpower, supporting services and recommend plans for implementation.”
“Sir, I made reference to the state of the construction sector last Friday in the debate on the Finance Minister's Budget statement. I am afraid I did not get any answer then and I hope to get some from the Minister today. To recapitulate, our construction sector which accounted for 6.8% of GDP in 1980 rose to a high of 12.8% in 1984 because of the concerted push in construction of HDB flats, infrastructure, offices, hotels and private residential buildings. Consequential to the glut that has been created, the construction share of GDP is now 8.5% and with the slowing down of HDB construction and the virtual stoppage of hotels, offices and private residences and also the tailing off of infrastructure development such as MRT, roads and highways, it is expected that the construction sector would probably return to the pre-1980 level, ie, about 5% of GDP. The point I would like to make is that the construction capacity has been built up to the level which constituted almost 13% of GDP. What happens when the construction sector shrinks and what will happen to the surplus capacity? Of particular importance is manpower. We have been turning out architects, civil engineers and mechanical engineers from the universities on the understanding that the construction sector will grow at historical rates. This is not going to take place. We will find in due course a glut of architects and engineers and, in fact, this already exists. In terms of numbers, the next level of skills is more alarming, ie, the semi-skilled technicians being turned out by VITB, the electricians, plasterers, painters, etc. They come out by the hundreds, if not thousands.”
“We have been able to do this without demonstrations, without strikes, without protests. Again, this is an achievement that most other countries would not be able to emulate. The forbearance of our workers, our people and the realization of the kind of difficulties that we have been in, in the past two years is an asset that we need to treasure. Hopefully, as we get set for the next few years to get ourselves out of the woods, the same kind of support by our people will be able to pull us through. If the policies and the measures recommended are allowed to work their way through, I am quite confident that we should be able to register the expected growth as forecast in the coming years. But the final lesson that we have to learn is that, whatever happens, we only have ourselves to depend on and despite adversities that have faced us so far we have been able to overcome them and I hope that with the same determination we will carry through to the future. On this note, Sir, I would like to support the financial policy as enunciated by the Minister for Finance. 12.51 pm”
“It looks as though the gap between us and our nearest competitors is still great and I therefore support fully the wage restraint policy that the Government has initiated last year. I think it is imperative that we have got to go for at least one, if not two more years. The cost-cutting measures should also continue, and here may I put in a word of caution: that the Government refrain from taking some of these goodies back because it is tempting that at the first sign of recovery the incentives that appear to be no longer necessary will be withdrawn. The cost-saving measures are particularly evident in the public sector. Last year, when the Finance Minister delivered the statement, he forecast a deficit of $3.2 billion in the public sector. In the event, we have an actual surplus of $3 billion representing a turnaround of almost $6 billion. While I understand that part of this reversal was due to the non-floating of development loans and therefore the interest element that need not be paid, the significant point is that the Government has been able to lower operating expenditures while development expenditure actually went up. This has been done through control of staff strength, aided by further automation and computerization. I think there are very few governments in the world loaded with a huge bureaucracy which have been able to achieve the kind of cost-cutting that has been achieved in Singapore. For this I think the civil service must be congratulated. Extending this to the overall environment in Singapore, our recovery would not have been so smooth or marked if not for the response from all Singaporeans, whether they are in the public sector or whether they are workers who were prepared to stand behind the Government in its drive to recover the competitive edge.”
“A question may well be asked as to whether it is possible that the incentives that have been introduced so far to propel the growth of our financial and business sector are not as attractive as those offered by our competitive financial centre development, particularly in Australia, Hong Kong or Japan. I think it is important that we have to revitalize the growth of this sector for the simple reason that the infrastructure that has been built up to support the services, the manpower training that has been carried out by our institutions of higher learning to provide this pool of manpower will need the expanded sector to accommodate them. We have to ensure that our finance and business services sector will have less dependence on regional developments and instead look forward to more international markets. One of the major thrusts of the Finance Minister's policy statement was that we should retain or, if not, improve our competitiveness abroad. It is therefore encouraging to notice that in the past year alone we have achieved a 15% improvement in this competitiveness through a combination of wage restraint, lowering of costs and an easing of the exchange rate. My question to the Minister is, how much of this improvement is actually due to exchange rate. Because if it is only the exchange rate that has been primarily instrumental in reversing this competitiveness, very much more effort will have to be exercised domestically to achieve the kind of productivity that we need because exchange rates can be manipulated and indeed are by many of our competitors in the region. We need to tackle the fundamentals of which we have overall control.”
“While one positive aspect of this is that we have now the cheapest hotel rates in the world and office space, rentals are comparable to any part of the region. This will encourage our tourism and business. The problem is, as our construction activities slow down, we are going to see a shrinkage of the sector leading to a surplus in the construction capacity, and of more importance, the support services which have been geared to a very high level in the last few years to support the feverish pace of construction. There is likely to be a redundancy of manpower, especially at the skill level, such as architects, civil engineers and so on. It may not be too early to consider how best we can tackle this problem, as some of this manpower may well have to be diverted to other uses, to other sectors. The expertise we have built up in the construction sector may have to be diverted elsewhere, for example, to carry out projects overseas so that we will not end up in a few years' time with an unemployment problem in the construction sector. Fiscal incentives, if necessary, could be considered to encourage our professionals in the construction sector to go abroad. The other sector which merits some discussion is our financial and business services. In 1980 it constituted 17.8% of GDP. In 1986 25%. It is now the largest sector, surpassing even manufacturing and transport and communications. In the last five years this sector has experienced double-digit growths until last year when it was reduced to zero. It is understandable that because of the depression in the region the growth of our financial and business sector was stymied.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I think it is with some relief that we can sit in this House this morning to debate on the Finance Minister's Budget statement with the knowledge that Singapore is on the road to recovery compared to the rather gloomy conditions that prevailed this House last year. I share the view of the Member for Whampoa that we are not yet out of the woods. In fact, our economy only recovered to the level that we achieved in 1984. We have quite a long way to go yet. The speed with which our economy recovered, I think, must be attributed to the swift action by the Economic Committee which was formed in September 1985 and its programme of action which was implemented very speedily in the past year. The most important aspect of this programme was that it was able to restore business and investment confidence, of which most of us Singaporeans were lacking in the dark days of 1985, together with the cost-cutting measures, real ones, which resulted in a revival of most sectors of the economy. As a result, we were able to crawl back, as it were, from the depth of recession in 1985. I would like to make some comments on the sectors that did not do well rather than those that have recovered. The first is construction. In 1980, the construction sector constituted some 6.8% of the entire economy. With the stepping up of construction, especially HDB programmes, office and hotels, the sector jumped to account for almost 12.8% in 1984. But with the slump in the last two years, the sector now accounts for only 8.5%. And with the gloomy prospects of the construction activities in the next few years, it is quite likely that, as a share of GDP, the construction sector will go back to the level that we achieved in 1980, if not lower.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I did not say that. I did not say I was a mahjong player.”
“I think with the recent enactment of the amendments on the Gambling Acts we are seeing less of illegal gambling in housing estates, which is a good thing. But there seems to be stories going around that people who are caught playing mahjong are also being arrested, so much so that the people in the street think that if they play mahjong at home they may also be arrested. I am sure many Members of this House always use to play mahjong for recreation. I am quite sure it is not the intention of the Ministry of Home Affairs to deprive citizens of this pastime. One can understand when this kind of recreation activity blossoms into a gambling house, as in some cases where houses cater to about five or even ten mahjong games at the same time, causing intolerable noise and inconvenience to neighbours and residents. But surely when there is a game of mahjong among four good friends or relatives, I think this is wholesome. I am quite sure that the Ministry would not look at this with the same kind of abhorrence that they look at illegal gambling. Perhaps the Minister can clarify this matter so that those of us who are addicted to it or those of us who indulge in it as an occasional means of recreation can keep on playing mahjong safely.”
“Sir, I would just like to comment on the recent series of rock concerts and discos organized by the Police for our young Singaporeans. This series has created a lot of excitement, not least among the young ones but also among the old ones. There are various schools of thought on this. One school has it that this is a good way to get rid of all the excess energy that our youths have but found no recourse. By getting them off the streets and to let them take part in healthy, wholesome, dancing and exercise their muscles, one would hope that we can give them some profitable means of recreation and also to strike up a better relationship with the Police Force which, until recently, has appeared to be more disciplinarians than friends in help. In particular, when we talk about crime prevention and law enforcement, we need the cooperation of our citizens, young and old, to cooperate with the Police Force. But there is another school of thought that says that while this could be a good means of providing recreation, but with the kind of culture and stigma attached to discos and rock concerts, has the Police not gone too far? Traditionally, in other countries, rock concerts and discos may have links with drugs, crime and other undesirable activities. Parents whose children go to these concerts always harbour the reservation that the children may get into bad company. I would like to ask the Minister whether he can enlighten the House on the rationale behind the Police Force concentration in these activities, and to ask him whether there are any safeguards that can be instituted to prevent the concerts and discos that we have in Singapore from degenerating into the kind that we see in other countries. The other matter which I would like to bring up is mahjong.”
“Will the Ministry consider de-registering the dormant licences even though they have been renewed, as otherwise the total figure would be inflated?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, could the Hon. Senior Parliamentary Secretary inform the House that among those who rejected the allocation of stalls, what is the proportion of cooked food stalls to market produce stalls? As I understand it, most of the rejections were for the market produce stalls, while cooked food stalls seem to draw quite a high percentage of acceptance.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the income tax proposals put forward by the Minister for Finance, as stated by the Minister himself, will go a long way towards redressing the tax burden on all categories of people, whether they be in the lower income, middle income or higher income group. I think we should run a system where, to each, we must reward his efforts that he has put in. The Member for Rochore cannot surely suggest that everybody be treated the same. If it were so, there will be no incentive to work at all. I would like to conclude by putting my full support for the financial policy as enunciated by the Minister for Finance in his Budget speech. 12.31 pm”
“It goes to the Government. He also mentioned that the CPF interest rate is nowhere near the market rate. He quoted the market rate of 12.4%. He also conveniently forgot that CPF contributions also attract an interest rate of 6r% tax-free. If we were to gross this 6r% up, the equivalent tax rate is, in fact, almost 11%. There were times when the prime rate in Singapore fell below 6r%. Is the Member for Rochore suggesting that the Government be compensated, or CPF be compensated for the fall in interest? I think the Member for Rochore, in using statistics in his own way to suit his own purposes, has misled the House. The misuse of statistics is more dangerous than sweeping statements because, if the statistics are presented only partially, it may lead to gross misinterpretation of policies and facts. Let me just caution the Opposition Members, lest they feel inclined to quote the Member for Rochore, as they have often done in the past - that if you were to use the statistics, be very careful because you may also be trapped in having to answer for some of the statistics that the Member for Rochore has omitted but that you are not aware of.”
“I was in Hong Kong just last month, Sir, and now the hotel rates in Hong Kong are much more expensive than Singapore. A 3-star hotel charges about $240 per room per night to about a 5-star hotel rate of about $300. Sir, this is what flexibility is about. If we expect Government intervention to be minimal, then we must allow the market to move. Whether the price goes up or comes down is a matter of market forces. We cannot expect the flexibility to be exercised only one way, and not the other. Whatever it is, the present supply of hotel rooms in Singapore has enabled us to become again one of the cheapest places for tourists to visit and, hopefully, our hoteliers instead of griping about empty rooms will concentrate their minds on finding more tourists now that they are more equipped to do so. The third comment that the Member for Rochore referred to was CPF. He claimed that CPF is a tax on labour. He said: 'Ihat it may be a political gambit to placate the NTUC. But it was foolish to create the impression all along that the employer's contribution is part of their pay. It is not. It is unearned income, ... and it has never been negotiable. It is a tax on labour for social security that we have and the amount is dictated by the Government.' Sir, the CPF has been in existence for a long time and the Member for Rochore has also been in this House and in the Government for just as long. Surely he could not be serious when he said that the CPF is a tax and is not part of the employee's pay. If it were so, how does he explain that the CPF contributor can withdraw his contribution when he reaches the age of 55. And further before he reaches 55 he can withdraw his CPF to purchase private properties which he owns. A tax by definition is a levy that is non-returnable.”
“' Again, Sir, he has used only part of the statistics, conveniently omitting the others. I think we all know the $70 that he quoted. It was mentioned by one new hotel in town, and this $70 per room was specifically mentioned as a concession valid for the month of February, in which month the hotel was opened. The effective rate was, in fact, $140. This 50% would be increased progressively to 60% for March and 70% for April. So after the introductory period is over, the hotel will be charging a rate of about $110. I wonder why the Member for Rochore forgot to mention this. If we cast our minds back three years ago, hotel rates in Singapore were much higher than even the $200 mentioned by the Member for Rochore. It was somewhere in the region of $250 to $300. Members will recall that at that time there was a great hotel shortage and the rates were jacked up so high that we were reputed to have some of the highest priced hotels in the world. At that time the developers did not complain that they were having good rates. Far from it. They were pushing to build more hotels, both new hotels and extensions to existing facilities. The Government at that time could not help stop these new buildings and extensions. If it had done so, it would be accused of stifling private initiative. The Member for Rochore talks about flexibility in Hong Kong. He says that Hong Kong is very flexible in everything. I was in Hong Kong two years ago too when there was a hotel glut in Hong Kong as well. The prices charged by Hong Kong hotels two years ago were equivalent to what we are now having in Singapore. It was caused by, firstly, an over-supply of rooms and a drop in tourism because of political uncertainties.”
“Surely the taxpayer does not pay tax equal to the chargeable income. In fact he pays a percentage of the chargeable income. For those in the bracket of chargeable income of $1,000 to $5,000, the effective tax rate is, in fact, 3.5%. If we look at the gross tax payable in this category of $148.75 the saving, in fact is not 0.64%. It is 17.9%, which is very much higher than what he has quoted. He said that the tax reduction is regressive; that we are penalizing the lower tax brackets. The Member for Rochore should know that under the present system all those earning below $7,000 do not pay tax at all, that is assuming that a family of four, one breadwinner, wife not working, and two children. He only starts to pay tax when he earns more than $7,000 a year, and only when he reaches $12,000 a year will he then pay a tax of $148.75. This amounts to about 15% of his monthly pay. For those in the middle bracket, by the time they reach a chargeable income of some $30,000 to $50,000, they will have to pay about one month's salary in tax. This is the progressiveness that we have introduced into our tax system for a long time, and I cannot comprehend on what grounds the Member for Rochore claimed that our tax system is regressive and inequitable and penalizing the lower income group. The interpretation of statistics, while they give a very low figure to suit the wishes of the Member for Rochore is, I submit, Sir, grossly misleading. And if it is done deliberately, it is mischievous. The next comment that he made was on hotel rates. He mentioned: 'When a 5-star hotel in Singapore sells at 3-star rates, when an international hotel management that used to sell rooms at $200 a day now sells rooms in a new 5-star hotel at $70 a day, it goes to show the parlous state we are in.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise to support the motion standing in the name of the Minister for Finance. Sir, what I want to say today has, in fact, been said in the week when we debated on the President's Speech. But after listening to the Member for Rochore's discourse yesterday, I could not resist but to look into some of his comments in some detail and come out with my own interpretation of what he wanted to convey. The Member for Rochore has included in his speech numerous statistics on various items. I am afraid that, despite the tutorials from the Member for Leng Kee and the Member for Whampoa, he has got his figures all wrong. I hope it is just a matter of misinterpretation rather than one of deliberate intent. One item he commented upon was that our income tax reduction in 1987 as proposed by the Minister for Finance is regressive. In his words: 'The revision of income tax for Year of Assessment 1987 is regressive. The weight of the tax burden is shifted to the lower and middle income groups.' And he went on to say, quoting the Table that he had circulated to Members. 'those whose a chargeable income is $5,000 to $25,000, the savings in tax vary from $32 to $494, ie. 0.64% to 1.98%. for those whose chargeable incomes are from $100,000 to $400,000, their tax savings are $4,144 to $21,644, ie, 4.14% to 5.41% of chargeable income.' Mr Speaker, Sir, with your permission, I would also like to circulate my own Table, which is an abstract of some of the data presented by the Minister for Finance in his Budget Statement last week. [Copies of tabled circulated to hon Members.] I think the Member for Rochore has committed a very basic error and a fallacy in relating the savings on tax payable on chargeable income.”
“Indeed, our people may have undergone a transformation, with the weather-worn older generation giving way to the prosperous young. But the fundamental spirit of Singaporeans as one people has not changed. We have withstood the test of time. We would have to do the same if we hope to overcome the obstacles ahead of us. Let us not lose our nerve, whatever we are and whoever we are, we are all Singaporeans. Doing so will mean playing into the hands of those who wish us harm. Worse, it will lead to the undoing of us all as a nation. I am sure that Singaporeans will not wish this ignominious end on themselves. Far from it, I am fully confident that we will respond positively and decisively to the challenges ahead and emerge from the economic recession better off, although battle scarred. More important is that we shall be more mature as a people, better able to deal with difficult situations and face future problems with greater resolve and determination. With this, our spirit as a true Singaporean nation will be preserved and enhanced. 2.51 pm”
“In the last 20 years of unprecedented growth, we have built Singapore into what it is today. The surprising thing is that we have done it so smoothly and apparently relatively trouble-free. Unfortunately, it is this very element of success with little efforts that could prove the undoing of all that we aspire. In the past year when the recession began to take its toll, one could detect in some of our people signs of panic. Some had even begun to write Singapore off. It is natural for those not favourably disposed to Singapore to start shooting at us, as had indeed been the case for many of the foreign journals and press. There is a Chinese saying which says that when you are up, nobody dares to touch you. But when you are down, anybody who has a chance to kick you would add in his effort. There has never been so much written about Singapore's ills in the foreign press in the past 12 months. Added to this, there have been remarks made by our worthy Members of the Opposition, both locally and overseas. Sometimes we wonder whose side are they on. Contrary to common belief, these publications are not banned in Singapore and Singaporeans have full access to whatever they say. I am afraid some Singaporeans are showing signs of losing their nerve. When we started our first year of independence 20 years ago in 1965, we were in a much worse position, facing much greater odds and far less prepared to tackle the problems. Yet, we overcame and prospered. The main cause must surely be that we, the Government, businessmen, entrepreneurs, workers, in short, the people of Singapore, have been able to work as one as had been so aptly put by Mr Lim Kim San. Circumstances may have changed. The environment may have deteriorated, the nature of the problems may have become more complex.”
“However, if a sufficient number of local entrepreneurs, industrialists and businessmen are to pitch in their effort, their investments taken together can be of significant impact. Foreign investors can then take the cue from them in making their investments in Singapore, for if the local businessmen demonstrate their confidence in Singapore, it must be a signal that it is worthwhile doing business here, for the same factors of production affecting entrepreneurs and businessmen, regardless of whether they are local or foreign still apply. A further advantage in investment by local investors is the speed with which such investment can be realized compared to foreign investment which will take more time. The impact on the rate of economic recovery can also therefore be expected to be greater. The entrepreneurs, businessmen and industrialists, in particular the local ones, therefore should respond equally quickly and decisively to the Government's call for action. In doing so, they will play an important role in turning the economy around and at the same time enjoy better returns for their investment in return for the risks they take. They can even take heart from the remarks made by the Member for Potong Pasir this morning that the private sector be helped to accelerate their business. It appears that the Member for Potong Pasir is not disagreeing with the contents of the Presidential Address and we should look forward to his support when the motion is being voted on. The most critical parameter in the economic formula to lead Singapore out of the recession, apart from all those that I mentioned just now, must surely be the people of Singapore. Irrespective of our occupations, whether we are workers, managers, civil servants, politicians, we are firstly Singaporeans.”
“The latter can be a very traumatic experience if the officers concerned are hauled up for investigation. The solution must lie in clear directives from the Ministers in the manner the proposed changes are to take place, so that civil servants are protected from accusation of favouritism in the discharge of their duties. Now that the Government has introduced the policies required to turn the economy around and paved the way by providing the required incentives, it is for the investors, both local and foreign, to respond to the Government's invitation to play their respective roles to get the eocnomic engine moving. All the incentives and measures in themselves alone will not even be able to start this engine, let alone build up speed if the investors and manufacturers stand their ground and do nothing. Should the recommendations of the Economic Committee be implemented in toto, Singapore will again be a good place to do business in. For the local businessmen who are already operating in Singapore, it would be folly for them to siphon off the benefits in terms of increased profitability arising from these fiscal incentives. Profits withdrawn from the economy will serve to further contract economic growth. The businessmen should instead re-invest their increased earnings in modernizing and expanding their existing facilities. In doing so, they will become more efficient in the export market and at the same time create new jobs. It is perhaps in this way that the workers' sacrifice can be made worthwhile for they will then share their companies' destiny and prosper with them when the good times return. While on their own, local industries may not be comparable to the multinational corporations.”
“I would strongly disagree with those critics, especially from the foreign press, not to say our Opposition Members here, that our civil servants have been responsible for much of the malaise afflicting us. If it were so, how could it have explained that we have been able to become one of the fastest growing economies in the last 20 years, when they have been in full charge? The Economic Committee has pointed out that other factors were in play. It was the confluence of these adverse factors that have caused the severity of the problems confronting us. Having said that, however, it is also true that the Civil Service, like anyone else, is not perfect. There could be lapses; or putting it more in perspective, slow responses to changing conditions on the part of some civil servants. The Civil Service can be likened to an oil supertanker which once set on its course will take 30 minutes just to come to a stop. The sheer size of the Civil Service prevents it from being sufficiently flexible to respond to changing conditions. The proposed policy changes, however, will demand that such flexibility not only be maintained but enhanced. It would not be easy for the Civil Service machinery to change course rapidly. But it must do so if the policy changes are to have the impact intended. In particular, rules and regulations, procedures governing the policy changes must be relaxed to facilitate implementation rather than inhibiting the full impact of these measures. Some civil servants are justifiably unhappy that, on one hand, they are directed to be flexible in the interpretation of changes in rules and regulations while, on the other hand, they stand accused of favouring one party against others.”
“Their conclusions are perhaps not unreasonable if the analysis of the problem is correct - that we need fundamental changes in policies - then the recommendations must be accepted in their entirety and implementation should follow as soon as possible, if not immediately. It is precisely because of the fundamental nature of changes recommended and their severity that have prompted some doubts on whether they would be approved in toto. It is not easy to alter policies that have withstood two decades or more, much less overhauling the very foundation of these policies. There is always the tendency to go for half measures and wait for the outcome before contemplating more changes. However, we are facing different challenges now. We are probably in deeper waters. We would need to go for the full measures if we are to establish the confidence of the people, both local and foreign, that Singapore is a place that is flexible to changing times. It would not be acceptable, I submit Sir, for us to accept the stop-go way of implementing changes. I would therefore urge the Government to act decisively, comprehensively and quickly on the recommendations of the Economic Committee. Aside from the acceptance of these recommendations, their implementation presents yet another set of challenges. Here, it will not be remiss of me to give some views on our Civil Service which is entrusted with the implementation of Government policies. Our Civil Service is rated as one of the best, if not the best, in the region in terms of efficiency and integrity. Our sustained economic growth in the past two decades is due in no small measure to our civil servants' efforts in facilitating policy implementation, providing the infrastructure and generally helping the people to achieve the growth targets.”
“It should therefore follow that the Committee's recommendations are directed at the very central task of solving the problems and achieving the objectives stated, rather than making excuses and blaming one another for failures. The Committee's recommendations, especially those on fiscal policies, constitute basic departures from the tradition which has been upheld for the past two decades. The Committee's call on workers, and may I add here it is not only workers but management including managers, to make sacrificies through wage restraints is to say the least controversial if not unpopular, having regard to a population who are accustomed to good living. The Committee's comprehensive treatment of all the important issues and problems affecting the entire economy and the accompanying recommendations to overcome these problems deserves our appreciation. It is gratifying to note that the Government has accepted, in principle, the policy recommendations set out in the Report. What is perhaps not so clear is the extent to which the recommendations will be implemented and the speed with which they will be made effective. The Government, through the First Deputy Prime Minister, has called for bold and swift decisions, just before the release of the Economic Committee's Report. The publicity and interests that have been generated subsequently have built up expectations to a very high level, so much so that some segments of the population have come to regard the recommendations laid out in the Report as having been approved in totality.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, before lunch I was elaborating on why we were better prepared to face the economic recession compared to 1965, 20 years ago. Apart from having a higher standard of living as well as the availability of comprehensive range of infrastructure, our people are also much better educated and are now trained to handle the various economic activities. But more important, however, is the fact that our workers are also much better paid than their predecessors. While it is somewhat ironic that high wage cost which has improved the standard of living of our workers, it has also contributed to our present predicament of having costs of production higher than those of our competitors. It also does mean that our workers should be better equipped to handle a wage restraint as they are now living on a much higher plateau than their fellow workers in 1965. Thus, we are in most ways prepared to stage an economic recovery and resume our economic growth, despite the uncertain world economy on which we depend so much for our livelihood and, indeed, survival. The speed and scope with which we can achieve these objectives will hinge critically on the responses of the Government, the entrepreneurs, the industrialists, the workers and the people of Singapore. The Government has made the first bold move in charting the course we have to take in the next several years to sail clear of the recession. The Economic Committee's Report on the Singapore economy has identified the key areas where we have to make very fundamental reforms. The frankness and the openness with which the Committee highlights its shortcomings and failures shows that it was prepared to tackle even the most difficult issues objectively.”
“Our education policy directed at training our people to handle the requirements of the various economic sectors has provided us with the necessary manpower to man the increasingly sophisticated industries and services with improving productivity.”
“Our children are receiving proper education and well looked after. So far, although we are in a severe recession, the purchasing power is as yet not severely affected, at least judged by the patronage of restaurants and fast-food outlets during the festive period. We are in a much better position to make sacrifice and accept a lowering of the already very high standard of living. In other words, our 'threshold of pain' is now higher. On the other hand, we were in a much more precarious situation 20 years ago as a lowering of standard of living then would have meant severe hardship. The question facing us now is whether our people are psychologically prepared to go through the same sacrifices after years of sustained prosperity and progress. Secondly, we are also much better prepared to tackle the problems we are facing. We have in our possession more tools and instruments to help us. Our infrastructure, whether it is in transport and communications, office buildings and hotels, industrial estates, flatted factories, utilities and supporting financial services, are in ample supply. All these facilities will enable our entrepreneurs and foreign investors to operate their businesses. The consistent efforts made in the last 20 years have enabled us to become a place where everything works. Businesses and industries can be run effectively and efficiently. Back in 1965, all we had was a fledgling Jurong industrial estate and much of the effort was, in fact, spent on building the infrastructure itself; the lack of which was itself a serious impediment to rapid economic growth and industrialization. Thirdly, our people are now much better educated and possess skills that were unheard of in 1965.”
“There must be a concerted effort by Government, entrepreneurs and workers alike - the whole nation must work as one. We have laid the infrastructure, we have provided the incentives and we have shown the way ahead to more rapid industrialization. It is now up to the people of Singapore to respond to the call. The entrepreneurs must ensure by a proper choice of industries and industrial associates that the products manufactured are of a quality and price competitive with foreign products. Our workers must also be prepared for factory discipline and hard work to make costs competitive in the international market. There must be restraint and discipline on both entrepreneurs and workers if we are to emulate the efforts which brought about the great economic recoveries after the World War." This sound advice, made two decades ago, has resulted in unprecedented growth for Singapore and very rapid rises in the standard of living of Singaporeans. This success has been achieved with the cooperation of the PAP Government, the industrialists/entrepreneurs, the workers, in short, the people of Singapore. We have, in a matter of speaking, come round a full circle and are facing similar, if not, more difficult challenges in our advance in the next decade. The issues facing us are whether our time-honoured policies, proven to be successful and effective in the past, can carry us safely and successfully to achieve the objectives and targets set out in the Presidential Address. There are, however, some significant differences in the situation prevailing in 1965 and now, 1986. First, we are now much better off in our standard of living, compared to two decades ago. Most of our people are housed in comfortable HDB flats and enjoying all the necessities of life and more.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to join my fellow colleagues in the PAP to thank the President for his Address to Parliament. In his speech, the President has remarked that the recession in 1985 is a watershed in our economic development; after 20 years of virtually uninterrupted economic growth. It would be helpful if we could recall to our minds the situation which existed 20 years ago in 1965 when another watershed in our economic development took place, and trace the causes for the rapid growth and progress that followed in the ensuing two decades. They may well contain some valuable lessons for us. Twenty years ago, Singapore was in a much more precarious position, both politically and economically. It was the year in which we separated from Malaysia and became a fully independent nation. Quite apart from the political uncertainties facing us then, the economic prospects and with them the problems in the years ahead were, to say the least, daunting, if not frightening for most of us. The world economy then was sluggish as is the case in the past several years. With our heavy dependence on trade and without the manufacturing sector to support the overall economic structure, the Government faced a tremendous task to generate economic growth and create jobs. It was then recognized that concerted efforts must be mounted to overcome existing problems and get on with the business of improving the standards of living of our people through rapid economic growth. In the words of the then Finance Minister, Mr Lim Kim San, who delivered his Budget speech in this House on 13th December, 1965, I quote: "To attain our objective in transforming Singapore into a modern industrial nation, Government action alone is not sufficient.”
“In the Minister's speech. And this will be a good ground. There are many cases where with modern communications, there is no reason why a person cannot come back within the 10 years. What excuse has he got to stay away without even setting foot in Singapore except for the reason that he has given up for good. And since he has done so, let us complete the picture for him. I think we need less of people who only make use of Singapore when it is convenient for them, when it is safe for them, when it is good for them. As we build up our nation, we need people who are committed to stay here for better, for worse, for life or death. And I think the Constitution of a country is not only to extend privileges to the citizens but also to safeguard the interest of these citizens who abide by it. I support fully the Minister's proposed amendment with just one small qualification, ie, in the exercise of these safeguards and provisions, that the officials be given clear instructions to ensure that genuine cases are not mistreated.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, I would like to give my support to the proposed amendment to the Constitution. All of us Singaporeans are very proud of our citizenship. Many of us were migrants and in the last hundred years we came here, we slogged it out, our forefathers, ourselves. There is therefore no question that citizenship is a very precious thing. But if there are among us people who do not treat this citizenship as precious as others and have chosen to stay away for long periods of time, then we have got to question whether they should continue to enjoy the privileges extended to them as citizens, As citizens, we enjoy the right to vote, to decide on the future of our country. At the same time, we also have the obligation to work for the survival and the prosperity of the nation and there are many ways in which we are doing it, whether it be economic development, social progress and, most important, security through doing national service ourselves or sending our children to do national service to prepare ourselves for any eventuality. For some of us, it has been painful. We see the demise of loved ones. Is it therefore logical that we, as citizens, perform all these obligations and pass on these benefits to people who have renounced Singapore in their own interest but who, having found that the pasture is not as green on the other side of the fence, decide to come back and exercise their rights? We heard of talks about preservation of rights but never for one moment have we heard talk about obligations, One Member of the Opposition appears to be a champion of all non-citizens or people who have renounced their total interest in Singapore. He has been known to take up causes for illegal immigrants, work permit holders who have overstayed.”
“Sir, can I ask the Minister whether a child who stays near a school will be given a higher priority for registration?”
“What I would like to find out from the Minister is in what way will this be done, whether it is through a public listing where members of the public will have a chance to participate in these companies, or whether it will be restricted to people who are able to contribute to the running of the business, Perhaps it is not wise to open the activities of these companies or the shareholding of these companies to all and sundry. If we expect the enterprises to succeed, we must find the right expertise to handle these projects. And in view of the rather substantial investments that have been incurred in respect of Government-owned companies, I think some care has to be exercised in ensuring that whoever takes over the companies will, as far as possible, possess the expertise and the skills to develop these companies further. 4.15 pm Finally, it may be worthwhile for the Ministry to consider whether it is necessary to divest all these interests at the same time. Perhaps despite what the comments from our private sector are, there is merit in keeping some of these companies, either for the strategic purposes for which they were first established and whether it is not sufficient just to divest off some of the activities carried out by these companies rather than divesting the company altogether.”
“I suspect it is because over time, many of these companies established by Government have deviated from the original objective when these companies were formed. And this deviation is a natural process. When the chief executive is put in charge of the company, he is not asked to achieve the original objectives set up by the company. His accountability is the bottom line. If the activities of the company are not giving him the kind of returns that he expects, then he has got to find other ways, whether going into diversification or entering into new business and I think this is where the problem started. Perhaps if we look into the activities of these companies, we will discover that it is not so much that the original objectives of these companies have been compromised but that the new activities taken over by the chief executive's concern have infringed into the private sector. It is in this regard that I welcome the initiative of the Ministry to set up a management panel to oversee the activities of these companies to ensure that the new activities taken on by these Government-owned companies, if they can be better managed by the private sector, these companies should abstain from these activities. My next question is that in the Finance Minister's Budget statement, he said that the Government is seriously thinking of divesting its interest in these companies to the private sector.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to say a few words on the problem of Government companies. I think it is being widely believed that the Government has through its own companies, whether wholly owned or partially owned, been unduly interfering in the business of the private sector. Let me first say that I fully endorse the views expressed by the Minister of State for Trade and Industry a few days ago. Of the 24 wholly owned Government companies which have been started over the last 20 years, I think we will be hard pressed to find any of them which has not satisfied the primary criteria of Government entering into an area where the private sector avoided because of the risk. For example, the shipyards. The shipyard companies were established in the late 60s when we had to take over the assets of the naval bases. There were other instances where because of the high element of risk involved in the very heavy initial capital investment, Government had to take a hand in it. And included in this, of course is the national shipping line, Neptune Orient Lines. And going down to the other end of the scale, we have enterprises like Jurong Bird Park and the Zoological Gardens which, while not strictly within the economic sphere, but nevertheless were set up to encourage tourism. And we all know that it is not easy to run the Zoological Gardens or the Bird Park as viable enterprises. Hence the Government took an interest in these enterprises. There are two considerations, of course. One is the element of risk which the private sector is not prepared to take and, secondly, by having a company, the accounts can be properly kept and any subsidy in whatever form can be properly accounted for. But why the private sector's reservation about Government companies if this is true?”
“I agree with the Police that it is not possible, with the manpower that it has, to try to mount raids, ambushes, and so on, on all possible outlets where such activity is carried out. But I would urge that perhaps the Ministry can look into whether, in fact, we can examine the more fundamental aspects of this illegal gambling and hope to find a solution to relieve the members and residents of our housing estates from this increasing menace.”
“To play with money, as the Member for Changi says. This has happened over the last two or three years with ever-growing intensity. Apart from creating a nuisance by blocking all the traffic along the thoroughfares, in some cases these have led to gang fights. And in my Constituency there was even a case of stabbing of an innocent bystander who happened to get into the way of these people. The Police explanation is that due to their manpower constraints they have not been able to cover as many housing estates as they wished. But surely that is not the only explanation. I think one has got to go back to the fundamentals and that is, people like to gamble. Can we suppress this urge? In the past we had a lot of other things. In fact, I was told that in Hong Kong, during the winter months, they would gamble on how many seeds a mandarin orange has, and without peeling the orange, of course. The question that faces us is whether we can succeed in eliminating gambling of any form, Or should we look at how we can curb or minimize these gambling activities so as to inflict the minimal inconvenience to residents and to other members of the public. One of the main reasons for the gathering of these crowds at coffee shops and so on is to seek information. The information comes from the results of the Races, whether it is in Singapore or in Malaysia; hence the frequent use of telephones. Maybe one suggestion could be that if we can discreetly or restrictively release this information at designated locations, far away from the maddening crowd, so to speak. And in this case we may succeed in at least containing the problem and yet giving vent to some of these human urges that some members of the public seem to find it hard to resist.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, may I be allowed a few minutes. Let me touch on the problem of the illegal bookie and gambling activities. It is a well-known fact to all of us that on weekends almost all housing estates will see massive crowds gathering around coffee shops and the purpose is not to drink coffee or tea but -”
“If we accept the principle that we reward each man according to the contributions that he makes, the alternative is to run a communist system where everybody is paid the same for whatever amount of work that he does. And in the communist system, such as China, they have discovered that this is not the way to motivate him to do his best for the country. They are also changing. Comparison with junior officers is also misleading, as mentioned by the Member for Anson. In the society, where each member has a part to play, depending on what his contributions are, we cannot put a lorry driver to run a ministry because he is not equipped to do that. It will be disastrous if we did. The principle of paying each man according to what his contribution is must be followed. If we accept that, then there is a matter of detail as to how much that worth is, and one indicator is to compare it to the average worth existing in the country. It is also misleading to compare Singapore with other countries. The circumstances are completely different, the cost of living, the environment, everything is different. We cannot compare apples with oranges. We here in Singapore are dealing with matters pertaining to Singapore, and therefore we should follow the Singapore concept of paying our Ministers, our civil servants, our chief executives, wherever they may be, their worth. I think once we accept this principle, the rest will follow.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, may I be allowed to say a few words on this. I think we can boil down the issue to one very simple principle which, in fact, has led to Singapore's success in the last 25 years. This is getting the best talent to do what we require, whether it is in the civil service, whether it is in the private sector or in the political arena. Take the Civil Service, for example. It is quite well-known in this region that we have the best civil service. How do we ensure that this principle continues? We pay our civil servants not because they are civil servants, but because of what they can contribute to the country, and to ensure that they stay we must make regular adjustments to their salaries so that the best are not lost to the private sector. I know for a fact, and I have been in the Civil Service before, that the Minister's responsibilities far outweighs those of even the top senior civil servants that we are talking about, such as the Permanent Secretaries. Apart from ensuring the smooth running of the Ministry, the Minister carries the responsibility for whatever action that Ministry takes. We are therefore talking not so much about a Minister's public service on that score. We are talking about actual work done and actual responsibility shared. It is the same with the private sector. If you want to run a business, you just do not go out and get anybody you find and expect him to do the job. You want to find the best man available, and in a free market where supply and demand dictates what you get, one indicator is salary. This indicator has proven right most of the time. It is not wrong to compare Ministers' salaries with those in private sector.”
“00pm I am wondering whether something like on-the-job training for these computer students could be applied, similar to what we are doing in the Nanyang Technological Institute where engineering students are given exposure to actual working conditions during the course of the study. In this way, it may be possible to cut down the lead time to ensure that these graduates, by the time they enter the job market, possess at least some relevant experience for the employers to use them. In order for the brain services and information centre to be successful, we just cannot allow ourselves to be confined to the normal requirements but we have to go one step higher to make sure that the services that we provide will be of an order that people feel comfortable using them and that they cannot get it anywhere else.”
“Sir, when the Government launched the economic strategy programme in 1980, there was considerable emphasis placed on promoting Singapore as a premier brain, services and information centre. Following that, a very intensive programme to train the manpower required was launched in the field of computerization. So far, events in the last few years indicate that perhaps demand has been outstripping supply because the demand comes not only from the industry itself but also from industries that make use of such manpower, in particular, in the finance, banking, manufacturing and even in the retail and trade sectors. As a result, the wages of computer personnel have risen substantially because of the lack of supply. The National Computer Board was formed three years ago to promote the training of this manpower. What I would like to find out from the Minister is what is the progress in meeting this demand. The events of the last few years have also shown that what we need in Singapore is not so much manpower on computer alone but, more important, skilled manpower to meet the more sophisticated needs of the various users. The problem here is, of course, that it takes time to bring the expertise of the newly trained graduates to the level that the industry will accept. I understand that in the recent past there has arisen a situation where the new and inexperienced graduates find it difficult to get jobs in the industry because employers insist that they must have certain requisite experience. The question is how to impart this experience to these new graduates in the shortest possible time. 12.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, may I be allowed to speak on my amendment* now?”