Cedric Foo Chee Keng
Singapore
“Chairman, indeed digital technology will be a key enabler for a brighter future for Singapore. Listening to Senior Minister of State, Ms Sim Ann, Senior Minister of State, Dr Janil and Minister Iswaran, I am sure my colleagues share my view that we are in good hands.”
“Chairman, some months ago, we had a healthy discussion between Mr Pritam Singh and myself about POFMA; whether the Judiciary is best party to act, or whether the Executive branch is better placed to act on the issuance of Correction Notices. I think the recent COVID-19 outbreak is a good example of when to use POFMA.”
“Mr Chairman, my cut is to ask about the tangible benefits to citizens and local businesses arising from our Smart Nation initiatives. Digitalisation has opened up new possibilities for businesses and for our society.”
“I am also particularly concerned with school children from lower income families who may not be able to afford a computer or broadband access at home. In today’s learning environment, a computer and broadband access are like "paper and pen" of the past and, therefore, no child should be denied that.”
“Chairman, this question is for Minister Chan. Historically, many Government agencies and Ministries design systems and processes from their points of view. I think the public will be well served if Government agencies can think "the other way around" and try to design processes from the citizens' or businesses' points of view.”
“Yes, probably the last engagement to give others a chance to speak. POHA is for private matters, and if somebody felt that they had been harassed, as a private individual, they will go to the Courts.”
The complete record
Every one of 423 lines we hold for Cedric Foo Chee Keng, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 6 of 9.
“Sir, I would urge the Ministry to re-examine the size and the pace of rail investments, and to advise if the scope of the recent land transport review includes the study on the optimum mix between rail and bus for Singapore. And if so, what is this optimum mix? Next, contestability. I fully agree that "competition for the market" every few years is the right model for Singapore. I understand that MOT is studying how to go about it. I would urge MOT to open the tender to all experienced operators, both local and foreign, and also to adopt a two-envelope system. With the two-envelope bidding system, the bidder will submit a price proposal separately from the technical proposal. Technical proposal is always opened and assessed first before the price envelope is opened. If the first envelope does not meet the requirements, there is no point going on to consider the second envelope as the service standards will not be met. Such a system ensures that the price proposal will not influence the assessment of the technical proposal. In structuring the bids, we could adopt either a 'gross cost method' or a 'net cost method'. Under the 'gross cost method', the PTO will not assume any transport fare risks. It bids only on the basis of meeting prescribed standards and its costs of operating the service. Under this system, the Government agencies will set fares and collect all transport fares to pay for capital investments and to the successful PTOs for operating costs. Sir, this system is better because it forces the PTOs to bid aggressively. And it has been shown that some 20% to 30% cost savings can be achieved if fare risks are removed from the PTOs. The converse method of 'net cost method' requiring the PTOs to assume fare risks would result, I believe, in higher operating cost.”
“Compared to bus, it is faster, it is safer, it is more comfortable, it is more time-definite, it is more reliable, and it is more environmentally-friendly. Currently, our buses carry twice as many passengers or passenger trips compared to our rail system. For every passenger trip made on the rail, we have two passenger trips on the bus. In New York, it is the reverse - twice as many passenger trips are made on the New York subway compared to buses. In Tokyo, the ratio of rail passenger trips to bus passenger trips is about 15 rail trips to one bus trip. The Masterplan calls for rail capacity to triple by 2020. This is good news but the ratio of rail-bus trips would only improve from 0.5 to 1.5, still below the ratio for New York and well below the ratio for Tokyo. Moreover, the bulk of the capacity increase will occur only in the latter part of the 2008-2020 period. The DTL Stage 2 will be ready only in seven years' time, and that is in 2015; DTL Stage 3 in 2016. The Thomson Line or TSL in 2018, and the Eastern Region Line or ERL only in 2020. The $40 billion MRT investment announced recently is commendable and certainly in the right direction, but is it enough? Yes, initial investments in rail infrastructure are high, but so are the returns. It is heartening to note that MOT will now evaluate rail investments on a network basis and not on a line-by-line basis, as they did in the past. The externalities that come with rail investments are massive – better connectivity (which improves exponentially every time you add a node to the rail infrastructure), enhancement in land and property prices around MRT stations, relieve road congestion, boost to the construction sector, job creation, and so forth.”
“This is achievable, given our two integrated resorts, F1, Youth Olympics, Arts and Sports Hub ambitions, and so forth. MOT's recent land transport review is therefore very timely but the question is whether or not our Land Transport Masterplan is up to the task. Are these measures effective, and do they go far enough? The Masterplan has three main thrusts: firstly, to make public transport the choice mode; secondly, to manage road usage; and thirdly, to meet the diverse needs of the public. Sir, let me focus on the first thrust, which is to make public transport the choice mode. I believe this is an imperative for Singapore. We are but 700 sq km and already 12% of our island is used for roads. There are three main ways to move around in Singapore - by rail, by bus or by private cars and taxis. Some of my parliamentary colleagues will say that bicycles or walking is also a way. But, really, these are not mass transport movers. Cars and taxis are the least efficient ways to move large number of commuters. It takes three or four passengers. Buses are better, but they compete for road space with other motorists. The vehicle growth rate, in terms of new COEs to be issued, will be reduced from 3% to1.5% per year. Contrast that with the forecasted supply in terms of road lane-kilometre of 0.5% per year. So, if you do the mathematics, it is clear that we cannot afford to have more vehicles on the road and we must increase the share of commuters on public transport. Indeed, we should encourage motorists to say "my other car is a bus". But, I think, better still, if they would say "my other car is a train". Rail – Sir, I believe is the best mass people mover.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the total sum to be allocated for Head W of the Estimates be reduced by $100. Sir, Singapore distinguishes itself from other nations in many ways. We have been successful in attracting and retaining foreign direct investments and talents partly because we have an efficient transport infrastructure. Our air and sea ports consistently rank among the best and are held as benchmarks by others. Yet, we plan ahead and constantly improve our air and sea infrastructure. Geographically, Bangkok is closer to the world's major cities by air and Thailand has more tourist traffic. As seaports, Tanjong Pelapas and Batam are just short detours from Singapore for long-ocean voyages. As a small economy without a sizeable origin and destination traffic, Singapore's success as a transport hub does not come naturally. We need always to be a 'few steps ahead' to capture the transit passengers and the transshipment cargoes. So, even as we opened Changi Terminal 3, T4 is already on the cards. We have also been adding berths at Pasir Panjang Terminals, always a 'few steps ahead'. Moving on to land transport, we do have a reasonably good land transport infrastructure today but we need to plan ahead as our land transport infrastructure is clearly under strain and our challenges are plenty. The Government has projected that the population in Singapore would increase from 4.5 million today to 5.5 million to 6.5 million in the near future. Add to that, Singapore is competing to be a major MICE destination. So tourist arrival is expected to increase from 10.2 million last year to 15 million by 2012, a 50% increase, and the target is also to get these tourists to stay longer in Singapore.”
“Sir, can I ask the Minister if there is a target date of completion to ensure that, either through a combination of public or dedicated transport modes, our elderly and the disabled will be well served in Singapore?”
“Sir, I applaud the Ministry and the public transport operators' messages to the commuting public to be patient and to accept that the disabled and the elderly have to integrate into society and to participate actively. My supplementary question is whether our economy would be better served if, instead of enabling barrier-free accesses on the public transport network, we provide dedicated transport links or services reserved for the elderly and the disabled because the former would obviously come with a cost to the general economy, slowing down the public network for example. Or, should we do both?”
“Sir, if the parents have an amount above the Minimum Sum, will the Ministry consider allowing a parent to draw down, so as to invest in the child's education, provided the amount remaining in the CPF is above the Minimum Sum?”
“Sir, the policy we take with regard to air transport is an excellent one. Before Terminal 2 was actually chock-a-block, we started with Terminal 3 construction. We announced the plan that Terminal 3 will be opened in 2008. And we all understand how much goodwill and how much externalities such new capacity, which is presented ahead of demand, have brought to Singapore. But does it mean that the Ministry has been late in thinking through the land transport issues and policies so that it will take another 11 years from now for it to come to full fruition or is there fiscal constraint that we cannot hasten it any further?”
“Sir, I understand from the Minister that the DTL will take up to 2018 before final completion. In the interim, can I understand how the Ministry will provide new capacity, whether rail or bus, to cater to the growth in demand which is expected to be very strong in the next few years?”
“Sir, to the Minister of State, I can well understand why HDB wants to reduce its role as a financier and concentrate on its role as a developer. For the resources available to finance HDB flat purchases, would it not be more logical to channel them to downgraders who actually need them? Many downgraders who are facing financial difficulties wish to downgrade, which is a policy I think we would encourage, because this is financial prudence. Yet, they are unable to get bank loans. So, basically, they are stuck. Can the Ministry review that policy?”
“Sir, on behalf of Members who have spoken on this Head, I would like to thank the Minister for Transport and the Minister of State for Transport for their very comprehensive replies and clarifications. The Minister has taken pains - he has gone to Toa Payoh MRT station; he has gone to Hong Kong; he has gone to Shinjuku; he has squeezed into the Tokyo trains - and he has explained and articulated the policies of transport, going forward. He would be taking care of the physical, the policy as well as the human aspects of transport on air, sea and land. I think we are very assured from this discussion and debate and we look forward to listening to the plans and outcomes of the transport review. In view of that, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The sum of $325,307,990 for Head W ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. The sum of $1,858,426,700 for Head W ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.”
“Sir, on air cargo complex, I did ask the Minister earlier whether or not rentals in the Singapore Changi Air Cargo Complex is the highest in the region and, if so, are we not practising competitive pricing, as we do for industrial land.”
“Sir, I was very heartened to hear that in this year's Budget, there is a $10 million public transport fund provided to help those who are in need. Can the Minister provide some details on how this fund will be distributed and how can the public commuters apply for it?”
“Sir, on the SMS system about public transport information, as I understand it, it costs the commuters some fees. I am referring to something which LTA or the PTOs can set up for the benefit of the commuters without fees.”
“Sir, this is about public transport information at bus-stops. In a recent REACH session where the GPC for Transport was invited, some of the feedback we received was that there was no point having the information once a commuter is already at the bus-stop, because he cannot do anything at the bus-stop but wait. Is it possible that such information be transmitted by handphones, SMS messages and other technologies?”
“Sir, let me ask the Minister a kind of a chicken-and-egg question. I am very keen to know whether when considering the construction of new roads or MRT lines, eg, the Downtown Line, would he introduce the supply ahead of anticipated demand or he only reacts to the demand?”
“Sir, let me assure the Minister that many of the Members of the GPC for Transport as well as myself acknowledge that Singapore, by any measure, has one of the best transport systems - air, sea or land - today. But many of the points that we were making were relating to how to maintain this pole position in the years ahead, given the strains and pressures that we all know we will face. I am very pleased to hear the Minister talk about the MRT Downtown Line with 33 stations. I would like to know when it will be implemented.”
“Mr Chairman, Sir, Changi continues to be the world-renowned aviation hub. It has been ranked sixth for international freight movement in 2005, having moved a record 1.83 million tonnes of air cargo. However, industry players have informed us that the value of transshipment air cargo has been decreasing in recent years. Singapore has been losing out on the transshipment business to Bangkok and Kuala Lumpur, and one of the reasons cited is that the cost of rental of cargo complexes in Changi is the highest in the region. Could the Minister update us on MOT's plans to recapture the transshipment cargo and to reposition Changi as a competitive air cargo hub?”
“Mr Chairman, Sir, Singapore's liberal aviation policies have helped us achieve open skies agreements with many like-minded states. However, we do not seem to have progressed much in liberalising our skies with our closest neighbour, Malaysia. I would like to ask the Minister for an update on our negotiations with Malaysia for more liberal aviation arrangements. The Singapore-Kuala Lumpur sector is an anomaly. People flows between Kuala Lumpur and Singapore are strong but yet the sector is served by a shuttle service with only SIA and MAS as operators. It is perhaps the only major route that is not served by budget airlines. I would like to ask the Minister when this route can be liberalised and when budget airlines can start serving this market. Liberalising Aviation Policy”
“Sir, it was recently reported in the media that the Malaysian government intends to temporarily close the Causeway to heavy vehicles for one year, reportedly from September this year. Apparently, this closure is to ease the traffic congestion in Johor Bahru and allow road works to be carried out at the new Customs Complex in Johor Bahru. In the interim, heavy vehicles will be diverted to the Second Link at Tuas. This would add to congestion at the Second Link as well as higher costs as the tolls at the Second Link are higher than at the Causeway and, additionally, tolls are also levied on the highways leading to the Second Link. As many of these vehicles transport food on a daily basis to Singapore, the proposed diversion may result in an increase in cost of many essential items in Singapore which could be felt by many Singaporeans. I understand that the Ministry of Transport has written to seek clarifications from the Malaysian government as well as to propose a technical consultation session. Can the Minister update us on the status of such consultations? Second Link”
“Singapore has for many years controlled the vehicle population growth through the vehicle quota system or COEs as well as Additional Registration Fees or ARF. In recent years, the Government has allowed the vehicle population to grow by reducing ARF, although not at this Budget but in previous ones, and issuing more COEs. There seems to be a shift in position to lower car ownership cost purportedly to meet the aspirations of Singaporeans who own cars and to control their usage instead, so allow car ownership cost to come down but control the use. If vehicle growth is allowed to pick up, I fear that it would be even more challenging to encourage more commuters to use public transport. And the speakers before me have said that as cars are costly investments, there is a tendency to put them to maximum use once they are purchased. I know of very few Singaporeans who have purchased their cars, paid road taxes and only to park them in the garage. So given the challenges in road transport, would the Ministry clarify its position on car ownership cost? Electronic Road Pricing”
“Mr Chairman, Sir, there is a big fleet of school buses that lay idle between the early morning school hours until around midday and thereafter again from mid-afternoon until the evening school dismissal hours. In a recent REACH session which the GPC Transport members and resource panelists attended, the School Bus Transport Association suggested to us that their members be allowed to deploy their buses more freely to help alleviate public transport congestion. There is also a possibility of deploying these buses into the private estates to feed passengers into MRT stations. The Association cited the many restrictions that are currently imposed on them which prevent them from deploying more buses to serve the commuting public. Would the Minister clarify what these restrictions are and whether these restrictions can be lifted further? Travel Information”
“For this to happen, without Singapore roads ending up in gridlocks, we need a major revamp of our land transport infrastructure, both physical as well as policies. I am pleased to note that the Ministry is embarking on a land transport review and would like to know the progress of this study. It would be good if the Minister could also share with us some of his early thoughts on the land transport review. At the moment, we have more questions than answers. What is the projected growth in land transport demand? What standards are we aiming for, as regards public transport services, waiting time, transfer time and journey time? How do we keep the cost of public transport competitive and affordable? How can we encourage more commuters to use public transport? How are investment decisions made for MRT and road capacity expansion? Would the supply of road and MRT capacity lag demand? Should public transport operators continue to assume fair or revenue risk, or should they compete on service and cost efficiency alone? Singapore has an excellent transport infrastructure. The transport infrastructure is an important consideration for companies as they weigh the merits of basing in Singapore vis-a-vis other cities. Whether we can continue to win them over depends on whether we are prepared to take bold and innovative investments and measures to retain Singapore's pole position in transport. MOT plays a critical role and I look forward to hearing the Ministry's plan to meet these challenges. Traffic Management”
“The heat is on, the competition to become hub ports is clearly underway. I am therefore very interested to get an update from the Minister on how we are positioning Changi to meet these challenges. 2.45 pm In the maritime sector, Singapore has established itself as one of the top container ports in the world. Last year, Singapore recorded 24.8 million TEUs, or Twenty-foot Equivalent Units against Hong Kong's 23.2 million TEUs and Shanghai's 21.7 million TEUs. They are almost equal amongst the three cities. But, just five years ago, the figures for Singapore was 15.6 million TEUs; Hong Kong a little higher, 17.9 million TEUs; and Shanghai, a mere 6.3 million TEUs. So if you work out the maths, the CAGR or compound annual growth rate is 9.7% for Singapore over the last five years; 5.3% for Hong Kong; and 28.1% for Shanghai. At these rates, the trend is clear. Shanghai will overtake Singapore within a year or two as the busiest container port in the world. Singapore must therefore go beyond just handling container volumes, but to build itself as a comprehensive and total maritime hub. This involves making Singapore a major finance, brokering, insurance and arbitration centre for shipping. Indeed, these activities could have given higher value-add than container handling. To this end, I welcome the Budget announcement to extend the Approved Shipping Logistics Enterprise Incentive from 5 to 10 years and that container services will be zero-rated for GST purposes. At the same time, I would be very interested to hear about MOT's plan to grow the maritime sector and also to address the manpower shortages confronting the shipping industry. Finally, land transport. We are gearing ourselves up for a resident population of about 6.5 million people.”
“Sir, low taxes are a necessary condition for success but it is not sufficient. Maintaining rule of law, enhancing national security, promoting public safety, keeping regulations light, ensuring a business-friendly environment, and investing in education and infrastructure are all critical factors which make for a competitive Singapore. Sir, I would like to focus now on infrastructural investments. Singapore's GDP grew by 7.9% last year and is projected to do well in the short to medium-term. We would also be seeking to increase the resident population and tourist arrivals as we open our doors to our two integrated resorts to tourists the world over. What does all this growth mean? More containers through our seaport, more passengers at our airport and more trips on our roads and trains. To cater to such a high projected growth, it is imperative that we invest in advance of demand, so as to enhance our transport connectivity and efficiency, both internationally and domestically. First, on aviation. Bangkok will get over the teething problems of the new Suvarnabumi Airport. This airport has a capacity of 45 million passengers. Bangkok itself is also a more attractive airport because of its proximity to the major cities around it, and it is also a popular destination in itself. Further afield, Dubai has announced an ambitious plan to build a mega airport capable of handling 120 million passengers. That is almost three times that of Bangkok Airport. If Dubai succeeds, long-range aircraft from Europe could stop at Dubai and then fly directly to Australia and, in the process, by-passing Singapore altogether. This so-called "kangaroo" route is today an important revenue source for Changi and Singapore-based airlines.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the total sum to be allocated for Head W of the Estimates be reduced by $100. Sir, we have heard many Budget and COS debates following the Budget announcement by Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam. The Singapore public is understandably concerned about the distribution aspects of this Budget. This is also reflected in the many discussions in this House. But lest we get too carried away into distribution issues, we would do well to remember that, to be a successful nation, the first order of business for Government is to invest in economic growth. Unless the Government can continue to attract new investments to grow the economic pie, we would not have much to discuss for distribution since there would be little left for distribution. The business community applauds Singapore's bold move to cut corporate tax by 2%. Whether Singapore can succeed depends not only on what we do but what other competing economies do. This is a point often lost for the population at large. I was often asked why do we need to cut the corporate rate to help companies whilst increasing GST which hurts resident consumers. The simple answer is that we are not acting alone in this globalised world. If we do not have a competitive tax regime and other economies do, then, willy-nilly, jobs in Singapore would be lost. How could that be good for Singaporeans? If we get the formula right, and the stimulus effect of a competitive tax regime kicks in, I would not be surprised if we chalked up budget surpluses in the years to come, and budget surplus is not a bad word. Ours is the envy of many economies and, with surpluses, we can then indulge more in discussions about distribution and reinvestments, a luxury many economies could ill-afford.”
“There is more that we could do and we should do to help the structurally unemployed, the disabled and children from disadvantaged families. Many in these groups need help despite their best efforts. Sir, I fully embrace the President's call for a more compassionate society. But let us be watchful, as the Prime Minister has warned, of the traps and the trip wires as we go down this path. Sir, the 11th Parliament has inherited a stronger Singapore. Our foreign relations are warm all round. Our national defence has grown from strength to strength, and our economy is chugging along nicely. Jobs are abound, and we have every reason to be optimistic and, yes, even very happy, as Mr Chan Soo Sen has reminded us. So, by all means, send the cow to the vet, refine our welfare delivery systems but, most of all, ensure that the cow comes back fit, strong and competitive, so that the "milk of kindness", as Dr Vivian Balakrishnan puts it, will continue to flow for generations to come. Sir, I thank the President for his Address and I am confident that through robust debates as we have heard in the last few days, the laws and policies coming out of this 11th Parliament will make for a bigger, stronger, more competitive and compassionate Singapore! 5.35 pm”
“Professor Linda Lim is a Singaporean who now lives in the US and works for the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor. So competition for talent is not new but now more than ever because of globalisation and our ageing population; it must be Singapore's top priority. As a multi-racial country with a large number of foreigners working in our midst, with English as the working language, I think our people are adaptable so we are, often-times, a target for countries who are seeking talents. At the same time, because English is our working language and with the large number of foreigners in our midst, we also have a competitive edge in attracting talents. So we will do well to capitalise on this. I think Japan will find it a little more difficult to attract and assimilate foreign talents. Sir, so if this first path is not viable, what then is a viable path? I think the viable path begins with the premise that the State expects its citizens to be self-reliant, to uphold the highest work ethos and intervenes only after an "effort test". The "safety net" is calibrated carefully to help only those who "cannot", rather than those who "would not" help themselves. We are not starting off from a bad base. In fact, we are starting off from a good base. Yes, there are stresses and uncertainties. But in Singapore today, we do not find homeless people in our streets as compared to even the most successful economies. Hospitals do not deny anyone who needs healthcare. No child will go without schooling even if their parents could not afford it. It is not the case everywhere. I read in the Herald Tribune, for example, that a student in suburban China offered to sell his 'blood' to help his classmate enrol into college. We must not allow Singapore to become such a society.”
“Why did the garment factory now wants to have a replacement factory in Vietnam? I am told that apparently, some international NGOs were lobbying the Cambodian Government to impose a minimum wage for all these workers in the Cambodian factory. The minimum wage proposed was US$50 per month per worker. And the garment factory owner told me that at that level, Cambodia would be priced out and be uncompetitive compared to Vietnam, especially when you adjust for the productivity levels in Vietnam, the higher political stability and the vast pool of workers that you can find in Vietnam. So if the NGOs do succeed, I would like to ask Mr Chiam, what would be the realised minimum wage of each of these 8,000 workers in the Cambodian factory? The answer must be zero. They would be out of jobs. Sir, the most important challenge for Singapore, in my opinion, is our shrinking and ageing population. In scenario planning, this is not a critical uncertainty. This is called a trend, this is something that will definitely happen. So for Singapore to continue on with its current trajectory of growth, we need a large base of economically-active citizens to support our ageing population. The preference, of course, is to have more Singaporeans born of Singaporean parents. That way, we preserve the values that would have made us successful - meritocracy, reward for productive work, corruption-free and so forth. But we all know the limits of such a strategy. The next answer lies with immigration. Here, we must first realise that Singapore is not the only country that is resorting to immigration. For many years, the US has been using immigration policies to very good effect, including attracting Professor Linda Lim, who was cited by Ms Sylvia Lim some days ago in this Chamber.”
“For these reasons, I share PM's views that globalisation is also good for Singapore and it can be done because, if a company like Wal-Mart, which is similarly situated can do it, I think Singapore can do it. Because if Wal-Mart does not take advantage of outsourcing and off-shoring, then companies like Carrefour or Tesco would do so and over time, by trying to protect jobs in the US, there will be no jobs left at Wal-Mart. Given the smallness of our economy, it is not possible for Singapore to resist the forces of globalisation. As in the case of Wal-Mart, as a company without much resources in Bentonville, Arkansas, if they can do it, as a nation, we can do it just as well. Indeed, our companies must venture abroad in search of better factors of production and larger markets. Indeed, foreign and local enterprises in Singapore must be given access to cheaper foreign labour. The more we distort market forces as a Government, the more violently these forces would come back; would boomerang to hit us. I want to talk a little bit about minimum wage. Last month, I visited a garment factory in Cambodia. It is a well-run factory, medium-sized, and employs about 8,000 workers. The Managing Director told me that although they were satisfied with the operations in Cambodia, they had recently opened up another factory across the border in Vietnam. The plan is initially for this factory to take over some of the load from Cambodia in the peak periods but they have actually prepared the Vietnam factory to be scaled up in a matter of weeks to totally replace the output of the Cambodian factory. When I was there, I watched the 8,000 workers working very hard and very diligently in the factory. So I was a bit concerned on the part of these workers.”
“Therefore, after adjusting for inflation, the real value of the reserve would be preserved. But I am sure that during the debate for the Constitutional amendment regarding the reserves and changing of the formula, the Prime Minister would enlighten us about the amount of funds available and the kind of checks and independence that the GIC would be put to in order that they make correct economic decisions about when to realise a capital gain. Consider next, Sir, the economic competition from other countries and Singapore's externally oriented economy. Singaporeans enjoy a high per capita income. We are the envy of the world. But in aggregate, our economy is actually quite small on the world stage. Singapore recorded a GDP of US$117 billion last year, ranked 41st in the world. Wal-Mart, a retail company in the US had an annual sales of US$285 billion last year - for a single company, compared to Singapore's entire economy of US$117 billion. Wal-Mart purchased more than a quarter trillion - I am not talking about millions or billions - more than US$250 billion worth of merchandise in a single year. If Wal-Mart were an economy, it would be China's eighth largest trading partner, just one company. I chose Wal-Mart as an example because it is a company that was born in Bentonville, Arkansas. Bentonville, Arkansas is a small town without a large local market and not much resources. Actually, it is a little bit like Singapore. So it is not unlike us. Yet, Wal-Mart was one of the first company to embrace globalisation for competitiveness. Suddenly, with globalisation, the local factor inputs become unimportant, whether you have land, capital or labour. It does not really matter because the whole world is your oyster, as the PM puts it.”
“I think if we put such a proposition to the crucible of the realities in the marketplace, we will quickly realise, Sir, that there are many unintended consequences. Consider first just human motivation itself. If the State rushes in to provide, without even expecting an 'effort test', why would citizens work hard? And if more and more of them become dependent on the State, who would be left behind to pay the taxes needed to fund the many welfare schemes? So I say a permanent welfare system in Singapore is a myth because if our safety net is too wide and if it is too entrenched, we will lose competitiveness eventually and, at some point, the system will self-destruct. But we were consistently reminded that we have a large reserve and here, I am more conservative than the Prime Minister. I think the reserve is similar in some ways to defence capability. When we have a strong reserve and a strong defence capability, if they are working well, they act as effective deterrents. What does that mean? Effective deterrents mean you wait, nothing happens, because the deterrents are effective, nothing happens. But over a long time, if nothing happens, then some people will start to question whether we are doing too much in terms of reserve or defence. If we yield to such questions and we allow either one of them to dwindle, then it will be way too late when something does happen. So I was listening very carefully to the PM when he spoke about changing the formula as to what constitutes NII. I think his proposal is a reasonable one since 'capital' gains are normally recognised as investment returns in most funds. And also, the capital value of the reserves will remain largely intact because the other 50% of the NII would be under the President's care.”
“Members have spoken passionately about many issues close to their heart. The Prime Minister also spoke yesterday on the dos and don'ts when reviewing our safety net. I am in broad agreement with the PM and would illustrate some of his points from my own experience as a business executive. I see the problem this way. Ultimately, it is about Singapore making a choice - a choice between two different paths; each of them seemingly compelling and both promising a better Singapore. Let us take a look at the first path. The first path begins with the premise that the State takes sole responsibility for the well-being of all citizens. Such a proposition sounds reasonable. And why not, since Singapore has built up a large reserve and if you add to that, funds held by the statutory boards and Temasek, there is plenty to go around? Along this argument, the State should also provide a permanent unconditional and needs-based welfare system. You have heard these famous five words many times. So that poverty in Singapore is eradicated once and for all. For good measure, this path also suggests that since globalisation results in off-shoring, we should reject it, stop our companies from venturing abroad, lest we lose jobs to China, India and elsewhere. And we should also be very careful when bringing in foreign workers or immigrants into Singapore because they will compete with Singaporeans for jobs, space and so forth. Also, to protect Singaporeans, let us impose a minimum wage and this will be really helpful to the lower strata of society. So what is the proposition? A country with no poor people and happiness all around? Quite an appealing proposition. Why not? If it can be done, I say we should do it. But let us pause. Can it be done?”
“For example, to lay two MRT tracks east and west; two MRT tracks north and south, and so forth - in a small island state like Singapore. If we cannot achieve 'true contestability', we should not rule out the possibility of a single operator. I know my GPC colleague, Mdm Cynthia Phua has asked the Minister to study whether we can have a more competitive system rather than have a system where there is a single operator. The GPC, even within itself, has many diverse views and we encourage that. We also have all the bases covered so whatever the Transport Minister may decide, it would be a suggestion of the GPC. I think a single transport operator has merits and we should consider it. It would enjoy economies of scale and there would be less inefficiency at the boundaries of the two operations. I understand that operating an MRT system is an expensive affair and it is a very specialised affair. So if you have two MRT operators keeping two sets of skilled technicians, keeping two sets of stock and so forth, I think it may not be the most efficient way to go. Also, for some years now, there have been talks of a bus arrival information system at our bus-stops. But this has remained just talks. I have been urging SMRT to follow in the steps of SBS Transit to offer seasonal passes so that commuters who buy these passes can use them not only for SBS Transit routes but also for SMRT routes and use them islandwide. Apparently, the two operators cannot come to terms. In the meanwhile, commuters are worse off. I hope that the Minister could help correct this. Sir, I would like to move on now to discuss issues other than transport. We have heard that from many Members of this House over the last five days of debate.”
“Road congestion occurs mostly on one side whilst motorists on the "reverse commute lanes" whisk by. If lanes can be made more reversible to cater to peak traffic, then we could relieve road congestion without having to invest in more lanes. In fact, such a system has been done successfully in Canada and elsewhere. The George Massey Tunnel, the Lion's Gate Bridge and the Pitt River Bridge in Vancouver are some examples. I urge the Transport Minister to consider "reversible lanes" in the proposed study. Another idea is water taxis like in Venice. But in our case, say, from the Kallang Basin to the city, that could also be an alternative mode to road transport. I think that is what the Environment Minister is also encouraging - active use of our water space. Sir, I agree with the Transport Minister that we should increase the share of public transport commuters. At 63%, Singapore trails behind Zurich which has 75% public commuters, Hong Kong, 72% and Tokyo, 80%. The Transport Minister has said that he is aiming for 70% by 2020, that is, some 14 years away. But in 1996, some 10 years ago, that White Paper I talked about had a target of 75%. I urge MOT to be more ambitious because in land scarce Singapore, the only way we can solve this problem is by increasing the share of public commuters. Unless the public transport mode is made more comprehensive with more stations, more convenient and also more accessible, then this target may yet be revised again. Sir, finally on transport issues, we have two main public transport operators - SMRT and SBS Transit today. Their routes do not overlap and so effectively, they do not offer commuters with choices. It would also be very expensive if we were to operate two overlapping networks.”
“Like my GPC colleague, Mdm Cynthia Phua, rather than working at the edges or making marginal changes, I would strongly encourage MOT to undertake a fundamental review of our land transport sector. The URA, in its Concept Plan 2001 has projected a resident population of 5.5 million people in Singapore in the long-term. That is a 40% increase. Last year, Singapore Tourism Board set for itself a target to double tourist arrivals to 17 million by 2015, up from eight million in 2004. That is more than a hundred percent increase. With the two IR projects and the IFC, I believe that these projections would be exceeded. The future demand on our land transport will put considerable strain on the existing network. If we are to avoid the "congestion tax" that the Minister talked about, then we would do well to invest in advance of demand. Since 12% of our land area has been committed to roads, there is a limit to constructing more roads. One way is to consider the construction of underground roads. This is not a new idea. In fact, it was written in the Public Transport White Paper 1996. In that document, the LTA said that it is seriously studying the feasibility of the Singapore underground road system. It even had an acronym for it: SURS (Singapore Underground Road System). The SURS is said to be able to increase road capacity by 40%. I would like the Minister to update us on the findings of the feasibility study of the SURS. Another alternative to increase the use of our roads is "reversible lanes". For many in this House, if you are motorists, you would have noticed that in the morning rush hours, the ECP, for example, is jammed up for lanes towards the city and in the evening rush hours, jammed up again for lanes towards the east.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, first, I would like to address some issues regarding transport. Singapore has an excellent transport infrastructure. Our seaports and airports are truly world-class, thanks to the many people who work in these sectors - the stevedores, the gantry crane drivers at PSA, the staff at CAAS and the immigration officers at Changi Airport. They work with utmost dedication 24/7 to maintain Singapore's pole position as a major sea and air hub. Sir, the President, in his Address, emphasised the importance of investing in infrastructure to meet future business needs. The Prime Minister has also spoken to that effect. Sir, I support these positions. The reason why China is today the factory of the world while India is not can be largely explained by their different approaches to infrastructure development. In 2004, China invested 20% of its GDP in infrastructure and received US$60 billion in foreign direct investments (FDI). In contrast, India invested only 6% of its GDP in infrastructure and received only about US$5 billion in foreign direct investments, ie, less than one-tenth of what China received. This underscores the importance of infrastructure development in attracting FDI and jobs. With globalisation, supply chains are getting more complex. To remain relevant, we must continue to invest in infrastructure and be plugged in as a major node in the global supply chain. On the maritime front, we are expanding the Pasir Panjang container berths. In the air sector, we will soon witness the opening of Changi Terminal 3 in 2008. These are all welcomed. In land transport, the Transport Minister has announced a major study this year and I welcome the study.”
“Mr Chairman, Sir, living in HDB estates is an important experience for Singaporeans. Like National Service, these HDB experiences have contributed immensely to the nation-building of Singapore. Interacting with neighbours of different races, customs, religions, and across socio-economic strata; deepening our understanding for one another's beliefs, customs and practices; lending a hand to help each other, celebrating our diversity and living as a closely-knit community - these are all valuable HDB experiences. The current housing policy of HDB though is to avail new subsidised flats only to households with a monthly income of $8,000 or less. I agree that subsidies should go only to those who need them most. But, Mr Chairman, Sir, my proposal is for the policy to allow higher income households to also buy new HDB flats, say, 5-room or larger ones, but without subsidies. As many Members are aware, there is no scarcity of supply of the larger flats, unlike in the early years of the HDB. In fact, HDB has many unsold new flats, many of them in my constituency in Jurong West, as Mr Ang Mong Seng has pointed out. So, my proposal should not result in competition between income groups for the purchase of HDB flats. Mr Chairman, Sir, it is important to allow more Singaporeans, especially young Singaporeans, to live in HDB estates. That way, more and future generations of Singaporeans can benefit from that very unique, special and common HDB experience that has proven to bind us as a nation. Affordable Housing”
“If Malaysia chooses not to declare it, does it mean that we should forever pay such an exorbitant price for pork? Sir, the economic downturn and restructuring reduced the take-home pay and CPF savings of our low-income families. The statistics also show that 20% of the families, at the bottom in terms of income, spend 23% of their income on food. In this respect, the AVA has an additional role to make life more affordable for this particular group of people by taking pro-active measures to ensure that food prices are reasonably low and not unreasonably high. It is time that the AVA took action to put the matter right. This is March 2005. It has been six years from the outbreak of the Nipah virus. How long does the AVA need to wait in order to put the matter right? The officers should overcome all the technical obstacles and risks and start accepting pork from Malaysia. By doing so, the current man-made artificial high price for fresh pork will immediately evaporate, thus ending six consecutive years of windfall profit for the monopolistic Pulau Bulan pig farm favoured by the AVA policy.”
“They are also affected by different types of animal disease. Food Prices On 19th March 1999, a day before the ban on Malaysian pork, the wholesale price of Indonesian's Pulau Bulan pork was $1.20 per kg. A few days later, it was doubled to $2.70 per kg; a month later, it tripled to $3.50 per kg. Since then, it hovers around $4 per kg. During the last Chinese New Year, the wholesale price quadrupled to $5 per kg. 30 pm Sir, the 300%-400% jump in the wholesale pork price shows that the AVA has obviously failed very badly in keeping the pork price affordable. This is a multi-fold jump in terms of food price, and, in Chinese, we call tian wen shu zi. In countries, like Indonesia, just a 29% hike in the oil price led to a public commotion and demonstration. I just cannot understand why our officers in Singapore could take this matter for granted and persist with the high food price policy, not for one year but for six consecutive years. The officers may blame it on animal disease. Sir, the Malaysian pork price has gone back to normal. Why are Singaporeans - they are, in fact, quite smart - still paying such a high premium for pork? Is it true that the Nipah virus is still haunting us? Every day, we have about 40,000-50,000 Singaporeans crossing the Causeway and most of them are Chinese. Over there, they are eating food using Malaysian pork. I have never heard of any person contracting the Japanese encephalitis from consumption of such pork. Or is our AVA choosing to play safe and waiting for the Malaysian government to declare to the WHO that it is not a Nipah virus affected country? By doing so, perhaps blame could be shifted to their Malaysian counterparts for any risk arising from the lifting of the import ban.”
“Low Seow Chay: Sir, according to the Yearbook of Statistics, the current basic food price compared with that just before the 1999 Nipah virus attack in Malaysia shows that the fresh meat price index increased by 36.8% - 15 times more than the 2.51% increase in consumer price index during the same period. Sir, a steady supply of food from the nearest source ensures the stability of their prices. To achieve this, we must not unnecessarily create restriction for food imported from sources which are scientifically safe for import. Lately, the AVA, in dealing with animal diseases such as foot-and-mouth disease, adopted a zonal approach, instead of the simple traditional method applied in the past, ie, on a country basis. In the past, when there was a problem in the country, all the affected food from that country would be banned from import. Because of this reason, there is no beef from the United States and Europe and, likely, there is no Kobe beef from Japan and, of course, we know there is no pork from Malaysia. The recent permission for import of poultry, meat and eggs from Malacca and Johore is one of the best examples for this new zonal initiative, despite the bird flu-infected Kelantan which is less than 300 km away from Malacca. Because of this, poultry, meat and eggs took only three months to be fully reinstated to the level of the normal supply and price. I was told that the price of duck has even fallen lower than before. The AVA should be commended for this unprecedented scientific approach in ensuring the continuous supply of certain food, and keeping prices affordable. I would like to ask how the AVA could apply this genius thinking of food supply to pig, lamb, goat and cow imported from countries much bigger than Malaysia.”
“BCA will study the merits of introducing registration and skills certification for construction trades. We can also consider incorporating local hiring requirements for these trades in the licensing of contractors. Also under consideration is the public sector procurement system for construction works. BCA intends to give more weightage to quality and non-price attributes, such as contractor's past performances and safety records. We already have a price quality system for evaluating tenders for consultancy services in the public sector. This would be extended to the procurement of construction works. The principles of value for money and transparency will still be upheld. With this, contractors who have consistently performed well will stand to gain. Over time, a group of better performing contractors would emerge, setting benchmarks for construction quality in Singapore. BCA will continue to promote buildable designs, such as pre-fabricated solutions, which are more innovative and less labour intensive. It will raise buildability requirements progressively over the next few years. MND and MOM are undertaking a comprehensive review on construction safety. The review would take into account the findings of the Committee of Inquiry into the Nicoll Highway incident when they are released. Sir, in summary, MND and BCA will proactively address the fundamental challenges facing the construction industry. We will consider the measures outlined above as well as those suggested by Dr Khor and others to upgrade the industry and will work closely with all stakeholders to achieve this goal. Supply of Food Assoc. Prof.”
“BCA will also consider a further refinement to the registration requirements in the Contractors' Registry System (CRS) for public sector projects. This is to ensure that only highly competent and financially stable firms are allowed to undertake public sector projects. Together with licensing, this will raise the quality of our construction firms. Next, promoting exports. To supplement the limited domestic demand, the industry needs to venture abroad. BCA will step up efforts with IE Singapore to facilitate the formation of consortia among local firms to export construction services. The early signs are, indeed, very promising, with local firms securing $2 billion worth of overseas contracts last year. There is still much scope for our contractors in the overseas markets, which stood at $6.6 trillion in 2004. The size of the construction market in China and India alone was $580 billion last year. So, hopefully, over time, our local contractors can say (in the words of Phua Chu Kang) that they are the 'best in Singapore and some say India and China as well'. Sir, BCA is working with MOM to moderate the number and improve the quality of foreign workers in the construction industry, through a combination of higher levy and skills certification. This should help improve labour productivity and construction quality. At the same time, BCA will study the feasibility of building up a pool of locals for some core construction trades. The focus will be on trades where sustained growth in quality, productivity and safety are badly needed. Unlike the transient foreign workforce, a stable local workforce will be more prepared to upgrade their skills every few years and can accumulate experiences which make for higher quality and safety.”
“For example, the number of top-tier contractors that can vie for public sector work has come down through tighter registration requirements. Man-Year Entitlement cuts and wider adoption of buildable solutions have reduced Non-Traditional Source foreign workers by up to 30% in certain projects. However, we still lag substantially behind many developed countries, such as Australia, in terms of the value-add per construction worker. The construction industry will need to adjust faster. Otherwise, I fear that the industry will weaken further, with our better firms becoming casualties of cut-throat competition. As the industry contributes 4% to 5% to our GDP and it is integral to our economy, the Government will need to be more proactive in positioning the industry for recovery and for long-term competitiveness. MND and BCA are conducting a mid-term review of the implementation of the Construction 21 (C21) Plan, which was launched in 1999 to address the problems in the industry. We are consulting industry stakeholders to evaluate the effectiveness of the C21 initiatives and explore additional measures to advance the industry. I will highlight some of the measures under consideration. First, to raise professionalism, BCA is considering the licensing of main contractors and specialist sub-contractors who carry out works that require building control approval as suggested by Dr Khor. This means that only contractors that meet licensing requirements will be allowed to carry out general building works that require building approval and other specialised works, like geo-technical works, that have a significant impact on quality and safety. BCA will study the practices in other countries and implement a system that is suitable for Singapore.”
“Mr Chairman, Sir, Dr Amy Khor has touched on the state of the construction industry, the need to improve standards in quality and professionalism, as well as construction safety. I would like to thank her for her comments and I fully agree with her that more should be done to upgrade the construction industry. Sir, the construction industry today faces two fundamental challenges, namely, over-capacity and over-reliance on foreign workers. These challenges have direct impact on the professionalism, productivity and quality standards of the industry. Construction demand hovered around $10 billion in 2003 and 2004, less than half the peak demand of $24 billion in the mid-1990s. In the next five years, BCA projects annual demand to be between $12 billion and $14 billion a year. This is to be expected because our infrastructure development has reached a mature stage. It is not realistic to continue building flats, roads, MRT lines or schools at the same rate as before. Despite the sharp drop in demand, the number of construction firms has not correspondingly declined. The over-capacity has resulted in firms resorting to price cutting, with ramifications on professionalism, quality and also safety. The other fundamental challenge facing the industry is its high reliance on foreign workers. This is a structural problem. While low cost foreign labour has kept construction cost down, it has also contributed to low productivity level in the industry. Contractors would rather turn to lower cost foreign labour than adopt efficient building technology. Local labour participation has also declined, given the relatively less attractive wages. Recent measures to improve professionalism, quality and productivity have had some limited success.”
“Sir, the Member is correct. She pointed out that the cultural sensitivity displayed by SAF officers, men and women in Operation Flying Eagle during the tsunami disaster was important. Indeed, it is appreciated by our host and it helped us to be effective on the ground. SAF officers participate in exchange programmes with various countries, Indonesia included, and these exchange programmes allow us an opportunity to immerse in their culture as well as to understand their military practices and the personalities involved. Fortunately, for us in the tsunami disaster case, many of our commanders there knew the Indonesian commanders on a friend-to-friend basis because they have participated in similar courses together. Additionally, SAF officers also take language classes and I think this is particularly helpful in trying to understand the culture and sensitivities of our various military partners in our region and around the world. Sir, on the point of training space, Singapore, being small, would always be constrained by training space. But we try to overcome that by participating in exercises abroad and SAF does so in many, many countries around the world - South Africa, France, United States, Thailand, Brunei, and so forth. So we will continue to strike such partnerships where there are mutual benefits. And as the Minister for Defence has announced, we will be looking to expand our partnership with India. That should help us alleviate the constraints of small space and help us diversify our training areas. Retirement Age”
“Sir, neither MINDEF nor MOE has any control on the admission dates of foreign universities. The Member should remember that NS is instituted for the purpose of the defence of Singapore. Therefore, the primary mission of operational readiness of the SAF must come first. Having said that, where it does not affect the operational readiness of the SAF and where it would be equitable because MINDEF enlists them later than their peers in the same school cohort, we would consider them for disruption. As I said, we are looking into the disruption policies which will be guided by the principles that I have just enunciated, and we would announce them in due course. On the second question of admission into local universities, as I understand it, the Ministry of Education is currently studying it to see if any adjustments can be made in the matriculation periods for local universities.”
“Sir, I would like to thank all the Members for their very thoughtful and valuable suggestions and feedback. MINDEF will bear their views in mind as we review our policies, as we do every now and then, and as we evolve the 3G SAF.”
“A significant number of NSmen also volunteer for peacekeeping and humanitarian missions, such as the recent Operation Flying Eagle, and the missions in Iraq and Timor-Leste. This is an indication of the strong commitment level of our NSmen. Sir, I will now speak on RECORD IV. Our operationally ready NSmen play a key role in Total Defence. Their commitment and sacrifice have ensured our continued peace and stability, and we should recognise their efforts and dedication accordingly. To this end, MINDEF will be convening the 4th Committee to Recognise the Contribution of Operationally Ready National Servicemen to Total Defence, or the acronym RECORD IV, later in the year. The past three RECORD Committees have made significant contributions in the recognition of our NSmen. For example, RECORD III, which was convened in 2000, brought about the relaxation of exit control of NSmen. It also brought about the recognition of NS for admission to Institutes of Higher Learning. The 4th RECORD Committee will build on the work done by the first three Committees, and will recommend further ways to recognise and enhance the contributions of our NSmen. It will start its work once the members have been selected, and should finalise its report and present its recommendations by early next year. Minister Teo Chee Hean has tasked me to chair RECORD IV. I look forward to working with members of the Committee to identify ways to further recognise and strengthen the commitment of our NSmen to Total Defence. I would encourage feedback, inputs and suggestions from Members of this House, employers, NSmen at large, and the public. Such suggestions can also be channelled to our website at www.miw.com.sg.”
“They undergo proper and realistic training and are deployed in appointments and vocations that make good use of their skills and abilities, wherever possible. Towards the end of their two-year service, we try our best to transit them to civilian life in various ways. One of the ways is our e-Prep scheme. NSFs can participate in a wide variety of online courses to better prepare them for transition from NS to the workplace or further studies. MINDEF also recognises that as citizen soldiers, our operationally-ready national servicemen (NSmen) have to balance the demands of work responsibilities, family commitments and NS duties. A vast majority of our citizens are committed to the defence and security of Singapore - citizens who will not flinch from the responsibility of national defence when called upon to do so. Mr Alex Chan is one such example. He holds the rank of a Colonel and is a Brigade Commander in the SAF. He has also volunteered to serve even after completing his NS cycle of 13 years. Colonel Chan's dedication as an NSman is commendable and his commitment is indeed a fine example for others to emulate. Sir, we understand the challenges that our NSmen face and appreciate their contribution to the defence of Singapore. MINDEF is committed to recognising the contributions of NSmen. I will address this when I speak on RECORD IV. To enhance the NS experience, continuing efforts are also made to improve service quality standards and to streamline NS administration to better serve our NSmen. MINDEF has recently introduced a number of e-initiatives to improve the efficiency of NS administration and will continue to do more.”