Chay Wai Chuen
Singapore
“As a result, some enterprising businesses and grassroots people have even come up with better ideas on equipment and machines designed to suit our HDB estates, HDB rubbish chutes and our older workers, to make the equipment easier for them to handle. 3.00 pm I give this as an example.”
“Since there are so many anomalies administered by the two agencies up to now, and because so many retailers will be affected, I urge the Ministry to freeze this scheme and review the procedures and policies entirely and put up the designated land for tender to be administered by one agency.”
“Sir, I would like to ask the Minister to give more choices, in terms of compensation or alternatives and flat type allocation for those people who are affected by the Selective En-bloc Redevelopment Scheme. Children should be, as best as possible, allowed to help pay for their parents in some of these choices that they have to choose.”
“Sir, the MUP Programme has been in place for some time and it applies to units which are 17 years and above. I would like to ask the Minister why are 40-year old flats still not upgraded.”
“Mr Chairman, there is an increase in the operating expenditure of $648 million this year for the Ministry of Defence. I would like to know what is the rationale for this increase.”
“Sir, the SAF has been involved in peacekeeping missions on several occasions, in East Timor and the Middle East, typically in the area of logistics and medical services. I wonder whether the Minister can enlighten me on what kind of role the SAF can play in this area of peacekeeping missions.”
The complete record
Every one of 526 lines we hold for Chay Wai Chuen, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 10 of 11.
“Therefore, if we want the town council to play the role of a charitable or welfare organisation by being responsible for these bad debts, then surely it will make the town council's burden even heavier. So I suggest the Ministry of Community Development investigate into the plight of these poor families who cannot afford to pay their conservancy charges, and help those who are genuinely having financial problem by paying the arrears owing to the town council on their behalf or encourage some charitable or welfare organisations to offer them some financial aids. However, upon investigation, if MCD discovers that certain families have the means but refuse to pay up, they should inform the town council and we will take very stern legal action against these families. By so doing, we can avoid having the majority of our residents bearing these large sums of bad debts, as it will not be fair.”
“Sir, yesterday, the Chairman of the GPC made allusion to the Rent and Utilities Assistance Scheme. I would like to ask the Minister how the Rent and Utilities Assistance Scheme has been operating, what is the present position of this scheme, and how the Ministry determines who are entitled to partake of this scheme. Mr Peh Chin Hua (Jalan Besar GRC)( In Mandarin): Mr Chairman, Sir, here I would like to urge the Ministry of Community Development to consider helping those poorer families in paying the arrears in service and conservancy charges owing to the town councils. As the Chairman of Jalan Besar Town Council, I notice that in the past one year, residents owe the Town Council as much as $280,000 in arrears of service and conservancy charges. The Town Council sent several reminders to them. Yet, as many as 525 families failed to pay up even after receiving the lawyer's letters. Even after judgment was entered at the Small Claims Tribunal, 145 families were unable to pay up the arrears, of which 129 families were from the 3-room or smaller flats, accounting for 0.5% of the flats under the Town Council. The amount owed amounted to approximately $50,000. Although the $50,000 in bad debts is not a large amount, the town councils are actually charging only minimal amounts for service and conservancy charges from the residents. We have to work very prudently to save on our expenses. In a year, we are in deficit for more than one million dollars. So if we do not have the subsidy of more than one million dollars from the Government annually, the town council will surely encounter great financial crisis.”
“Sir, I have another cut under item (5), Code JD 9908103 of the Development Estimates. May I be permitted to take it together?”
“This will enrich further our world view and creativity and give more balance to the search for a more communitarian culture, which can answer to the changing political and economic conditions of international competition, globalisation and the borderless economy. For in the final analysis, the experts of communitarian studies, including Prof. Lodge, have never said that communitarianism is preferred to individualism. We should be aware that each approach exacts a price in the social calculus and the art is to find a balance to answer to the changing economic and political challenges of the times.”
“A statement on Shared Values may not necessarily lead to a Singaporean identity. The working out and the imbibing of these values and the practice of these values will be buffeted by the pressures of the modernistic cultures in an information age, in the telecommunication centre, where we find news, views and entertainment from all over the world. It will require quite deliberate attempts in policies and education to bring up these values. And in so doing, I have no doubt the Government will get consensus from the people. The new shared value which is "Community support and respect for the individual", as first propounded by Dr Vasoo and Prof Choo, is a good suggestion and I hope the House will adopt this. Here, I would like to add that in all these debates on communitarianism and shared values, we should remember that communitarianism is not a subterfuge for Confucianism. Germany has always been a relatively communitarian state since its birth in the Hegelian Prussian state, although aspects of its communitarian values have changed since the 19th Century till today. And ever since the early 19th Century, communitarian principles in the policies of Andrew Jackson have always been a torturous facet of the ongoing debate on the American value system. Compared to them, the Japanese and the East Asian NICs experiences are relatively late starters. Yet I should add that we should not undervalue the individual, his capacity and his right to choose and his free will, his capacity to differentiate between good and bad, right and wrong, truth and falsehood and to articulate them.”
“Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, for allowing me to join in this debate. Hearing my young colleague espousing on the wisdom of the Chinese philosophy, and especially on age, I rather thought that he might allow me to speak first. Many people have spoken on this and shared their views on the subject. Reading through the Command Paper, I observe that there are two significant improvements over the original proposal. Firstly, we have originally talked about National Ideology, now this Paper is titled "Shared Values". Secondly, there are now five principles instead of four previously. The Government has added a new principle which is the amended one of "Community support and respect for the individual". These are significant improvements. It is a good example that the contention of ideas is not necessarily a bad thing and these improvements and additions show that the Government leaders do deliberately seek views from the people and improve on them. Why do I say that these are significant improvements from the original position first propounded? A statement on Shared Values differs from a National Ideology. An ideology must imply not just specific relationship of individuals and the community and the ultimate purpose, but also ownership and rights to properties, incorporating the role of the State. Putting a cap on "Nation before community and society above self" in the context of a National Ideology could generate uncertainty and confusion to citizens and foreign investors alike. A statement on Shared Values is definitely more amenable and more consonant with what the Government hopes to achieve, as can be deduced from the many statements made and the introduction to the White Paper. Sir, I wish to point out the obvious.”
“It is right that the shared values have to be taught from young through the school, and by us as parents. I concur with the view that these shared values should not be legislated. But I strongly feel that there must be some ways to enshrine these values so that they become basic tenets of the value system of Singaporeans. The following are some ideas which can be considered. First, perhaps casting in concrete the Shared Values onto a monument which can be sited at an appropriate place, such as the grounds of our Parliament House; Second, to amend our Singapore Pledge so as to include elements of the five values; and third, to compose a Singapore song, or a few more Singapore songs, or even a new National Anthem, that can embody the Shared Values. Sir, we can tap the public for more ideas on how to enshrine the Shared Values. To gain widespread acceptance of the Shared Values, it is obvious that further extensive propagation work at the ground should be conducted. Some of our best minds should be put to work to expound further on the values. The ultimate objective is that the Shared Values can be fully embraced by the people. In my view, proposing and gaining national acceptance for the Shared Values will be a major step forward for our Government under the Prime Minister, Mr Goh Chok Tong. Sir, I support the Motion.”
“Hopefully, the shared values will assist in shaping the type of Singaporeans we want to project. Perhaps a Singaporean is one who believes in the well-being of his family and the nation and living harmoniously together in a small compact island. For the five basic shared values proposed, I think I can agree with all, except perhaps for the fourth, which is the most contentious one. The fourth one is, "Consensus instead of contention". While the intention is valid, that is, a need to build consensus among our people, I feel that the expression can be subject to much argument. To call purely for consensus, without explanations and elaborations, can lead to misunderstanding of this proposed value. We cannot possibly have consensus in every issue. In any case, there should be room for differences in opinion. I feel that over-emphasis on consensus tends to create a people that are submissive and pliable. I also feel that promoting consensus is in conflict with the often quoted ideals of meritocracy, a society of excellence and a city of distinction. To achieve these latter objectives would mean encouraging competition and individual performance. We need some degree of free-play for individualism to reach out for excellence. Yesterday, the Deputy Prime Minister, BG Lee Hsien Loong, had suggested in this House that this expression can be changed to something that is more popularly acceptable. I would urge the Government to consider modifying this fourth value to mesh with our desire to strive for social cohesion. Perhaps if I could be bold enough to venture one suggestion. Why not use: "Consensus building for social cohesion"? Sir, I would like to touch on how to enshrine the shared values.”
“Hence, I believe that instead of being labelled as paternalistic, we should view the Government as forward-looking for proposing the Shared Values. We can concede that the approach could be a short-cut, as compared to letting the value system evolve slowly. However, the process is not artificial as we are developing the shared values not from thin air, but by distilling the essence of the major civilizations in the world, namely, Malay, Indian and Chinese. Sir, on a Singaporean identity, is there any hope in creating a Singaporean identity? Many would ask, what is a Singaporean identity? Let me quote an anecdote to show that a Singaporean identity is in fact already taking shape. I was recently in Tokyo. In a restaurant in a large hotel, I happened to chance upon a Singaporean couple who are friends of mine. After the usual pleasantries, one of the friends remarked that the two gentlemen at the next table must be Singaporeans. He noticed that they talked and behaved like Singaporeans. I told him that he was right. These two people at the next table were in fact my Singapore colleagues. Sir, it is our common experience that when we travel overseas, we are more and more often being recognised as Singaporeans. There must be something in our behaviour, speech, tastes, mannerism or preferences that make us distinguishable from others. Since we are already exhibiting these various external features, I think it is natural to add to the finishing touches by agreeing among ourselves the value system to adopt as the common internal traits of Singaporeans. This move is timely as left unattended, we see lately that the image of Singaporeans has been tarnished by some unfavourable characteristics. There are labels being used such as kiasu or materialistic.”
“Some may criticise that pre-determining shared values is artificial, and it is another example of the paternalistic style of the Government. While these remarks are not entirely wrong, I feel there is strong justification for developing the Shared Values. Let me address these two criticisms. First, unlike societies and nations with long histories and established cultures, Singapore is a very young country. In other countries, their long histories have enabled their distinct cultures, ethos and value systems to develop naturally and become sub-consciously accepted. In the course of their history, the great leaders, thinkers, philosophers and writers had expounded and propagated ideas, thoughts and teachings. A few notable names are John Mill, Karl Marx, Karl Popper, Bertrand Russell, Gandhi, Confucius, Sun Yat Sen and others. Their writings have helped to mould the value systems in their societies. These value systems are internalised by each citizen and become accepted values of the people. For Singapore, we have a very limited pool of local thinkers, writers and philosophers to conceptualize and spread their ideas and teachings. In Singapore, I think our most notable philosopher is Mr S Rajaratnam. For him and others, they have to gain prominence and a following, and consequently for their ideas to be absorbed by the populace. This is a very time-consuming process. Due to the openness of our society, these people have to compete with other external philosophers and thinkers to win over the minds of our people. The process to naturally evolve a Singaporean identity and value system may take a few generations, probably one to two hundred years. The question is: can we wait one to two hundred years? Do we have one to two hundred years?”
“The school principals, teachers or parents should stress the importance of teamwork when they are educating their children, so that it becomes natural for these children to look after others and to be considerate to others. When they grow up, they will be able to sacrifice their own interests and take the initiative to care for others, for society and for the nation. At the same time, this will help to cultivate the spirit of unity, mutual help and love among the children. This will certainly help in countering individualism which our shared values seek to oppose. If all ranks and files, from political and community leaders to school principals, teachers and parents, are to cooperate closely and impart these values by weaving them into their way of life, by practising and setting good examples, these will be living examples for the younger generation to emulate. In this way, the objectives of these shared values would be attained much sooner. Therefore, Mr Speaker, Sir, so long as we can put in a concerted effort, we would be able to have good and happy families and our society will be compassionate and gracious, and more prosperous. I support the motion. Mr Leong Horn Kee (Thomson): Mr Speaker, Sir, the primary purpose of evolving shared values is to develop a Singapore identity. The White Paper has explained at length why there is a need to evolve a Singapore identity. The reason is that the openness of our society is affecting the attitudes and outlook of our young Singaporeans who are being exposed to external influences. These influences, which are often unfiltered, can lead to absorption of unsuitable and misguided values which will be detrimental to our society.”
“(2) To build a compassionate and gracious society. By putting society above self and recognising the importance of the family unit and society, more Singaporeans will come forward to do community work and will contribute to community and welfare programmes. Those who are talented and have done well for themselves will assist the less fortunate ones. Such community support for individuals will ensure a more compassionate and gracious society. (3) Our society and our country will be more prosperous and developed. The value of "nation before community and society before self" ensures that our multi-racial and multi-religious society would take a step further towards our nation building process in a more tolerant and harmonious manner. At the same time, it demonstrates the spirit of mutual regard and community spirit within a multi-racial and multi-religious society which, in turn, contributes greatly to the prosperity and progress of the country. However, for the above ideals to bear fruit, it will take many years. The best way to inculcate these qualities would be through education. Students are taught these shared values in the schools so as to make them good pupils. Parents at home should also instil and help prepare their children to be good children, so their children will grow up to become good husbands and wives and good parents in due course. At a later stage, they will be able to guide their fellow countrymen to become good citizens through social education. Education has a very major role to play. "Example is better than precept". It is only with this can education become effective. Cultivating the spirit of cooperation and teamwork among our children is something that should not be neglected.”
“This practice of discarding a narrow and self-centred outlook and putting the interests of society as a whole ahead of individual interests would ensure that all Singaporeans attach more importance to the interests of the community. The Chinese version of the White Paper which says, "Nation above all, society comes first" has in fact reflected the spirit of these shared values. This set of Shared Values would also encourage each ethnic group to preserve and promote the cultural heritage of each of our communities and to uphold certain common values which capture the essence of being a Singaporean. These will also help to prevent us from losing our direction when confronted with undesirable foreign influences. These values, which transcend racial, religious and political confines, at the same time, do not allow any community to forcibly impose its philosophy and thinking on others. This would be crucial to our multi-racial society. In other words, we would be moving towards a more tolerant, respectful, understanding and harmonious society. Our cohesiveness will be more solid. I believe that with the implementation of the shared values over a period of time, the following results will be met: (1) Most of our Singapore families will be blissful and happy. Under the Shared Values, emphasis has been laid on the family as the basic unit of society. It advocates mutual respect and love between husband and wife and they shall remain devoted till the end of their lives. Caring and educating the young offsprings is the responsibility of parents. Paying due respect and taking care of the needs of our elders, such as parents and grandparents, will be the responsibility of the young. These make up the essence of a blissful and happy family.”
“It is an enormous sum because currently petrol consumption is running at something like 750 million litres per year. So a 10 cents reduction on duty will cost a revenue loss of $70 million, equivalent to the tax collection from 1% of corporate tax. In other words, in order to offset a price reduction of 10 cents per litre on petrol, we would have to raise corporate taxes by 1%. I am sure that is not a sensible alternative. Question put, and agreed to. Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House. The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. - [Dr Richard Hu Tsu Tau]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. SHARED VALUES (Motion) Order read for Resumption of Debate on Question [14th January, 1991], "That this House adopts the White Paper (Paper Cmd. No. 1 of 1991) as the basis for developing Shared Values amongst Singaporeans.". -- (Dr Ong Chit Chung). Question again proposed. Mr Peh Chin Hua (Jalan Besar GRC)( In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I second the motion moved by the Member for Bukit Batok on developing a national ideology through a set of shared values. The White Paper on Shared Values proposed by the Government is secular in nature; it does not include any religious or political values. It stresses the importance of "nation before community and society above self", which emphasizes that the existence of the family is possible only when the nation exists. Moreover, the concept of "family as the basic unit of society" would strengthen unity among family members, thereby resulting in social cohesiveness of the nation.”
“He has also suggested that we might consider not introducing a three-quarter tank rule so as not to discourage Singaporeans from visiting Johor. I think the statistics disprove this. Prior to the half-tank rule, cars going to Johor were running between 5,000 and 6,000 per day. They are running at about 9,000 per day now despite the half-tank rule. So we do not believe that this move to the three-quarter tank rule will in fact have any significant impact in discouraging motorists from going to Johor for other reasons. Mr Chay has suggested that we should move to the full tank rule immediately so as to avoid any confusion in the public's mind about Government's intentions. I have explained earlier why we did not do this, and it is deliberate. In the case of any tank rule there are only four positions you can choose: no rule at all, quarter-tank, half-tank, three-quarter or full. In between, it is not possible to enforce. So I do not think the question of misunderstanding the policy is very likely. I have explained why we did not move to the full tank rule. It is mainly because we do not want to create unnecessary inconvenience for the motorists. Finally, there has been a suggestion that one way of solving this problem in the introduction of unleaded petrol would be to reduce the tax on unleaded petrol and keeping the tax on leaded petrol the same. Experience in other countries has been that in order to induce the motorists to switch from leaded to unleaded petrol would require a price differential of about 10 cents per litre. Therefore, if we were to reduce taxes on leaded petrol by 10 cents per litre, the tax loss would amount to approximately $70 million per year.”
“It is simply to allow the motorist some discretion in not having to top up his tank every time he wants to go to Johor, lest he runs the risk by the time he reaches the Johor causeway, his meter has somehow fallen below the full-tank mark. So it is done with a conscious wish to avoid inconvenience to the motorist, although administratively and from the financial point of view, I would have preferred the full-tank rule right away. You can see that it would be much simpler to administer, but the decision was taken to give the benefit of the discretion to the motorist. It is not for any other illogical reasons. Mr Chew has asked why I had in 1989 argued that the three-quarter tank rule was difficult to enforce and therefore we introduced the half-tank rule. That is technically true. The half-tank rule is simpler because every fuel tank meter has a half-tank mark. At that time, the half-tank rule was thought to be adequate in view of the differential in prices at that time. But clearly it is insufficient now since the price difference has widened considerably. Hence, our need to raise the tank rule from half to three-quarters, and I have just explained why we did not move entirely to the full mark. He has also asked what is the tax loss if the three-quarter tank rule is not introduced. At the moment, the tax loss is currently estimated to be running at something like $2 million a month. Previously, before the prices jumped, the tax loss was running at about $1 million a month. So it is nearly double. The objective is to try and bring it back to below $1 million per month. He has also asked that if oil prices in the Middle-East should jump as a result of war, would we consider lowering taxes. I think this question can only be answered when we actually see what happens.”
“I am not sure what the origin of that is, but I believe the intent was to take photographs, not of the motorist, but of the meter so that if there should be any dispute over the position of the marker on the fuel gauge, this can constitute proof. So I do not think the Customs officers want to take pictures of people. His suggestion that we should introduce a trial period of about a month is a sensible one and I am prepared to consider that. We had in fact introduced a trial or grace period when we first introduced the half-tank rule. At that time, motorists who did not have a half-tank on their gauges during this period would be turned back but not fined. We can continue this trial period in the same way for the three-quarter tank rule but, in this case, of course, the discretion not to fine the motorists would only apply to those who have at least half a tank. So if there is any doubt between half and three-quarters during the trial period, we can accept that the motorist will simply be warned, not fined, but turned back to fill up to the proper mark. I thank the Member for his suggestion. Finally, he has said that some motorists at the causeway have been casting derogatory remarks like "tiga-suku" against Customs officers. I agree with him and I would ask motorists not to vent their frustrations against the Customs officials because it is not their fault. Blame me, if you like, but they are merely doing their job and have done it under great restraint. I might at this juncture explain why, and this anticipates some of the questions asked later by the other Members, Government chose to introduce the three-quarter tank rule rather than the full-tank rule.”
“It is very important for the public to understand correctly the aims of any legislation or policy, otherwise it can be misrepresented by others and what mileage one can gain in fudging the issues in the short term can be defeating in the long term. Those who argue favourably but wrongly for one is a far greater danger to one than those who argue unfavourably but rightly against one. Hence, I would seriously urge the Minister to consider announcing a target date for a full-tank measure. This will bring the customs duty loophole for the petrol in the tank in the car to a close, and the quality of informed public comment and debate to greater heights and fuller measure. Dr Richard Hu Tsu Tau: Mr Speaker, Sir, I will reply to each of the speakers in turn, although there is some overlap. Mr Chandra Das has asked if Government would exercise flexibility. I can give him a categorical assurance that that will be the case. In fact, our experience has been that in the last year or so the Customs officers have been very flexible and there have been very few complaints about the way they have implemented the half-tank rule. They will certainly continue to do so. It is recognised that the three-quarter tank rule would create some problems because about one-third of cars do not have the three-quarter tank mark. This means that the Customs officers will have to assume that if the meter stands half-way between the half-tank position and the full-tank that the three-quarter tank rule is satisfied, and they will use their discretion accordingly. I think in the majority of cases they would give the benefit of the doubt to the motorist. I believe that Mr Das has misunderstood the press statement about photograph-taking.”
“It is like defining the elephant to people who have only touched or felt different parts of it, all coming out with different ideas of the elephant, depending on which part of the elephant they have touched or felt or knocked against. Of course, there will always be arguments for and against. But I feel that this is not good for the Government as the people have all sorts of explanations or misunderstandings of the policy. Some argue it is good for creating road space at the causeway and for swifter traffic. Some argue that if the policy is to help the environment in favour of non-leaded petrol, then the Government should reduce tax on unleaded petrol or award demerit points or give incentives to buy new cars. The Straits Times in its editorial even talks about a dual pricing rationale for the three-quarter tank rule. I hope this varying of the tank rule will not deteriorate into an instrument of regulating control on traffic flow or has a dual pricing rationale for some policy goals of which I am not aware, and I hope the Minister for Finance can clarify this matter. Sir, these are not my wild imaginations. One should read the editorial of the Straits Times of 10th January 1991 to appreciate the contortions and the letters to the Straits Times. Sir, the confusion regarding this clear-cut custom duty problem is partly caused by the Ministry of Finance, unwittingly or deliberately, taking a lift from the Environment Ministry in attempting to point out the discrepancy in leaded and unleaded price of petrol between Singapore and Johor. I really do not see the connection this has for a three-quarter tank rule. Does it mean that we will revert to a half-tank rule if the price differential is to be narrowed by some factors in the future?”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker, Sir, for allowing me to speak. The Government announced some weeks ago that it will be raising the requirement of Singapore cars going to Malaysia to have a three-quarter tankful of petrol from the present half-tank rule. This announcement was made with some explanation of how the price difference of leaded and unleaded petrol has widened. Some people have argued or explained why this is good for a green Singapore. Some have argued or explained why it will not affect traffic flow between Singapore and Johor Baru. Even the Straits Times has sought to argue the tenuous connection why this is good in view of the philosophy of stringent pricing on road usage in land scarce Singapore. Frankly, Sir, I do not see the connection. Sir, you will recall that when the half-tank rule was first brought up, there was much uneasiness among the public on the matter. It seems to suggest so many things to so many people regarding what the policy aims to do. One person actually asked me whether the next thing the Government was going to do was to make sure that Singaporeans have a full stomach before they go to Johor. Let me say that I support the Ministry of Finance's policy of plugging this problem, which is a clear-cut custom duty loophole problem, which lies hidden in the petrol tank. I agree with the person who said that the Government should announce clearly its intention to plug this loophole and set the target date for the full tank rule to be effective. This amendment allows the Minister to vary the tank rule. Every time it is changed, new explanations and interpretations will be proffered.”
“By this control measure, foreigners will always have faith in the long-term stability of our Singapore dollar, and the worth of assets owned by Singaporeans will not fall due to a depreciating currency. Finally, Sir, the proposed Elected President does not exercise his decision and his prerogative in splendid isolation. It is important to repeat that the Elected President is elected by the people. His constituency is Singapore. There is also a provision for a Council of Presidential Advisors whose members include ordinary citizens nominated by the Chairman of the Public Service Commission from the civil service and by the Prime Minister. This body which advises the Elected President is another institution which allows for the non-partisan scrutiny of Supply Bills and issues pertaining to the responsibility of the Elected President. These Advisors are in touch with the mainstream of development of Singapore and will be able to advise the Elected President accordingly. Mr Speaker, Sir, I support the Amendment Bill.”
“Thirdly, does it provide a stabiliser to any factious parliament and any unstable parliamentary government that may arise? As I have explained earlier, I think it does. Finally, does the Elected Presidency take away the excessive burden of responsibility on the Prime Minister which our system has been operating up to now? The answer is yes. Such an innovation may not be a disadvantage. It represents a more politically mature society that we are now, with power sharing to a new institution to safeguard the integrity of State. I believe this is good for three reasons:- Firstly, it provides potentially more room for a more balanced approach by the Prime Minister, especially when he is committed to building consensus in a partici- patory democracy. He is also, by the presence of the Elected Presidency, forced more to consider the potential bottleneck because of the need for assent and thereby to persuade and to find more middle ground among various sections of the populace. Secondly, the people will be assured that the Government by meritocracy will always prevail because of the second level check on the integrity of the civil service and the statutory boards. Thirdly, I believe this additional institution will lend stability and assurance which will enable and ensure that Singapore will continue to attract foreign investment and that Singaporeans will find it worthwhile to save and invest. Because of the safeguards in the Elected Presidency, Parliament and the Government cannot easily run a deficit or draw down the accumulated reserves. This virtually guarantees the long-term external value of the Singapore dollar.”
“The Member for Potong Pasir would surely agree. Such integrity can better be guaranteed with the institution of the Elected Presidency who does not have to partake of the parliamentary fray. The Elected Presidency is a new milestone in our political development. For the past 30 years, Singapore has achieved much in the way of economic development. We must also match our economic development with the necessary institutions in political structures to support our long-term overall development. I believe we should evaluate this proposed institution under the following criteria: Firstly, does the Elected Presidency add to the system of checks and balances in our representative democracy? The Elected President can only withhold his assent. He does not initiate policy which rests with the Prime Minister and his Cabinet. It provides power to the President to withhold assent for the drawdown of the reserves of the statutory boards and the government-owned companies, not accumulated by the current government. It provides protection for the trust money held by the Central Provident Fund. These are very strong institutions held closely by our people. The Elected Presidency will be able to safeguard the integrity. Secondly, does the Elected Presidency take away from the safeguard of civil liberties of Singaporeans under the existing constraints? Nowhere in the proposed legislation does it take away these civil liberties from the people. In fact, it provides additional safeguards that the integrity of the CPIB and the Presidential Council for Religious Harmony should protect the civil liberties of Singaporeans because the Elected President can disagree and withhold his assent.”
“First, it is important to remember that the proposed Elected President does not initiate policies. To that extent, the Execu- tive arm of the present parliamentary representative government is not affected. He can only put a stop sign in certain safeguarded areas if he does not concur with the policy decisions put forward by the Government and by Parliament. Thus, it is important for the public to bear in mind that he does not usurp the power of the Prime Minister and Parliament. The Elected Presidency enables us to tackle directly and openly a second order problem in our parliamentary system of government -one that we have all along conveniently swept under the carpet in our discussion of parliamentary democracy - the problem of maintaining the integrity of government and government institutions. Because the PAP under Mr Lee Kuan Yew has been able to maintain the integrity of government institutions does not mean that under changed circumstances, such will always be the case. In fact, parliamentary representative government is basically confrontational and dissentious. Because of the need for representation, the views and interests expressed are often parochial and short term. A very good example recently was when we hear of rice farmers in Japan demonstrating in Tokyo for greater protection with powerful parliamentary lobbyists behind them. One wonders why the Japanese pay so dearly for their rice. Voting by Members of Parliament of the party in power and the Opposition is governed by the Whip in true Westminster style. But for stability, the integrity of government and government institutions must prevail even in the midst of a parliamentary tussle. That we do not have much of a tussle these days does not mean there will be no parliamentary tussle in the future.”
“Member for Punggol has given you some background to what could have happened in 1963. The danger in this scenario is that factionalism will develop in the PAP and in the Opposition. Various interest groups and pressure groups, skilled by the experience of participatory democracy and finding new levers in the political balance, will exert influence on parliamentary government, and parliamentary politics will find new directions in compromise and the lobby. The interest of the nation may very well degenerate into an aggregation of interests of the various interest groups and pressure groups, and the Opposition will swing the balance to affect the decision of government. This is not a far-fetched scenario. It is not a scenario of political decay. There are many examples in present-day democracies with this compromise and lobby system of representative government. The best example is the United States. For a big country like the US, through a federal framework of government, the country needs this bargaining system simply because the country is too big for power to be concentrated at the epicentre in Washington. America and her people can walk many ways and arrive at their destiny. But for a small country like Singapore, such a case will lead to compromised politics for the city state, lacking in clear direction and purpose. With only a small margin of error between success and failure, it is important to ensure that the correct long-term policies for stability and prosperity for the city state are adopted at the right time. Hence, it is important that we explore new institutions to ensure continuity and stability that can add longer term perspective to our choice and determination of policies. Such an institution is the proposed Elected Presidency.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker, for giving me this opportunity to speak. I wish to speak in support of the Constitution of the Republic of Singapore (Amendment No. 3) Bill. This amendment is a constitutional landmark for Singapore. After more than 30 years of executive rule under a Prime Minister, the question is often posed: why do we need an Elected President? It is not that our institution of Government has failed us in its period of history. On the contrary, this institution has grown and its modus operandi has worked to the visible progress of Singapore. However, there is one institution in my mind whose modus operandi has hinged very crucially on the outcome of a collective decision in which the extraneous and the extrinsic can play havoc with any consideration of rational decision-making in constitutional government. What do I mean? The Westminster style first-past-the-post system of our parliamentary democracy is uniquely devised for a strong parliamentary government. A governing party can win a big majority of seats in Parliament and yet obtain only a small majority of votes. For example, in the 1963 elections, only 47% of the total votes went to the PAP and yet it won 37 out of 51 seats, ie, 72% of the seats. The example of Britain under Margaret Thatcher in the last few elections is also a good pointer. While the Opposition always decry against this, yet in another time when they are more ready, it can also work to their advantage. The knife can cut both ways. What is wrong with the opposition having majorities in elections and forming the government? Obviously, in our parliamentary system of government, there is nothing wrong. What is wrong when the PAP loses its predominance but maintains its majority in government and the Opposition gains ground? The hon.”
“Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, for allowing me to join in this debate. I would like to speak in support of the Bill. However, there is one point which I would like the Minister for Labour to perhaps review and that concerns the ceiling rate at which we peg the workman's compensation. For example, right now workers who earn below $1,250 per month are bound by the Workmen's Compensation Act, ie, employers have to provide payment for premiums for this category of workers. However, as the economy progresses and more and more workers are earning more than $1,250 per month, it may be necessary for the Minister to review or perhaps come up with some suggestions on how to cover that category of workers whose salaries have exceeded this $1,250 ceiling. In particular, I realise that workers who earn above $1,250 per month may be covered under personal accident policies of the companies. But there is no regulation which says that they must be covered. So it is left to the whims the judgment of the employers. I would like to hear the Minister's view on this and perhaps to incorporate certain decisions.”
“Singaporeans fully realise that to take over the reins of the state from our esteemed Prime Minister, Mr Lee Kuan Yew, is indeed a daunting task. Having known Mr Goh's style of political leadership, let us be unequivocal in giving him the requisite understanding, support and cooperation for our nation's continued well-being. Our nation-building efforts are far from over because the greatest challenge facing Singporeans today is how to ensure that we continue to make progress as a cohesive society for our future generations. On this note, Sir, I once again support the motion moved by the Member for Tanglin. ADJOURNMENT OF DEBATE With the consent of Mr Deputy Speaker and the general assent of Members present, Question put and agreed to. Resolved, That the debate be now adjourned. - [Mr Wong Kan Seng].”
“It is critical that Singaporeans have the courage and commitment to make their ideas, views and opinions known by giving concrete proposals and alternatives and not just comment or criticise for comment or criticism sake. Secondly, Sir, I would like to touch on the point regarding the progress of the Malays. It is indeed heartening to note that the Government is giving its full backing to MENDAKI. To yield the desired results, it must be recognised that the Government's commitment must be matched by an appropriate response from the Malay community. One clear signal is the decision by MENDAKI (after consultation with several Malay organisations) to accept the proposal to charge Malay students from better-off families tertiary education fees. For the Malays to continue to move forward, all concerned Malay-Muslim organisations and the Malay community must rally behind MENDAKI so that they can focus on the major issues and problems and avoid being distracted by parties with ulterior motives. For example, the call made by some quarters to MENDAKI to set up a special committee to administer the tertiary fees is contradictory to the self-help aspiration and is therefore irrelevant. With this fresh approach taken by MENDAKI on the fee issue, I hope the observation, whether rightly or wrongly, of Malays not wanting to be in the mainstream will be seen in its proper perspective. The point I wish to put across is we must be clear of what we mean by "mainstream" as otherwise our different ethnic groups will be clinging to mindsets which would be obstacles to better understanding. Finally, Sir, we are entering a new phase in our political development when Mr Goh Chok Tong takes over as Prime Minister by the end of this year.”
“Of great concern is the military pull-out of the United States from the region with the problem faced by them in the Philippines. The ensuing vacuum may attract interest which may not be beneficial in the longer run. But I have no doubt that the Minister has an answer to this changing danger. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, finally, I wish to support the motion. Encik Zulkifli Bin Mohammed (Eunos GRC)( In Malay): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I rise to support the motion moved by the Member for Tanglin in thanking the President for the Address which he delivered on behalf of the Government at the opening of the Second Session of the Seventh Parliament. Firstly, Sir, allow me to say a few words on the subject of "Consultative Government and Consensus Building". In my view, the "experiment" we started in early 1985 in having a greater number of concerned Singaporeans participate in decisions that will chart our nation's future course is working out satisfactorily. By now, few will dispute the fact that the Government has amply demonstrated its serious intent and purpose in seeking inputs and feedback on national issues. This is evident by the encouraging response witnessed during the several dialogue sessions, be it during Ministerial walkabouts or at Feedback Unit sessions or at the constituency level. To me, the ball is now in the court of many Singaporeans and they should make good use of the opportunities presented to them. The argument that the Government is not listening no longer holds water. What is required is for all parties to have an open mind and think positively so as not to misunderstand each other's motives and thus make it difficult to work for consensus.”
“In the section by the Minister for Finance, it was mentioned that legislation on a broad-based consumption tax would be introduced this year and that actual implementation would be deferred for as long as the revenue position permits. I wish to suggest that it may not be wise to defer the implementation for as long as the revenue position permits. If times are good, the revenue position should be good. The economy is doing well. The Government collects more revenue in taxes. If the economy is not doing well or in recession or when the Government's budget goes into deficit for expansionary growth, the revenue position deteriorates. Collecting revenue then through a consumption tax may not be wise. It would be the wrong time to implement the consumption tax as it would have further deflationary or withdrawal effects on the economy. At such times also, the Government would be subject to other pressures politically and economically. I would suggest and urge the Minister for Finance to consider the consumption tax bearing in mind the experience of the women voters in Japan. If it should be implemented, it may be better to introduce it on a graduated scale in good times, not bad ones, when the revenue position more than permits. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I wish to turn to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The Minister observed that other global actors are coming on to the screen and that the East/West relations have never been better. It is gladdening that the Minister will continue to exploit the opportunities present in this new situation. Yet, the end of Communism in East Europe and the disunion in the Soviet Union and the new multi-polar world with many potential medium powers do not necessarily mean that peace is at hand.”
“The problem is how to transmit the experience and the virtues born out of necessity of the age and the times. It is through the history books, the fables, the drama, the fun, the leaders and the people interacting with one another with the outside changing world that this character is forged. It is through the sweat of training and sometimes the call of battle. I remember when I was an officer controlling a unit of soldiers on an exercise when I was doing my national service more than 10 years ago. It was on one of the hills inside SAFTI. It was beginning to rain heavily. A young soldier on exercise ran up to me and gave me his raincoat while he was on the move, though he knew that he would have a long day and night ahead. He did not know me because I was not his officer as I came from another unit. He was from the Malay platoon. I thanked him but kindly refused his offer. He was a Singaporean. He interacted with me equally as a soldier to his officer. And I hope that I did the right thing by refusing his kind offer. We understood one another at that point in time. A statement of shared values may not evolve the Singaporean identity. But I believe more and more Singaporeans of all races interacting with one another equally with mutual respect to our race, our language and religion will confirm that Singaporeans know that what they share in experience and work and play gives them their unique character, more than what they possess from their own culture or social or religious background. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I wish to turn to the Addenda to the President's Address.”
“I must applaud the Malay community and the Mendaki leadership in rising to the challenge in accepting the Government's proposal, first braved by the First Deputy Prime Minister, on the administrating of the financial subsidies for Malay students. Such sound-minded choices in the response to the challenge can only prove that our Malay brethren has what it takes in meeting the challenges of the future and in interacting equally with the other ethnic groups in Singapore. I believe it is in the interaction of Singaporeans at work and play, with one another, and with the world, that will finally forge a Singaporean identity. We have been attempting to do that for the past 170 years. A body of principles for the people, such as the Constitution or a National Ideology, vis-a-vis the Government, the State, law and justice, individual freedom and the social limits, can be a basis to evolve the Singaporean nation. But I am not sure whether a formal statement of shared values can be of much help to evolve a Singaporean identity. A statement of shared values can at best give an expression of common ground among our races. Yet, it is in the areas of ambiguous and uncommon ground, the uniqueness, the character and the identity of Singaporeans are forged that makes one pick out a fellow Singaporean in the streets of London, or Tokyo or San Francisco and feel comfortable with him whether he or she is a Chinese, Indian or a Malay. Such an identity is evolved out of working, playing and generally interacting equally and respectfully. Sometimes it is by the turmoil of the age that the identity is catharsised. We often talk about the old Singaporeans who have been through the 50s and the battle for merger. We often say today of the young who do not know.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I wish to speak in support of the motion. The Address by the President provides a good intermediate reference point to the people and the Government as to the direction and the achievements of the Government in this Parliament. It is good to search ourselves occasionally and to make sure the people are with us. It is gladdening that the President in his Address makes a special point in mentioning that the Government will do more to help the lower-income group by building up their assets and lightening the burden of bringing up their school children, in meeting their expenses. I hope the Government will spell out more soon on what the specific policies are. This will greatly lessen the anxiety which many Singaporeans are feeling in the face of rising charges in their day-to-day living expenses. Over the last 1 1/2 years since the opening of the Seventh Parliament, the Government has pushed through many measures - education fees, in car and car parking charges, in health, etc. I must say that they are done for good reasons, and necessary. Politics and Government being the art of the possible, I do not doubt that the leaders are fully conscious of this. Yet it is significant to remember that the average Singaporean worker is earning only about $1,000 a month. With economic growth and full employment, income growth may rise, but real gain is constrained by productivity gains. It is quite common to hear complaints among the lower-income group of rising charges. It is wise of the Government to do more and soon enough.”
“Sir, the present policy is for the Government to subsidise dollar for dollar the building of new community centres and building extensions. With the recent idea about community clubs and the rising standard of living, it may be necessary to upgrade some of these community centres which were built about 10 or thereabout years ago in order to provide a more elegant and more variegated atmosphere with improved facilities. Retrofitting and lighting may be done to improve the architecture. So I am asking the Minister concerned whether there is any plan for a grant to community centres to upgrade or to renovate the buildings, provided the management committees of the CCs have a programme of activities to turn some of these facilities into community clubs.”
“For the improved existing exhibition halls, theatres and drama centre, like our Indoor Stadium which is a very good one, the charges for each performance are about $16,000. This is not something that every cultural organisation can afford. I hope that the Government will have two rates for the use of the National Indoor Stadium. For the non-profit organisations which promote culture, we can give them concessionary rates; for those profit-making organisations and those which charge higher admission fees, then they can apply the higher rates. I hope that when we are improving our exhibition halls and places of performance, we will not in the process let our cultural organisations lose the opportunity to perform in such places. If Singapore is to develop itself into a place for international performance of arts, the most basic thing is the quality of our artistes, our performers. I am glad to note that in the proposed new university to be set up, consideration will be given to the training of trainers for this kind of personnel. But for those who are participating directly in performing arts, and those backstage people like the lighting men, the sound-effect men, the stage designers, the floor managers and so on, we are in dire need of such people. So I hope that in the proposed new university and polytechnic, they can provide such training for this kind of backup people. If the new university will take some time to set up, then at least in the interim period, I hope that the Government will assist the civic and cultural organisations to provide such training. The Cultural Foundation over the past few years has been allocating funds to assist in the further education of artistes and performers. In 1989, the Cultural Foundation provided S$90,000 for ---”
“I hope that the Government will give them assistance to have their places, such as old schools, to carry our their activities. They are a few other points I wish to raise for the consideration of the Government. Although we have set up a Council for the promotion of culture, if we look through the budget provided for cultural activities, I think the provision is only 0.02%. This is a very small amount. I hope that with the establishment of this Council, the Government will also consider allocating funds to this Council for the continued promotion of cultural activities. Another source of funding is to get money and funds from the private organisations and statutory bodies. Such bodies have been buying local works of art and fine art. I hope that the Government will encourage semi-government bodies to contribute to the cultural promotion fund, not just by buying fine art pieces but also assist in the financing of performing arts, such as ballet, singing and music, etc. For private organisations, I hope that the Government will consider giving them higher tax exemption for their funds provided for donations to and sponsorship of cultural activities and development. In entertainment tax, although this has been reduced a few years ago from 25% to 10%, I hope the Government will further reduce it to 3% so as to enable private bodies to organise more public performances. Sir, the next point I wish to raise concerns exhibition halls and theatres. We may have a number of places for the performing arts but these places are not up to international standards for drama performance. I hope that the Government will soon build a drama centre or a theatre for drama.”
“But I personally feel that we should preserve our own multi-racial cultural heritage so that each ethnic group will be able to develop on its own roots and on the basis of these roots we will be able to seek concord while maintaining differences, so that we will have a special unique culture in Singapore in this way. To develop the ethnic culture does not mean that we do not want to create a Singapore-type culture. In the process of seeking concord while maintaining differences, we hope to create a Singapore culture which is different from other cultures. This is not something that can be accomplished within a year or two. Cultural promotion and development take a long time. And I think under our efforts, Singapore culture will develop. The next point is how do we develop ourselves into an international centre for culture and art. As a centre for East-West international communication and transportation, I think Singapore has the advantage whereby we can absorb the best of Eastern and Western arts and cultures for the smooth development of tourism and economic development. This is because tourists and international investors also want to enjoy a certain degree of cultural life. So in order to develop Singapore into a progressive society, it is important that we should also develop our culture. I would like to thank the Government for giving places for cultural and arts organisations for the purposes of training and research. At the moment, more than 20 organisations have, under this "Homes for the Arts Assistance Scheme", obtained their own premises. But I think these are not enough. We have over one hundred arts organisations and they need more premises.”
“On this note, Sir, I wish to withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. Mrs Yu-Foo Yee Shoon (Yuhua)( In Mandarin): Sir, I beg to move. That the sum to be allocated for Head J be reduced by $10 in respect of Code JE 1500 of the Main Estimates. Sir, a few years ago, our cultural activities were rather quiet. But in the past few years, cultural activities have been flourishing in Singapore. A few years ago, I expressed my disappointment over the financial assistance given to cultural activities in Singapore by the Government. Now, having seen the kind of cultural activities in the past two to three years, I would like to thank the Government, civic organisations and cultural bodies for their efforts in promoting cultural activities in Singapore, especially now that we want to promote ourselves in the 1990s as a gracious society. For this purpose, the Government has set up an Advisory Council on Culture and Arts headed by the Second Deputy Prime Minister. The Council has set up a sub-committee to draw up a blue-print for the development of a more gracious society in Singapore, so that Singaporeans will not only be economically developed and have a better life, but, more importantly, also have a better spiritual life, in which the people will mould their temperament with art and culture, so that they will have a broader vision, a gracious conduct and a drive for creativity. At the same time, in the multi-racial society of Singapore, some people may advocate that we should discard our own roots and find a common ground.”
“Sir, I thank the Minister for her reply. But just to make one clarification. It was mentioned that the Government is going to spend 0.5% of the GDP for the next five years on community development. I understand the figure given for this year in the Command Paper is only 0.4%. I would like to seek clarification on this point.”
“It is not a case of hard of hearing. I think it is a case of preaching to the converted. But I would just point out some elements of the development expenditure, both in the direct development and the capital grants, which in this Code, will be reduced in the fiscal year 1990. There is a substantial fall from $6.1 million in fiscal year 1989 to only $2.5 million which is a decrease of 58%. Also the total expenditure for the Welfare Services Programme is not budgeted to increase in fiscal year 1990. As this Department is directly related with the poor and the under-privileged, and as our economy and our budget have expanded, are there good reasons why the development expenditure and overall expenditure are reduced? This Department covers children and youth services, family services, services for the aged, public assistance, probation and aftercare services. In particular, after all the Advisory Councils' reports and recommendations over the past year, it is surprising that development expenditure in this area will fall so drastically. In fact, the project development expenditure shows that apart from the $2.4 million for the development of child-care centres and $100,000 for the children and youth complex at Yio Chu Kang, there are no other project expenditures for the Welfare Services Programme. Are we to assume that after all the publicity regarding all the Advisory Councils' reports on welfare for children, for the family services, for the aged, youth services, probation and aftercare services, this is all the project development can show. I hope the Minister can reassure us.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head J be reduced by $10 in respect of Code JD 5100 of the Development Estimates. After the extended expose by the Minister of State for Community Development on the Welfare Services Programme, I must still say that I do not understand. An hon. Member: Hard of hearing.”
“These data and analyses are with reference to Japan and the Asian NICs where by cultural value system and by economic performance over this period we have been trying so hard to emulate. The Government should not believe that spending more on community development or welfare will lead to the kind of soft welfare state syndrome, as found in some Western countries where the government is saddled with looking after the people from cradle to grave. Aspiring communitarian societies should spend more on community development. I do not mean social welfare of the extremely narrow public assistance type. I mean the wider benefits of a society in terms of arts, archives, cultural and recreational institutions, sports training and community facilities, homes and hospices.”
“Sir, I note that under Head J, the total expenditure for Community Development for financial year 1990 is projected to be at $228.92 million, an increase of $77.61 million. In terms of the GDP, this is about 0.4%, which is an improvement over the figure of 1989 which is about 0.28%. In terms of the total budget expenditure of $14.13 billion, the total expenditure for Community Development is about 1.6%. This seems to me to be a very small figure. After all the recommendations of the Advisory Councils, it seems that the amount we are spending to develop community amongst Singaporeans seems rather tentative. Most of the increase in recurrent expenditure goes to child care centres and a tentative provision of $13.34 million for the implementation of the Advisory Council's recommendations. Why should these sums be tentative as reflected in page 198 of the Command Paper? And why can't the Minister boldly ask for more? In a recent analysis of the patterns and prospects of Asian economic development by Shinichi Ichimura, Emeritus Professor Kyoto University, for the Asian Productivity Organisation, he compared the components of government expenditures of Japan and the Asian NICs, Singapore, Hong Kong, Taiwan and South Korea, for 1972 and 1982. The share of welfare expenditure in total government expenditure is lowest for Singapore, being 3.9% in 1972 and 8.2% in 1982. This is lower than the comparable data he had for Hong Kong, 12.5% in 1972 and 12.7% in 1982. And for Japan, 18.2% in 1972 and 22% in 1982. I realise that this kind of inter-country comparison is very difficult to evaluate. But it is interesting to note that in this respect we rank the lowest amongst Japan and the NICs.”
“Sir, I withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The sum of $103,041,600 for Head S ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. The sum of $85,188,300 for Head S ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.”
“Sir, will the Minister be persuaded by me that he should not consider the recommendation of the Select Committee on the incorporation between the ARF/PARF and the licence bid system as divine? He should tread with caution on juggling between the ARF/PARF scheme and the licence bid rate.”
“Sir, I would like to ask the Minister two related questions. (1) Should the Minister consider freezing the ARF and the PARF rate currently so that the bid for the licensing and the quota system can be conducted without undue expectations and uncertainty and with greater transparency, and also bearing in mind that such changes in the ARF and the PARF rate now will affect the personal networth. (2) Related to this, will the Minister consider implementing the quota system and the licence bid system without dismantling the ARF and PARF system, bearing in mind that both the quota system and the PARF scheme can co-exist without contradiction and without bias, revenue and cost effects?”
“In this way, it gives the full range of car owners, from the high-end owners to the low-end owners, equitable bidding. Alternatively, we can set a minimum bid in dollar terms to each range of size of cars based on a common percentage of the ARF price and the bid for the licences can be in dollar value above that minimum limit. It would be wrong, I feel, following from what Dr John Chen has said just now, to suit the desired price level of the car by adjusting the ARF. For example, he was proposing that we should lower the ARF in case the licence bids go up. If we do this, we will exactly repeat the errors that Dr Hong Hai mentioned this morning. We are missing both the price and the targets and, more, we can cause a lot of uncertainty in the car finance market because then the ARF value will be fluctuating. So the proposal to let the quota system on cars impacting on to the licence bid should be decoupled from the PARF scheme. That is the best way to tackle this quota system on cars. Finally, the Committee recommended keeping the existing PARF scheme. If the purpose of the preferential discount is to give incentives for scrapping older cars, then the Government should work out a progressive scheme so that the preferential discount applies to cars scrapped in less than 10 years beginning, for example, from the sixth year and working up to the present discount rate by the end of the tenth year. Such a scheme can be worked out and announced in advance of implementation together with the other measures to avoid uncertainty. Finally, Mr Speaker, Sir, I wish to support the recommendations in the Report subject to the considerations mentioned. 5.15 pm”
“The present proposal places the burden of the implicit tax arising from the licence bid exclusively on the new owners of cars so that the new owners are punished and the existing owners will gain. The argument that they can alternatively own a car by getting a used car does not hold water. If they do, the overall effect of the action will be to drive the second-hand car market upwards and that the outcome would still be inequitable as the existing car owners make windfall gains from the rechannelled demand. The burden of adjustment should be placed on all owners of cars, not on new entrants. One of the most important reasons why people want to drive a car, quite apart from the available means of public transport, is the mobility status such ownership bestows. Transport economists and social scientists have accepted that when you are mobile you have arrived. In a modern society, people want mobility. The paradox of owning a car in cities is that while mobility is desired, the end result of every- body wanting it at the same time in the same area results in huge traffic bottlenecks. The Government's policy is to ensure that our roads and expressways do not choke up so that the mobility desired will not be achieved, with the resulting economic wastage. Hence, it is crucial for us that the roads are generally free of bottlenecks by targeting the number of vehicle growth. We should make the implicit tax on owning a car equitable on all so that the joy of mobility is equally available to all, subject to a charge applied to all owners, new and existing ones. Otherwise the inequity of the existing proposal will not be acceptable. The bid for the licence can be expressed as a percentage of the ARF price.”
“Firstly, I think it is necessary to forestall the inevitable speculation in the bidding for licences. I suggest we can introduce two features. The first is to put in a currency period to the licence bid so that there is a time limit by which the licence will be operational with the car. The quota release should be constant throughout the year. Otherwise a secondary market in licences would be created for speculation. Secondly, the licence must go with the car, not the owner, on the road. It should have a life span, say, for 10 years. The moment we make the licence perpetual, we are treating one part of the ownership of a car as an investment good which is not desirable. Here again, I wish to stress that the perpetuity of the licence has nothing inherent to do with the PARF, as pointed out by Dr Hong Hai and Dr Augustine Tan this afternoon. All existing cars on the road, when the policy is implemented, should be deemed to have a licence whose life will expire by, say, the tenth year from registration date based on our present PARF scrap car policy. At the end of this period of 10 years, the car will be scrapped and the licence will lapse. Owning a car should not be compared to owning a house. The moment we do that, we run the risk of treating the car as an investment good which is not a desirable objective in our land transport scheme. If we allow a car licence to be perpetually given life with a new car when scrapping an old one without having to bid for a new licence to go with a new car, we will be allowing the ownership of a car licence as a birth right to be handed down from one generation to another. It would be inequitable for those who do not own cars presently.”