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 8 of 11.
“I am very glad that the Minister has mentioned that the Government is studying possible changes to its fiscal policies to make the economy more competitive and to strengthen the incentives of businesses and individuals to venture, succeed and enjoy the fruits of the enterprise. I hope he can consider how to give the SMEs a great lift. EXEMPTED BUSINESS (Motion) Resolved, That the debate on the Budget Statement be proceeded with beyond 4.30 pm at this day's sitting and the proceedings thereon be exempted from the provisions of Standing Order No. 1 at this day's sitting. - [Mr Wong Kan Seng]. ANNUAL BUDGET STATEMENT Debate resumed.”
“As our big boys go and establish beachheads overseas, our small and medium-sized industries should be pulled along. Otherwise, the so-called building of the second wing is not complete. One may ask why do we need to specially help our own small and medium-sized industries when they are supposed to be competing with the world. My answer is because they are largely our own. Our own market, we all know, is too small. Our economy is largely dominated by MNCs who can make their own way in third countries on their own in collaboration with the locals in those countries. They will also bring along their own home country suppliers or subcontractors or pass jobs to them. All these have been done by MNCs for decades. If our SMEs are not pulled along, the danger is that our economy will not only be hollowed out, the linkage in the business sectors will be more and more fragmented. Entrepreneurial businesses riding on the coat tails of the big boys will be affected. The political economy will lose its social economic bonding. Suddenly, as the Minister has so aptly put it, the balls may not be so readily fed for the goals to be scored because the team has been thinned out. According to Command Paper 3 of 1995 which spells out the Budget spending of the Government last year, in 1994, only $5 million out of a budget allocation of $20 million was used to assist under the EDB assistance schemes under Phase I, that is, 25% of what was allocated. And only $20 million out of an allocated sum of $56 million, that is, 36% was used to assist under the EDB assistance schemes under Phase II. This figure for 1994 was very much lower than for 1993. These figures are found in page 675 of the Command Paper. Are we reaching out to the SMEs in a timely and approachable manner?”
“Perhaps I would like to suggest that what we are seeing at work is an economic allocation process. Naturally, resources, whether it is labour, office workers, managers, or tearing down of old buildings and building new ones in its place, will move to higher value-added sectors or more profitable business. The problem is that we need some of these laggards. The solution to the predicament is not necessarily less regulation or let the free market rein wild but targeted assistance to certain business sectors to improve and imbibe newer technology and organisation with the goal to raise value-added. It is in this area that we should do more, particularly assistance schemes to the small and medium enterprises. Small and medium-sized enterprises given a chance will also want to move out of Singapore. That is a sentiment I get talking to some of them. The difficulty is that they may not have the ready access to opportunity and capital, compared with the bigger companies. It is perhaps inevitable that a certain hollowing-out of industries and businesses may take place as regionalisation takes up speed. MNCs who have been investing overseas for decades finally end up using more and more of the local industries as supporting contractors where such industries have the low cost, the skill and the quality in servicing them. But for the home-based suppliers and the contractors who have certain technologies or special skills in the production of the intermediate input, it is possible to continue supplying the MNCs overseas from home. Hence, I consider a renewed and more deliberate scheme to pull up the small and medium-sized industries to be a corollary to our regionalisation drive.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to speak in support of this motion in the name of the Minister for Finance. Most of the people the GPC members talked to in the business sector are concerned with rising business cost. We have heard this so many times and the Government has rebutted this issue so often that somehow I feel somewhere something is amiss. In response to concerns and queries received in the House by Members, the Minister has included a Table this year in the Budget Statement to show how our tax revenue and non-tax revenue compared with other countries. At 22.1%, comprising 17.7% of GDP for tax revenue and 4.4% of GDP for non-tax revenue, it is interesting to note that we are not exactly the lowest in this respect. The fact is that the data show that we are higher than the average for the other four ASEAN countries, comprising Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand and the Philippines, and higher than the average of 21.6% of GDP for the NIEs. But tax and non-tax revenue in relation to GDP is only one dimension to this problem of concern for rising cost of doing business. The other part to look at is from gross profit rate in the business sectors in Singapore. If the tax and non-tax revenue part of GDP is high and the gross profit rate part is relatively low, then naturally the complaint by those business sectors must be justified. What we should focus on is that the tax and regulatory costs and fees constitute only one aspect of the problem. The level of the cost structure affects the gross profit rate. If the high costs, including regulatory cost, impinge directly across the board on many sectors - rentals, wages, levies, transport cost, COEs - many of the lagging business sectors will naturally feel the pinch more than the others.”
“I have not suggested detailed amendments to this Act because I do not think it should be looked at just from the point of view of futures trading. I think this is going to be a problem that affects all facets of white collar crime. Perhaps something on the lines of the Drug Trafficking (Confiscation of Benefits) Act could be enacted for white collar crimes. It would be a shame, I think, if after all the time and effort expended to bring white collar criminals to book, they could, after serving their jail sentence, merrily fly off to the Caribbean and live off their loot for the rest of their lives.”
“If you look again at Part VII of the Act which prohibits other offences, like creating a false market, false trading, manipulation, the penalties are found in section 56 which provides a maximum fine of $100,000 or imprisonment for a term not exceeding seven years or both. Would Members of this House consider that justice is done if a fraudster having made, say, $10 million, is fined the maximum of $100,000? No doubt he could go to jail for seven years. But when he gets out, he can still spend his ill-gotten gains. No doubt the court can order him to pay prosecution cost, but prosecution cost would not come up to $10 million. Theoretically, the victims of the fraud should sue for compensation under section 57(1). This is similar to section 105 of the Securities Industry Act. In the 20 years that the Securities Industry Act has been in the statute books, I know of no case reported, or unreported, where compensation has ever been awarded. This Futures Trading Act is a shorter pedigree, but I think the situation is not much better. I wonder if the Minister knows of any case where compensation has in fact been ordered. The fact is that civil compensation is impracticable. Victims of fraud may be indisposed to sue. Their losses may individually be inconsequential although in aggregate may amount to a lot, and they may decide to write off the loss. One cannot depend on private enterprise to deprive a fraudster of his ill-gotten gains. May I suggest to the Minister that he look into the possibility of confiscating the benefits that a fraudster acquires through market fraud, not only for contravention of the Futures Trading Act but also for the Securities Industry Act.”
“In the Amendment Bill, the failure to comply shall make one liable for conviction to a fine not exceeding $50,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding seven years. Does the Minister not consider the above penalties too lenient or the fine too small? After all, the cost of such non-compliance may involve hundreds of millions of dollars. Assoc. Prof. Walter Woon: Sir, I support the Futures Trading (Amendment) Bill as far as it goes. My fear is that it does not go far enough. I have just one short point, if I may. The recent problems with Barings reminds us forcefully of the great sums of money that are involved in this kind of trading. If there is fraud, the losses are numbered in tens and hundreds of millions of dollars and the profit of fraudsters is similarly mind-boggling. The problem is that the Futures Trading Act does not provide for adequate penalties in respect of multi-million dollar frauds. This is the failing that it shares with the Securities Industry Act. You look at the new sections 37A to 37D, for example. This kind of behaviour has now been criminalised. But what is the penalty for contravention? The penalty for contravention, you will find in section 40 of the existing Act, which reads: `Any person who contravenes or fails to comply with any provisions of this Part shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding $30,000, or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 3 years or to both.' Since these offences apply to futures brokers and futures brokers by definition are corporations, you cannot send a corporation to jail. It means the punishment for contravention is a $30,000 fine.”
“The Minister has just explained the rationale for it. So I will not pursue this matter, because these institutions are covered by the Banking Act. This Amendment Bill should serve a signal to all those participants of the futures market, including the derivatives, that the authority is concerned with some of the practices so far and bucket shop operators should take heed of the operations and streamline their operations in accordance with the rules. Section 14 of the principal Act is amended to enable the authority to be satisfied over a host of conditions such as qualifications, experience and the overall general suitability of the officials in charge in applying for these licences. The amendments also prohibit practices such as front-running, trading against customers and cross-trading in futures contract. The amendments also provide for a fidelity fund of not less than $5 million from the fund of the Futures Exchange to be established for compensating the investors in case of defalcations. I share the view of the Member who spoke just before me and I would like to ask for the rationale for this $5 million to be set and whether it is not too low. As in all regulatory control in this area, it is ultimately the directors and the management within the trading corporation that must exercise the internal control. It is hard to expect the central regulatory body to do more than setting the off-limit markers. The directors and management ultimately hold fiduciary responsibility over these funds. Participants in this globalised free market should be prepared to be disciplined by the market regulating itself.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I speak in support of the Futures Trading (Amendment) Bill in the name of the Minister for Finance. Sir, this Bill comprises a series of amendments to the 1985 Futures Trading Act. Over a period of 10 years, a decade of almost exploding dimension in terms of growth in the value of trade in futures and derivatives in commodities, currencies and exchanges epitomised in the financial markets global big banks, these amendments are needed to rein in on some of the many esoteric practices that are done in the world of the futures market. With the benefit of experience from other countries and our own, the time is appropriate, and I believe it is not too late, to draw the line for many people who trade in the futures market. The problem with regulatory control in the futures trading is that these transactions take place by the hundreds of millions of dollars every minute of the day across many borders instantaneously in an electronically-generated environment. The market is truly one everywhere in the world. Sometimes it is hard to pinpoint which regulatory body is responsible for which aspect of the transaction. Any financial regulatory body has to balance between the stunting rigidity of too much regulation and supervision within its borders and the market forces of globalised perfectly mobile short-term capital moving in search of higher values. However, one cannot afford not to be too careful in this area and if one should err in controlling too much, it is better to err on the side of caution. Thus, I welcome the Futures Trading (Amendment) Bill. For the purposes of this Bill, it excludes from the definition of foreign exchange trading and leveraged foreign exchange trading any contracts or arrangements by banks or merchant banks.”
“I suggest that it may be a good idea to target some size value to the Pension Fund just as what the Government did for the Edusave Fund. That way may give a better assurance to retiring and retired public servants and make the institution of the Pension Fund a permanent value of their contribution.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise to speak in support of the Pension Fund Bill. Up to now, all payments for pensions or gratuities and allowances related to it are paid out of the Consolidated Fund, which is being approved yearly in Parliament. This Bill is to establish a Pension Fund separate from it. It is not mentioned so far what is the size value of this Pension Fund or the target set by the Government for it. At the same time, a provision is made in the Bill to allow all shortfalls in the yearly payments to be made out of the Consolidated Fund under clause 8(1). Also, under clause 9, the Minister may, by warrant, authorise the transfer to the Consolidated Fund any moneys in the Pension Fund which, in the opinion of the Minister, are not required to meet the liabilities of the Pension Fund. Perhaps the Minister can elaborate to the House the rationale for this. Has there been any study to work out the amount for the establishment value of the Pension Fund, considering the total amount of moneys to be paid out as allowances within a certain time frame? What is the target for this Fund in order for it to be meaningful as a fund body that public servants retiring or retired on pensionable service will feel assured of his pension amount? Is there any plan by the Government to build up the Pension Fund to a certain amount in order to meet the liabilities by a certain year? This Bill also allows for accounts and financial statements of the Fund to be audited and examined. There is also a provision in clause 13(1) for periodic examination of the Pension Fund and for its report to be made to Parliament. However, as it is, there is no provision for the Pension Fund size to be reviewed and for its fund to be adjusted accordingly. Perhaps the Minister can clarify on this.”
“I hope that, with the law for children to maintain their parents, there is better reason for the MCD to assist, if it can be established that the children are doing their best to help in spite of their economic difficulties. I do not subscribe to the argument by some people that because we are an Asian society, we will know what to do with our parents, that is, to naturally maintain them. This law provides for those in difficulties, who have children, but are not supported by them. At least, there is a recourse for them. It will not be something they will factor in in bringing up the children. The Bill will not substitute legality for morality. But it will draw the line for the limiting case and allow the abandoned poor and the aged to seek assistance from their children. It will also help in the limit to draw the line for the society we are attempting to build through the shared values and the emphasis on the family, including filial piety. Philosophers, moralists, story tellers will interpret the issue in different ways, at different times. But the law founded in morality will maintain its course. That is why we are all here. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I support this Bill in principle and suggest that the Bill be committed to a Select Committee.”
“She wrote to me from overseas where she had emigrated, telling me specifically that it is the State's duty to look after the aged, namely, her parents. After all, she argued, people pay taxes and what is the Government for. I can understand how one can get into this mindset. It is part of being initially enamoured of and later ensnared by the welfare by the state prevalent in the West. The danger is that our people can also get into this mindset. We stress family value as a virtue and do not like to see families break up. But we do have laws to protect the women and the children; why not parents when they are aged and cannot fend for themselves when the children are no more living with them? This Bill leaves it to the Government of the day to decide on the quantum of the maintenance and the detailed administration of the law. I have no doubt the details for the smooth administration of this law need to be worked out. Perhaps, it may not be a good thing to go to a court in the first instance. It is expensive going to the courts. Perhaps, it may suffice administratively, in the first instance, to apply to some agency in the MCD. Perhaps, the consensual approach through some counselling agency is preferred than taking the adversarial approach through the courts. Those of us who have sat in the Public Assistance Review Committee (PARC) will, no doubt, agree that many of the cases of the aged and destitute that come up to the PARC do have children. But through breakdown in the family relationship and communication and through the financial hardship of the children's families, the old folks are left unsupported. As a result, they have no recourse but to seek the help of the MCD. The MCD, as we all know, is reluctant to help because the applicants have children.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I wish to speak in support of the Bill in the name of the hon. Nominated Member of Parliament on the maintenance of parents. The Government has been highlighting the important problem of aging in our population. Not many people may realise that Singapore has a relatively more older population than Malaysia or Indonesia. In some of the more older constituencies, as in Queenstown, one can almost find one in two flat units comprising largely the aged and the retired. Most of these aged and retirees stay by themselves and live on their savings. In most cases, the children support them though the children may not be staying with the aged parents. However, sad to say, there is a small minority of aged who have children but are not getting the maintenance support from the children. To me, the reason why I would support the Bill is very simple. Are we as a society valuing filial support in the family? If we believe and nurture this as a value, especially as we stress family value as a national value, then children should help to maintain their parents in their old age, especially if they have no means of income. Most people would not need to, or want to have recourse to the law to seek maintenance from the children, but this does not mean that the recourse is not available. Hence, my support for this Bill. Some people have argued that we do not need such a law. We have not got one for so long. Why one now? But the sad fact that there are such cases of the aged struggling by themselves, with little help, or no help from the children, is real. There are not many, but there are. I have actually received a letter a few years back by the daughter of one of my residents who sought some assistance from me.”
“Question put, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." Division taken: Ayes, 67; No, Nil; Abstentions, 2. Ayes Ayes (cont.) Abdullah Tarmugi Loh Meng See Ahmad Mattar Low Seow Chay Chandra Das, S Mah Bow Tan Chay Wai Chuen Mohamad Maidin B P M Chen, Bernard Ong Chit Chung Chen Koon Lap, Kenneth Othman bin Haron Eusofe Chen Seow Phun, John Peh Chin Hua Cheo Chai Chen Sidek bin Saniff Chew Heng Ching Sinnakaruppan, R Chin Harn Tong Sung, Peter Chng Hee Kok Tan Cheng Bock Ch'ng Jit Koon Tan Keng Yam, Tony Chong, Charles Tan Soo Khoon Choo Wee Khiang Teo Chee Hean Davinder Singh Teo Chong Tee Dhanabalan, S Umar Abdul Hamid Goh Chee Wee Vasoo, S Goh Chok Tong Wan Soon Bee Goh Choon Kang Wang Kai Yuen Harun bin A Ghani Wong, Aline K Heng Chiang Meng Wong Kan Seng Ho Kah Leong Wong Kwei Cheong Ho Peng Kee Yao Chih, Matthias Ho Tat Kin Yap Giau Cheng, Eugene Ibrahim bin Othman Yatiman Yusof Jayakumar, S Yeo Toon Chia Ker Sin Tze Yong-Boon Yeo, George Koh Lip Lin Yu-Foo Yee Shoon Koo Tsai Kee Zulkifli bin Mohammed Lau Ping Sum Lee Hsien Loong No Lee Kuan Yew Lee Yiok Seng Nil Lee Yock Suan Leong Horn Kee Abstentions Lew Syn Pau Lim Boon Heng Chiam See Tong Lim Chun Leng, Michael Low Thia Khiang”
“We are not saying that you have to be a Permanent Secretary to come past that point. You may be a Deputy Secretary promoted to Superscale C. But who makes that promotion? Today, it is the Prime Minister. So under the new arrangement, it will also be the Prime Minister. I think it is good to define a Significant Grade in this way. As I explained, we intend to introduce legislation to amend the Constitution to devolve the powers of the PSC and some of the other Commissions to various other agencies so as to free up the system of personnel management of the civil service. In doing this, we need safeguards. One safeguard which we will introduce will be that the powers which can be devolved will only be those which pertain to officers below the Significant Grade. So if you are in or above the Significant Grade, then you are managed by the PSC, because you are at the very top, you are among the key people, and it is important to have direct management from the PSC, which is the constitutionally appointed authority. If you are below that grade, then the Executive will have powers to delegate and devolve away from the PSC your authority of appointments or promotions over recruitment, over disciplinary matters as well, to other agencies, personnel boards, which will be appointed for this purpose. So the Significant Grade will serve another function in that respect. That is why the legislation is drafted this way. Mr Speaker: The Question is, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." A Division will be taken to ascertain that the Second Reading of the Bill is supported by the votes of not less than two-thirds of the total number of Members of Parliament, which is 54 Members, pursuant to Article 5(2) of the Constitution. Ring the Division Bells.”
“We have decided to go the second route. This is really a digression from today's subject but it will be the subject of a White Paper - Ministers' salary benchmarks as well as Administrative Service's salary benchmarks - which we intend to table in Parliament within the next month or two, at the latest, and which will be debated in Parliament. Secondly, Mr Chay asked whether we need the Significant Grade because Article 34(2)(a) does not establish a link between the Permanent Secretary grade and Superscale C. There is no definition in the Constitution that the Permanent Secretary grade is Superscale C. But in the Administrative Service's terms of service, it is understood that the Deputy Secretary grades range from G up to D and D1, and from C, B, A onwards are Permanent Secretary grades. Therefore, in the working of Article 34(2)(a), officers who are promoted to the grade of Superscale C have their promotions really on the authority of the Prime Minister rather than of the Public Service Commission. Ceremonially, they are appointed by the President. Under the new Article 34(2)(a), we say to the "office" of Permanent Secretary. So if you are in a big Ministry, like Finance or Defence, with a Staff Grade Permanent Secretary, and you rise up in that hierarchy, your first appointment as Permanent Secretary may not come until you are in Staff Grade. So you will be promoted to Grade C, Grade B, Grade A, without the Prime Minister's intervention or authority, and only when you reach Staff Grade will the appointment come from the President, on the Prime Minister's advice. We want to preserve that entrance-gate check at Superscale C where the Prime Minister will be the one who will decide who comes past that point.”
“Do I want to be there, you are stuck with a golden handcuff of a pension? My handcuff is not yet golden. Should I not go?" So, therefore, they will leave. And, in fact, we are already seeing young officers in the Timescale leave because in Singapore, if you are good, you are known very quickly. If you go into a Ministry like National Development or Trade and Industry, or into a statutory board like EDB, you have contacts with the private sector, they know you, they size you up, they make you an offer. So we have to adjust. This is a problem more with the Administrative Service than with the Ministers. Because with the Ministers, after the last salary revision, I think we are at a sustainable relativity compared to the private sector. Our concern is to make sure that this relativity is maintained as salaries move up in the private sector, that this relationship is still kept, and the public sector adjusts. Or if the private sector goes down in a recession, the public sector also must go down correspondingly. So the Ministers are generally in line, that means, Staff Grade II and above. At Superscale C and below, the civil service is still considerably out of line. Therefore, we have to make an adjustment for the civil service. We have two ways of doing this. One, we just make a salary revision - Superscale C will now be 30% more than it used to be, and we pay everybody more. The second way is to change the benchmark. A Permanent Secretary, I will now consider to be a Superscale B post, which means that I will promote people faster, I will assess people more generously in terms of grades and, therefore, when a person reaches the Permanent Secretary rank, he will get to Superscale B faster. Therefore, I will be able to reward deserving officers more, and more responsively.”
“As and when officers are deemed to be ready to be promoted to these grades, I am sure the Public Service Commission will do so. As for new grades A1, B1 and C1, I think what the Administrative Service lacks is not the number of grades but grades pegged at the right level and promotions which are quick enough and responsive enough in order to adjust to private sector's salary movement, so that good officers are rewarded in the Administrative Service. You can do it by having two grades and promoting people once a year. Or you can have it by having one grade and promoting people every other year. It is a question of how many steps we want to take to go up the stairs. We do not lack for number of steps. From G to Staff Grade I, we already have 10 grades - Staff Grade I, A, B, C, D1, D, E1, E, F, G. So assuming that you make those 10 grades in 15 or 17 years, that is, one promotion every year or every year and a half, which I think is reasonable. The gaps between the grades are not excessive. Our problem is after the salary revision, which we implemented in January, if you compare the civil service Permanent Secretary Grade C with a typical private sector individual professional, aged about 45, you would find that the Permanent Secretary Grade C ranks somewhere way down the list, 500 or 600 down the list. If you tell a young man, you join the civil service, you work hard, you show ability, you will rise to the top at the age of 45, you will rank about 400 or 500 compared to your peers of the same age group, he is not going to join you. And even if he has been persuaded to join you by a PSC scholarship, as soon as he enters the service, he looks around. Being a bright young man, he does his calculations. He says, "If I work hard, I will end up there where you are.”
“Coupled with the present Timescale and Superscale grades, there will now be three groups: Timescale, Superscale and Significant Superscale officers. If this is the case, why not simply cut the Gordian knot and let every Administrative Officer's salary be determined by his ability and experience, irrespective of whether he is a Permanent Secretary, which is an appointive rank and office, or Chairman or CEO of EDB or MAS? There will be no more glass ceilings. This will really ensure a greater flexibility in deployment and promotion of Administrative Officers in the active public sector which, I believe, this Bill serves to provide. It will also ensure all Administrative Officers to rise to their own level of competence. Article 34(2)(a) presently allows for the appointment of the grade of the Permanent Secretary to be made by the President, acting in accordance with the advice of the Prime Minister, from a list of names submitted by the PSC. With the present amendment of Article 34(2)(a), only the word "grade" has been amended to read "office". The powers and responsibility of the President and the Prime Minister remain intact. Hence, it is not clear to me what is meant when it is mentioned that on its own, the revised Article 34(2)(a) would no longer provide for the Prime Minister to decide on appointments or promotions of officers into the top most echelons of the Administrative Service. I would be grateful for the Minister's clarifications. BG Lee Hsien Loong: Mr Speaker, Sir, Mr Chew Heng Ching has suggested that we include Staff Grades IV and V and new Superscale Grades C1, B1 and A1 for the Administrative Service. We already have Staff Grades IV and V in our structure. However, no officer has yet reached these grades, but there is no hindrance.”
“I read Article 34(2)(a) as follows: `Appointments to the grade of Permanent Secretary shall be made by the President, acting in accordance with the advice of the Prime Minister, from a list of names submitted by the Public Service Commission.' While I can understand the rationale of delinking the office of the Permanent Secretary to Superscale C, as explained by the Minister, I do not understand why it is done by introducing a Significant Grade. Why are we untying a knot only to tie it again? Why can the Minister not consider untying the office of the Permanent Secretary by not having it specifically pegged at the grade of Superscale C? Why must we introduce another Significant Grade which, we are told, will be a Superscale B? Would the Minister explain the rationale of introducing this Significant Grade? And why are there some officers now "significant"? By this, I mean that only a select group of the existing Permanent Secretaries will be in this grade. Are we linking the Significant Grade to the office of some Senior Permanent Secretaries? Why can we not simply delink the Superscale C with the office of the Permanent Secretary? Then, an Administrative Officer can be promoted to any Superscale grade without necessarily being constrained by the Permanent Secretary's salary scale. The Minister has said that the Government will raise the benchmark of Permanent Secretary grade from Superscale C to B, but not all Permanent Secretaries will automatically be promoted to Superscale B. In other words, they can be at Superscale C which is not a Significant Grade, although that job is obviously significant. The core of Administrative Officers will now be in two groups - those in the Significant Grade and those not in the Significant Grade.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I wish to speak in support of the Constitution of the Republic of Singapore (Amendment) Bill in the name of the Minister for Finance. This Constitutional amendment Bill is really in two pieces: one, for the repeal of Article 100 of the Constitution and the other, for a new Article 111A which, in essence, introduces a Significant Grade to the Administrative Service. I will first make my comments on the first part, ie, the repeal of Article 100. This Article has provided for the appeals to the Privy Council from the Supreme Court. This House has already debated at some stage about the abolition of appeals to the Privy Council. I believe this is necessary at some stage. Our legal system must develop with reference to our own needs and changes. We have been independent for more than 30 years and our social, political and economic changes are now moving at greater variance from Britain. With these developments, there have been the confidence and growth of our own legal system. I am sure it is a step in the right direction. Many Commonwealth countries have already done so long ago. Notwithstanding this, I understand that any existing appeal or application outstanding will still be allowed to the Privy Council before the commencement of the Act. On the second part of this amendment, I am not so clear. I can understand the rationale why it is necessary to delink the Superscale C grade of the Administrative Service with the office of the Permanent Secretary. The Minister has given good reasons for that. First, I wish to point out that nowhere in Article 34(2)(a) of the existing Constitution is there any specific mention of any link of the grade of the Permanent Secretary to the Superscale C grade.”
“Sir, the Minister has given me the same reply as the previous Minister. In spite of that, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head J of the Main Estimates be reduced by $10 in respect of Code JD 2600. I have raised this point before with the Minister for Community Development but I have never received a convincing answer from his predecessor. It concerns the administering of the Rent and Utilities Assistance Scheme (RUAS). I believe that a sum of $25 million was paid to this scheme to help the poor and needy from the 25th Anniversary Fund. The present scheme is only available to people who are in arrears of rental, that is, only to people renting flats. I believe that 90% of Singaporean households in HDB flats own their own flats. So they are automatically excluded from help. The heads of these households who own their own flats do get sick, they get injured in accidents in the course of work and are temporarily out of work because of these reasons. During this difficult period, they need help most when they are not able to get a normal salary. Can we not even pay for these people the utilities and service and conservancy charges that they have to pay every month? Surely, we need not be so circumscribed in our thinking that because it is called a RUAS scheme, we can only help people who rent houses, or flats, from the HDB. I urge the Minister to review this policy with a new perspective. Perhaps, he can call it a Needy Utilities Assistance Scheme (NUAS). I am sure the people who run into these problems now and then will be grateful to the Minister. Is the Minister satisfied that the money under the National Council for Social Service (NCSS) for this RUAS scheme is put to effective use?”
“Sir, thank you for allowing me to speak. The Government has started to implement its sale of shophouses in HDB estates. There is a category of HDB shops which have been built in the earlier days, usually two to four storey shops, in and around the town centres, such as in Queenstown, Tanglin Halt, Toa Payoh which were among the first shops to be built by the HDB. Many of these shops are not part of the sale scheme. They are supposed to be under relocation. Will the Minister consider conserving some of these unique low-level shops and town centres, so that the Government can sell the shops to these sitting tenants later? The unique feature of these shophouses can be preserved. They are the prototype, testimony to one of the greatest public housing programmes in the world. As more and more of these new flats and shops and new town centres are being built, it may be a useful reminder to future generations just how the HDB started in its public housing programme, and with a bit of upgrading works, it can be a quaint feature in our public housing landscape. The tenants who have been amongst the first HDB lessees would also benefit by the sale of shops, if the Government agrees. They have been amongst the earliest and oldest lessees of the HDB and they were partners with the HDB right from the beginning. Surely the Minister can consider this request by many of the tenants favourably and let their oldest and most faithful customers benefit from some of the goodies of the HDB.”
“I thank the Minister for his reply and I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head R of the Main Estimates be reduced by $10 in respect of Code RC 5100. Sir, I first raised this matter in 1989 regarding the construction of the new National Library. The Minister then replied that the new Library would be built at the grounds of the old Raffles Girls' Primary School. Each year, I have been looking forward to seeing some new building coming up. The matter has since gone through the hands of several Ministers. Knowing that the present Minister is an avid lover and reader of good books, I hope he can push this matter sooner while he has a good hand to shape it. I once took a walk inside the National Library, a few years ago, and I do not think it has changed very much from the time when I went there as a student. It was to say the least depressing. I think Singaporeans deserve a better place to be called the National Library.”
“I thank the Minister of State for his reply, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.”
“The point I want to make is that the shortage of manpower in the service industry has caused a decline of standard in the quality of service. I wonder whether the Minister would consider letting service be a course for training among the ITE Institute as well as in the secondary schools.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head W of the Main Estimates be reduced by $10 in respect of Code WI 3100. Sir, may I be permitted to skip the subject on labour productivity and go into "service quality"?”
“Sir, my suggestion here is whether we could have a dollar-for-dollar grant to the local enterprise for up to, say, $250,000 per annum for the smaller SMEs. For the larger local enterprises, probably we could give them just double tax deduction without the dollar-for-dollar grant. And I think the grant should be valid both for the local and overseas promotion, as Singapore's success will lead them further afield. The Chairman: Can I ask the remaining Members speaking on this amendment to take one-and-a-half minutes each to make their points. Mr Low. Mr Low Thia Khiang( In Mandarin): Sir, in the estimates of MTI, we have $180 million for loans to be granted to local enterprises. Though this is very good, the amount is the same as last year's. Can I ask some questions? Firstly, based on last year's amount, is this year's estimate enough to meet the demand for assistance by the local enterprises? Secondly, are there any enterprises locally which have not been able to pay back the money because of poor business? Thirdly, on what standard does the EDB determine the eligibility of applications? Fourthly, what is the emphasis on the local entrepreneurs? Have they overlooked the fact that there are some companies which do not have the means to venture overseas? Fifthly, for the small enterprises, have they been able to upgrade themselves to increase their competitiveness, as these small enterprises will one day become medium-size enterprises?”
“Sir, I thank the Minister for his answer. I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. Mr Chia Shi Teck: Sir, I first declare my interest as a businessman. I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head W of the Main Estimates be reduced by $10 in respect of Code WE 3100. The Singapore Government has said that Singapore is a level playing field, transparent, open; we do not practise protectionism as there is no market to protect anyway. The system is free and open but not necessarily "free and fair" as our system favours the big boys, big names, big track records. They have natural advantages in economies of scale, size, strength, technology, market, etc. So the level playing field is there, but the size of the players is different and, most unfortunately, the local players are the smaller players. The Government has accepted that local enterprises have an important role to play and many schemes have been established to help them level up. It is in the levelling up that I think it may be time now to introduce a new scheme for the advertising and promotion business. This advertising and promotion business is very expensive and it takes time before a brand is recognised. The locals have a very tough time in meeting and competing with the foreign brands in Singapore which are big and known. A disadvantage the locals face is this. Take two similar products - one known and one unknown (the unknown being the local company). If the local company has, say, $100,000 to spend, a big chunk of the money will go into production cost, whereas the foreign agent in Singapore will spend the $100,000 straight on media purchase. So that itself is an additional advantage to an already unknown Singapore brand.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head W of the Development Estimates be reduced by $10 in respect of Code WA 5100. Our effort in the Growth Triangle (Singapore-Johor-Riau) has attracted considerable attention in the past. In the past one or two years, however, the attention has also been raised on other regional investments in China, Vietnam, India, and so on. How does our Growth Triangle's strategy fit in, in the face of this greater drive for regional investments in the Asia-Pacific? Does it run the danger of being rendered irrelevant? And how does this affect our longer term Growth Triangle development?”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head W of the Main Estimates be reduced by $10 in respect of Code WA 2420. Sir, it is common nowadays to find our businessmen follow our Ministers on official visits to China, India, Vietnam and so on. Many business deals can be struck. I hear that not all Chambers of Commerce are represented in these visits, in particular, the Singapore International Chamber of Commerce felt a bit left out during one of these visits by our Ministers overseas. They believe that they can help Singapore make business even though they may have more of an MNC representation. Perhaps the Minister can clarify and elaborate on this role that the MNC can make in this regional drive for Singapore.”
“Development economists were in two camps, the outward-looking versus the inward-looking camps; export promotion versus import substitution. It was outward-looking policies which won the day. It is gratifying to note that we are now encouraging our local businesses to go overseas, to build up the external wing to our economy, while continuing to attract foreign investment to Singapore. This is another aspect of the outward-looking, outward-seeking policies. However, while this is good for our long-term growth, it is useful to remember investing overseas does not add to our economic growth in the first instance. But it would add to our ownership of productive capacity. We are channelling investible funds overseas for overseas countries growth. We should not forget about the need for export promotion for our own Singapore-based industries and to attract high quality investment here. I am glad that the Minister has set forth the Government's position in public policy for growth and development. It has also allayed the fear of many as to whether the Government will let unbridled free market to work out situations to the detriment of many people. The market will still be governed. Not only in education and health costs, but in strategic action to stimulate and catalyse growth in certain business sectors, the Minister has announced that the governing hand is still at work. This must be quite a relief because I believe in Singapore, the political leadership and Government is very important for economic growth and development. Without political leadership and Government, Singapore can only be a lesser version of Hong Kong. With superior political leadership and Government, Singapore is the cynosure of the world. Sir, I support the motion.”
“Beyond these fiscal incentives and transfers, I would like to focus a little on the message of the Minister in elaborating on the role of public policy for development by our Singapore Government. I am glad the Minister has come out very clearly to put in perspective the role the Government will still play in selective intervention and in providing the catalytic stimulus and competitive controls for sectors in our economy, amidst the current fervour of the free market. I am glad that the Minister made mention of the World Bank Study "The East Asian Miracle." The East Asian miracle was not a miracle of free market. It was a miracle of competitive control and selective intervention. The major areas identified by the Study which governments should focus are (a) in macro economic environment, with the minimum of price distortions, (b) flexibility in labour markets and training, upgrading with wage flexibility, and (c) social solidarity. The Minister has also identified the intervention role of upgrading the economic structure through selective direct investments in strategic projects. To that extent, it will build up a $1 billion fund for Cluster Development. Mr Speaker, Sir, if you allow me to add, one more important point in the East Asian miraculous success, and Singapore's as well - it is in adopting an outward-looking or an outward-seeking policy in our economic growth and development. All the East Asian economies that succeeded had Uncle Sam as their main market for their exports in the first instance. It was export-led growth, not import substitution and licensing that was the answer to growth and development. India lost decades in this. It was not necessarily the in-thing in the 1970s to believe in export promotion as a strategy of growth.”
“Sir, I rise to speak in support of the motion in the name of the Minister for Finance. Various sectors of the economy have categorised the Budget, some as a "people's Budget", others as "one not so interesting for businesses". It is, perhaps, characteristic by now of Singaporeans to take almost for granted what goodies the Minister has to give. In most countries, people wait in fear of the Minister for Finance's budget for any new and increased taxes they may have to bear. But in our case, some people feel disappointed when it is another's turn to receive and no decrease in taxes is given. I guess the businesses' representatives feel a bit let down because of the corporate tax, now at 27%, was not lowered further. The lowering of the corporate tax was given last year and its full working has not even been translated. Is it reasonable or realistic to expect another decrease when the previous decrease has not fully been worked out for the fiscal matters? The second concern of businesses was the increase of 1 1/2% for CPF rates for employers - fears have been expressed that it will raise business costs further. We should remember, Sir, that businesses did well last year, and can therefore sustain the higher rate. We must bear in mind that profits were also raised by the better performance of the economy, and the increase in CPF rate is a restoration of an earlier rate. This Budget is for the people. The Government will pay on behalf of the people in HDB flats, some months of payment in rentals, and service and conservancy charges. These transfers represent a positive action by the Government in transferring and directly assisting our people in making adjustments in the forthcoming GST.”
“At that time I had urged the Government to examine a reverse mortgage scheme for the elderly who own HDB flats. Two of my colleagues had also made the same point yesterday. Under this scheme, an elderly couple who own a HDB flat can reverse mortgage the flat for a stream of income payments by the HDB or a properly constituted re-financing body for a term period. In this way, the couple can still remain in their flat but at the end of the term period they would no more own their flat. In the meantime, they receive a stream of income for their livelihood. Then at the end of this term period, they can rent the flat from the HDB possibly. Sir, this proposal was first made in the Howe Yoon Chong Report. I think there are many good suggestions in the Howe Yoon Chong Report on the Aged which we should study deeply for implementation. Unfortunately, it was torpedoed prematurely, and we all know the history of it. I urge once again the Government to examine this policy. Many aged Singaporeans in HDB flats own only one asset - their flat. Some viable way can be found to liquidate this saving. This reverse mortgage proposal is much better than asking them to sell off their flats and move into rented ones. Over time, through this reverse mortgage instrument, the HDB can acquire back the flats for redevelopment or for rental. And the cycle of life savings for many Singaporeans can then be better deployed for their needs and the needs of society.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I wish to speak in support of the motion of thanks for the President's Address. Sir, the President's Address has correctly identified one of the most glaring problems in our society, that of the ageing population. Closely tied to this is the problem of health care for the aged. It is reassuring to hear that the Government is looking into this problem now, although it is a problem more of the longer term. The President's Address mentioned that it will raise the Minimum Sum in the CPF gradually and will decide in the next few months which is the best way to do so. I think there is very little choice in this matter. People's life expectancy is longer these days and good public health has lengthened the people's life span. $36,000 may be able to buy an annuity for about $300 per month for perhaps 15 years, depending on the interest rate. However, that is very unlikely to provide a very decent livelihood at today's cost of living. Hence the amount for such a livelihood provision has to be higher. Whilst we can sort out the arithmetic and decide on the increase in the Minimum Sum, the section of the people who will be affected by this would be those who are currently working. For the other section of the people who have already retired long ago and who have limited savings, it is a struggle to make ends meet. Many of them, especially in the lower income bracket, cannot rely too much on their children to support them fully because their children also have families of their own, and these children also need to be provided at today's cost of living. Sir, in my first speech in Parliament in January 1989 I had addressed this issue. I had also urged the Government to adopt policies which can allow our elderly to achieve more financial security and flexibility.”
“should be gradually done in order to make adjustments easier for the people. It seems to me there are some anomalies here. On page 39 of the White Paper, it is mentioned that "to give hospitals some stability in planning, X will not be revised annually, but only once every few years". But in page 40, the last sentence reads: "They should give people adequate warning of price changes, and make more frequent but smaller price adjustments instead of infrequent large adjustments." I hope during the course of this debate some clarification on this may be made. The second point I wish to make is that the Government should appoint a special medical audit body to verify and ensure that the regulations and controls, and the charges and the rates, are observed in true spirit and in law by the hospital bodies. This will give periodic adjustments in rate-setting and standard-setting greater credibility. It will also ensure that timely feedback on the whole system is possible. The working of this complex system of affordable health care will be closely monitored by this specialist auditor body. It will help the Government in achieving its goal of affordable health care and provide, hopefully, true and fair views on the whole system. Mr Speaker, Sir, I wish to support the motion.”
“It may appear that we are very low compared to the developed countries, but we must remember that we are a relatively young population compared with them. In fact, the percentage of our people over 65, as found in the Report, in the total population is about half of theirs. As people age, more is spent on medical and health expenses. Hence, we should address the problem seriously now in order that we should avoid the problems faced by them presently. Yet while I can understand the range of regulations and control measures the Government intends to administer for our affordable health care system, I urge the Government not to throw away competition from the bathtub. They must basically allow competition to enjoin within the parameters set by the Government. The health care market should be wisely governed and not allowed to operate unbridled. Going through the White Paper, I have two points to make here. One concerns the cap the Government intends to set in terms of the average revenue per patient day. Just now my colleague, Mr Chin, has mentioned about the problem of X. It is indeed mentioned in the White Paper that the Government will set the maximum percentage growth in revenue allowed each year to the CPI plus X (where X is the control variable). This control variable is supposed to represent productivity increase and medical progress. I do not know how the Ministry intends to compute this productivity increase and medical progress rate. If they know of a method, I am eager to know of it. Also, it is mentioned that this rate X will not be revised annually, but only once every few years. I remember in the Cost Review Committee Report debate, it was quite clear that one of the recommendations is that the increases in fees, etc.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I wish to speak on this motion standing in the name of the Minister for Trade and Industry. I must say that I find this White Paper quite sensible, contrary to what has been echoed about free market health care system not so long ago. To many of the aged and to many of the retirees, I think this White Paper and the policies it spells out are a great relief. This White Paper, I believe, rests on sound economic and social perceptions. It recognises at the outset that the public health care system constitutes a unique case for market failure and that regulatory controls should be made in order to generate an outcome that is equitable, choice-friendly and affordable. In going from this starting point of goal-setting to the end point of achieving the outcomes, one has to trespass a whole minefield of controls, levers, pressure points, compulsions, regulations, and incentives. That is the menu of health care systems all over the world. While the White Paper is quite clearly written, I do not think that the process will be so simply administered neat, cut-and-dry. At the end of the day, some loopholes, some bypasses will be exploited, mismatch between means and ends in this complex system will recur. Nonetheless, by starting on the right footing, as I think this White Paper has, we will hopefully avoid the pitfalls of cost escalation in health care that is found in many of the developed countries, especially in the United States and the United Kingdom, and, hopefully, avoid some of the mistakes in developing a viable and economically efficient and affordable health care system in Singapore. Singapore spends about 3.1% of our GDP on health expenditures compared with 13% for the United States, 6% to 9% for the OECD countries, and about 6% for Japan.”
“The CRC also addressed the issue of taking care of the less well-off members of society, such as the retirees and the aged, through various schemes which have been effected such as Edusave, Medifund, the Small Families Improvement Schemes. Various measures have been introduced over the past few years to look after this sector of the population. I recall the Prime Minister has announced a few years ago that the Government intends to uplift the bottom 20% of the population through assistance schemes such as these, without obliterating the underlying challenge of market competition and economic reality. In estates where it is known that large numbers of the aged and the poor reside, it is not unwise for bus services to consider serving the aged and the retirees. Polyclinics and post offices, cheap food centres, markets and other public sector agencies should be retained and not be relocated at the first moment in the name of development and efficiency. These facilities being nearby mean a lot to lowering the cost of living for these people. They go a long way to maintaining the low cost of living for many of these residents whose income levels are low or who are retirees and aged. I hope the Government will consider the points raised. I support the motion.”
“I suggest that an appropriate council be formed within an appropriate Ministry to look into this issue. After all the quantum and the timing of such former public sector goods and services increase, ultimately the effect must be on the people. There is no guarantee that such bunching of price increases would not affect this in the future. Part of the problem has to do only with the increases in the cost of operations. The other part of the problem really is the phasing in of a deregulated market-driven economy from a formerly regulated environment, especially in the area of public sector goods. It is not as easy as a change of clothes, as the Russians have learnt. As we embark more and more on a market-driven economic environment and cap our subsidies to the former public sector goods and services, some decision must be taken on the timing and the increases in the charges of these former public sector goods and services. Otherwise, we can see a repeat of this bunching phenomenon, as identified by the CRC. No market in these areas of education, health, public transport can be completely free. Such a proposed council - another one of this idea was formerly presented by the Nominated Member of Parliament, Mr Robert Chua, yesterday - is not responsible for the cost increases. The respective agencies or the bodies' corporate are directly responsible. But in implementing price increases over these former public sector goods and services, someone has got to coordinate the time and the phase, so as to avoid this bunching phenomenon we saw in 1989 to 1991. Perhaps, this council can also query the bodies to justify their increases of fees in the same way that the Government departments justify their requests for more subsidies and allocations from the Finance Ministry.”
“This list of such increases would be scrutinised and debated in Parliament. As we progress more and more towards a market-driven economy, many of such increases in former public sector goods and services are no more matters of fiscal consideration, but left to the variety of bodies and corporations concerned to administer, being no more affecting revenue. This scrutiny list on Budget Day for the Finance Ministry is no more. Although people do not like increases in charges, there is something to be said about such charges being announced by the Minister for Finance on Budget Day so that the whole array of increases in public sector goods and services charges can be seen by all at one time for the year. With off-budget increases in public sector or statutory charges becoming the rule, and many public sector services privatised, the cost of services are being passed on, although with capped subsidies. It is not surprising, therefore, that at some stage public perception of such cost increases can be disturbing, especially when a variety of such cost increases from education, transport, health, for example, hit the people in the same period. Therefore, some coordination in the timing of such price or fee increases is necessary, as identified by the CRC. The CRC calls for a more gradual increase, phased over a period of time for such goods and services, as education, health and transport expenditures. But who is to coordinate this? Every one of these bodies has a right to fix their own price. It used to be in the Addendum List of the Minister for Finance on Budget Day. Presumably, the Minister for Finance looked at this and presumably a good Minister for Finance did not want or need a long list. But now it is no more.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, after all the days of debate and the straight As from Mr Chia, I hope we do not have the mindset that everything that has been said has been said about this Cost Review Committee. I wish to speak in support of this motion in the name of the Member for Tampines GRC. I have gone through the Report and the minority report of the Opposition Member of Parliament. I must say that while the Opposition Member of Parliament has recorded his views in a minority report, we should not be detracted from the main substance of the issues that is found in the Cost Review Committee. The Minister for Trade and Industry has also addressed these issues just now. However, I consider that the recommendation by the CRC for avoiding the bunching up of cost or fee increases by the public or former public sector bodies to be a most significant recommendation of this CRC. Unfortunately, this point was not addressed by the Minister just now in the Government's reply. The timing and schedule of administering cost increases are very important. I can understand the urgency Government departments or public service bodies feel, once policy decisions are made, to achieve some target solutions; such as raising of some necessary charges, they would do so soonest. We have to realise that adjustments and the impact of any such public sector goods pricing would ultimately be felt by the people, and that they are the rich and the poor. There was a time not so long ago when increases in taxes, statutory charges, or fees in public health, education, transport services, etc, were long awaited and tolerated on Budget Day, when the Minister for Finance would announce from his bag a variety of tax and revenue raising changes on public sector goods and services.”
“I know Dr Vasoo for many years, more than a decade, even before he and I entered Parliament. He is a highly-principled man, who has always been serving and representing the poor and the underprivileged in society, and I have sat with him for years in the Public Assistance Review Committee which reviews all appeals for public assistance cases brought up by MPs. I marvel at his tenacity in putting forward the case for the poor and the underprivileged of society. He is the MP who fights for the poor and pushes for their well-being actively and quietly in numerous committees and meetings and publicly in Parliament on numerous occasions. He is the man who speaks for and serves the poor and the underprivileged, not Dr Chee. He has not just got a good brain, he has got a good heart. Finally, Mr Speaker, Sir, the present motion in the name of the NMP is too ambiguous and I cannot support it.”
“There are hundreds of lecturers with PhDs from all over the world with all sorts of political ideas and beliefs at the NUS. It expends hundreds of millions of dollars annually. We must give some respect to the University administration for its decision-making on how to run the University, or deal with its staff and how to set the rules. Any person believed to be wrong can naturally seek the proper lawful redress. Singapore is a very civilised society. Millions of dollars are given out each year from the University for approved research topics. Not all the research money can be guaranteed to be fruitful, but none should be dishonestly spent. This is the basic trust between agencies funding out research grants and recipients. The terms of application are always spelt out. Let the people responsible for it handle and deal with it. The motion seeks clarification from the Minister for Education. I am sure this will be forthcoming. But we must not play into Dr Chee's hands. It is not the facts he is after. He knows the facts and they are against him. He has already made the choice. It is the emotion that he is after. I urge Singaporeans not to let themselves be drawn into this mini-attempt psycho drama created by Dr Chee to achieve his own narrow political objective. Let the problem Dr Chee has with the University be resolved between themselves, as it lawfully should be, and no one should exploit Dr Chee's problem to political advantage. I would like to add a little bit on what I know of the hon. Member for Tanjong Pagar, Dr Vasoo, the Head of the Social Work and Psychology Department. He is unfortunately the Head of Dr Chee in this Department. I am sure Dr Vasoo will, in good time, furnish information to the House as to what exactly happened.”
“By doing so, naturally he hopes to serve his own purpose, which is to cloud the issue of his misconduct, to attract media attention for his own political goal. Naturally, he hopes to build up himself as a political martyr and to turn his problems to political advantage and make political capital out of it. In fact, the SDP, in its press release, has implicitly admitted that this action of Dr Chee is calculated for political advantage. I quote: 'The SDP would not ask any person to endanger his health or life for any political advantage. (Signed Chiam See Tong)' However, I believe that Singaporeans are not so easily swayed. If they were, more than 70% of Singaporeans would not have voted for the PAP in the last by-election where Dr Chee took part and failed. Yet, if it is necessary, it must be pointed out that these desperate political moves are not something that should be tolerated and Singaporeans should not be fooled and taken for a ride by it. The contractual agreement between NUS and Dr Chee should properly be respected as dealing between an employer and an employee, and best left to themselves to sort it out. Unfortunately, since the matter has been brought to the House, in the nature of a democracy, Members must have their say, perhaps, this was meant to be so by the person in question. Let me say a little bit for the NUS in this instance. Sir, I have no interest in the NUS, or the NUS in me. However, as a former research scholar in the University of Singapore who had benefitted from the research awards from the University, I must say that I have a healthy respect for the University. From its antecedent days of the University of Singapore, it has grown into the present National University of Singapore. I dare say one of the best universities in the world.”
“I am sure they are willing and they are ably qualified to do so, particularly as the dismissal as alleged is supposed to be politically motivated. That would have given the leaders of the SDP the platform and the avenue to clear the matter once and for all for Singapore and the world to see. Yet this sensible avenue was not chosen. Why? Instead, Dr Chee has chosen to go on a half hunger strike with glucose. This is the real politically motivated part. Being the psychologist he is, he is deliberately politicising the situation so as to impugn the responsibility for his dismissal to some political motivation by some powers that be. Who? He has not specified. This is a clever art done by psychologists all the time, the redirection of feelings, emotions and desires towards another object. It is called transference. Religious fanatics and false prophets also practise the psychological game to influence and control their followers by self-inflicted denials, always in the public light but never in the cloister of one's retreat and never in the loneliness of the desert. The practitioner of this art portrays himself as the one suffering for humanity, the one to bring the new joy and freedom, the one without sin admits all the sinners. Hence, a bed from the bedroom was placed in the sitting room, with a few pillows to bear, and a daily press conference is an essential. For a politician, Dr Chee is true to his colour. True enough, as identified by our Prime Minister sometime ago, he is playing the politics of envy once again. He is polarising the politics of envy on to himself, invoking on himself as a torch-bearer for the long suffering Singaporeans that he purports to champion. This is a sordid attempt at deluding the people to camouflage the political underhand.”