Chia Shi Teck
Singapore
“Mr Speaker, the Minister has missed out my question on affordability. I would like the Minister's assurance. Nobody believes in the word "affordability", as the prices are moving up. Will HDB, for instance, freeze the selling prices for the next five or 10 years to ensure affordability?”
“The question is to prepare the girls, after the 'A' level, for some jobs that will get them ready for motherhood later on. Because the fear is that while the schools are chasing for As in academic achievements they might divert their attention from the basic motherhood later on.”
“Sir, the Parliamentary Secretary said that the complaint of the needles only came months later. Actually, it was taken on 16th November 1993 and there was confirmation that there were needles implanted. But the X-rays were lost. Subsequently, at counsel's request, another X-ray was taken on 29th April 1994.”
“My question is: how was it that when the prison knew that there was a needle implanted in November 1993 it lapsed until 29th April 1994 when the counsel asked for another X-ray to be taken and the needle was still inside? Therefore, it shows that there must be some lapse, as you said, and that there should be further investigation.”
“Would the Parliamentary Secretary agree to using camera for serious cases that lead to capital punishment if it is not possible to use camera to record all interrogations? But for serious cases that lead to capital punishment, probably it will be fair to do that. Assoc. Prof.”
“Sir, a recent report by EIU stated that Singapore is more costly than Hong Kong in terms of telecommunication costs. Given the monopoly to Singapore Telecom, would the Minister direct that they must be the cheapest as far as this region is concerned, because they have the advantage of the monopoly?”
The complete record
Every one of 186 lines we hold for Chia Shi Teck, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 3 of 4.
“Sir, will the Minister tell us the size of our reserves and whether the size is based on our cost or the present market value of our assets? Dr Richard Hu Tsu Tau: I have answered this question at a previous sitting of Parliament. Currently, the totality of our foreign reserves is around $65-66 billion and that is based on current market values.”
“Sir, the Hon. DPM mentioned about transferring software to Suzhou. From what we have read, the decision has not really been taken. But we have already signed the letter of intent to develop Suzhou township. So what will happen if the Government decides to go to Shandong, Yantai and Weihai?”
“Could I take the Minister to mean that he is quite happy with the current controls and that he is also quite happy with the current state of affairs?”
“The Minister has said that options are not transferable but, from what is happening, we see people queuing up and the very next day they are already selling the units. The other question is whether the forfeiture is a bit too low and that people who are looking at the gains that they can get out of selling may think it is worth taking a small risk.”
“Sir, could I take the Minister's earlier answer to mean that they will leave speculators alone, as the Minister has said that there will be more than enough houses to go around and genuine house buyers need not panic into rushing to buy their houses?”
“Sir, with the recent rises in URA's land tender prices, how would that affect HDB's pricing? As the Minister has said, the price of land is one big determinant and now the tender prices of URA's land would definitely move up the land value?”
“Potential house buyers should take note that the supply ofnew private properties will increase substantially. Over the next eight years, URA's Real Estates Statistics Quarterly show a potential supply of 52,340 dwelling units or an average of 6,500 per annum. For the years 1993 and 1994, the estimated supply coming onstream is 7,366 and 9,468 dwelling units respectively. This is much more than the average historical demand of 3,900 dwelling units per annum and supply of 4,200 units per annum over the last 10 years. Indeed several real estate developers have expressed their concern to the Ministry of National Development that we may be heading for an over-supply of private properties. There is sufficient land in Singapore for both private and public housing. Government plans to release land for development of 3,000 dwelling units a year, and will release more if the demand justifies it. This is in addition to the supply of housing land available in private hands. Let me now turn to another group of property buyers. These are the ones who buy expecting property prices to rise, whereupon they will sell at a profit. Such speculation is a normal part of the free market, provided it is not fuelled by excessive lending from financial institutions. Persons who derive regular income from such property transactions must of course declare and pay tax on this income. However, their greater exposure is to the risk that the market will turn, catching them with unsold and overpriced properties. In every property boom, sooner or later this happens.”
“In 1993, more than 20,000 purchasers will take delivery of their new HDB flats. Of this number, 45%, or 9,000, are upgraders. They will put their existing flats on the resale market. In comparison, in 1991, the corresponding figure was 6,800 and in 1992, this was 8,300. So the number of flats going into the resale market, because of upgrading, will increase. Let me now turn to private residential properties. Prices of private residential properties are determined by the developers' calculations and what buyers are prepared to pay. Residential property prices have increased because of many factors. They include a growing economy, greater investor confidence, rising incomes, low interest rates, and the easing of some CPF investment rules. In addition, perceptions and expectations of sellers and buyers of properties and the booming stock market also play a part in the rising prices. Over the long term, property prices in Singapore will almost surely rise in step with economic growth and prosperity so long as the fundamentals of the economy are sound. But our property market is also subject to short term cyclical ups and downs, like property markets everywhere. Thus, while current selling prices may reflect supply and demand in the present circumstances, we cannot assume that present prices are sustainable, or predict when the property market will cool down. Let me turn to the different types of property buyers. There are many types of property buyers. Some wish to upgrade their homes or buy new ones to live in. When these buyers choose to make their purchase is their personal decision. However, such buyers should not panic into buying their homes because they are worried that there will be a shortage of supply.”
“Sir, may I first declare my interest as a director of a property company. Question No. 2. Mr Lim Hng Kiang (for the Minister for National Development): There are two categories of residential units in Singapore: firstly, new HDB flats sold by HDB, and secondly, HDB resale flats and private housing units sold on the open market. Let me first address the first category. New HDB flats are priced to reflect the construction and land costs, premium factors such as good locality, storey height, and so on, as well as design improvements. In the last nine months, from July 1992 to April 1993, construction costs for HDB flats have been stable. As a result, price increases for new HDB flats have averaged only 1.8%. HDB expects the price adjustments for 1993 to be minimal. If construction and land costs continue to remain stable, purchasers of new HDB flats need not worry about higher prices. Let me now turn to HDB resale flats. Although there are restrictions on the sale and purchase of HDB resale flats, their prices are largely determined by market forces. HDB's records show that resale prices have increased by about 5-10% since HDB announced on 23rd March this year that it would increase the amount of mortgage financing it provided to buyers. One possible reason for this increase is that the larger HDB loans have made buyers more willing to pay higher prices for a flat of their choice. HDB expects the increase in resale prices due to this reason to be a one-off phenomenon. Another reason why prices of HDB resale flats will stabilise is the bigger expected supply of resale flats. Because HDB is building more new flats and a higher proportion of the purchasers are upgraders, more flats will be offered for resale. This will dampen further increases in the resale prices.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, in moving the motion, I asked for the truth and I said I wanted to know the truth, and the general public also wanted to know the truth. The truth has come out and I am thoroughly convinced that the action taken by NUS was not politically motivated. And the Hon. Prime Minister's assurance then at the Marine Parade GRC by-election that he would not be dismissed just because he is an Opposition candidate holds. So here we have the Minister, Dr Vasoo and all the others speaking out the facts and the facts have proved that Dr Chee did make a mistake. Mr Chiam took objection to my tone. My tone was one for the big picture and, that is, the truth of the matter, and the truth has come out. The smaller one is that the action taken by Dr Chee, I thought, was inappropriate and, as Mr Shanmugam said, childish. So it is for his own good and his family's own good that he should kick off the hunger strike. If he still feels not convinced with all the facts, there is still other course of action. Question put, "That this House expresses its concern over the allegation by Dr Chee Soon Juan that his dismissal from NUS for alleged misuse of his research funds amounting to the sum of $226.00 was politically motivated and seeks clarification from the Minister for Education of the actual facts that caused Dr Chee's dismissal and deplores the SDP's action in politicising an internal NUS disciplinary matter, and pressuring NUS to rescind its action against a dishonest staff member."”
“But what I want to know and, I believe, what the general public wants to know is the truth, simply the truth. Was he, as he claimed, victimised? He gave reasons to support that he did not act dishonestly in expending the $226. He claimed that his wife's thesis was relevant to his work. NUS was originally silent on this. Now, NUS has said that even if the work was relevant, she has no right to the funds. He claimed that Dr Vasoo had approved the expenses and had in fact shown invoices with Dr Vasoo's signatures. SDP's statement claimed that the issue of the research funds came up only after Dr Chee was questioned about his political motives or activities by Dr Vasoo and the Faculty Dean, Professor Ernest Chew, on 4th March. And there was this illegal taping that we read about and which Dr Vasoo was unhappy. The other questions floated about are: (1) whether NUS rules on use of research funds are clear; (2) whether it is a practice of the academia to draw on research funds to send relevant thesis. Is this, even taking that Dr Chee was wrong, a dismissal offence? Were there precedents? And there are many, many more questions which I can leave them to the other hon. Members. Mr Speaker, Sir, it is important that we get the true picture to clear all doubts about the dismissal. We should not allow doubts to hang over our system of justice. We have, in fact, in this House just moved several Bills to improve the system. Sir, I beg to move. Question proposed.”
“And out of the blue, we suddenly read of Dr Chee's dismissal and then this saga. Dr Chee made a serious allegation that his dismissal was politically motivated. Everyone can see that he is a rising star on the Opposition camp and Dr Chee's boss was Dr Vasoo, a PAP MP. So his sudden dismissal did cause some concern amongst the public. Dr Chee had said many a time that he has a good brain. So using this good brain of his, he decided, and he said on his own accord, to go on a glucose-coated hunger strike. SDP had declared its 101% support for Dr Chee's honesty and integrity but said it did not influence him to go on a hunger strike. Sir, personally, I cannot understand the rationale for his action, but, then, I am not a politician. [Interruptions.] I came in by the back-door, so some of us have said. I thought there must be other better, perhaps, less dramatic, but certainly more effective ways to clear his name, if he is innocent. Maybe he has other reasons. One must always remember that Dr Chee has a good brain. Maybe he believes he can gain politically, shooting to national prominence, leapfrogging the popularity of even Mr Chiam See Tong and, perhaps, even Mr Goh Chok Tong. He had scheduled press conferences and interviews with even foreign press, including the Melbourne Age and probably even the BBC. So maybe he wants to go down in history, at least, in SDP's history book, as a martyr, a sacrificial lamb. Sir, I do not know his reasons. Maybe he is just simply tired of living and this might be a glamorous way to go. He has not even started the battle. So I wish him well, whatever his reasons are. Good luck to him. But if he wants an advice, I would like to say that dead heroes are no heroes. Mr Speaker, Sir, I do not want to know his actual reasons.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker, Sir. I beg to move, That this House expresses its concern over the allegation by Dr Chee Soon Juan that his dismissal from NUS for alleged misuse of his research funds amounting to a sum of $226.00 was politically motivated, and seeks clarification from the Minister for Education of the actual facts that caused Dr Chee's dismissal. I am grateful to you, Mr Speaker, Sir, and to the House for allowing the motion standing in my name to be debated. This whole episode, like it or not, has been politicised and Parliament is the best place to debate on the issue. This matter of Dr Chee's dismissal is no longer a personal matter between him and the NUS. It has much wider implications and probably some political repercussions. Dr Chee Soon Juan, an SDP candidate for the Marine Parade GRC by-election in December, came across to me, at least, as a very clever politician. He projected himself as David taking on the might of Goliath, the PAP. He projected himself as an underdog and even went ahead to compare himself to Cdre Teo Chee Hean, both being new members then. He talked about the promotion that Cdre Teo was to get and the sacrifices that he had to make and probably even the risk of losing his job as a lecturer in NUS. The Hon. Prime Minister, Mr Goh Chok Tong, had dismissed his fears, saying that NUS would not fire him just because he is an Opposition candidate. Dr Chee had since, what the SDP has termed a sterling performance, been elected Assistant Secretary-General, second probably to Mr Chiam See Tong. Dr Chee had also written several critical letters of the Government to the press, and we read of several exchanges, which include Mr Matthias Yao's replies to his letters.”
“Sir, I rise to support the Bill. Whilst I am no lawyer to go into the details of the qualifications of the District Judges, I would like to ask the Minister - with the passage of this Bill, the District Judges would have their civil jurisdiction increased to $100,000 - what percentage of the workload in the High Court will then be reduced and shifted to these District Courts and can the District Courts cope? Would that also mean there is no more need to appoint High Court Judges or there is no more need for additional Judicial Commissioners? Could the Minister also assure the House that there is no more need, as mentioned some years ago, for recruiting foreign judges in the High Court? Maybe the Minister could explain how these changes in the jurisdiction could bring about more efficiency as simply transferring the workload from the High Court to the District Judges may not just increase efficiency.”
“Sir, I rise to support the Bill. I totally agree with Mr Ho Peng Kee that ever since Chief Justice Yong Pung How has assumed this role, much improvement has been made. As a non-lawyer, I would just like to ask the Minister whether this appointment of a permanent Court of Appeal means that the Government is contemplating abolishing all appeals to the Privy Council in London. If so, when. And are there many outstanding cases for the Privy Council and, when transferred to our Court of Appeal here, would there be a lot of work and can the Court of Appeal cope?”
“To those who are not contributing, of course, it is fair; those who have no skill at all and are costing the company that much money. But to those who are actually contributing and are useful to the company, then it may not be fair to these workers. But I suppose there should be a compromise, so that employers benefit from those who are contributing and carry those who are not contributing. And the 5% reduction, as I see, is fair. But then the question is: what about the Government? There is a price to pay here. The individual pays a price. The employers pay a price. What about the Government, other than just issuing notices and sending the errant employers to jail? Could the Government actually do more to show its sincerity of wanting workers to continue to work beyond 55 by, as suggested earlier, allowing higher medical expenditure for companies? What about lower income taxes? What about a medical allowance of $2,000-$3,000 for the older workers? What about the topping-up scheme where the Government is generous in giving $200 for the purchase of shares? What about giving a couple of hundred dollars, as surpluses permit, to these older workers and paid into their Medisave accounts? There are things that we like to see the Government playing its part other than just legislating. A higher interest rate could be given for CPF accounts, for instance. What about discounts in public health costs, discounts in public transport and so on and so forth? Sir, with that, I support the Bill cautiously, because the employers' worry is, as Mr Chng said, on contract employment. They may engage a consultant for a period of two years or engage a designer for all he is worth for 2-3 years. Will that right be taken away from the employers?”
“In fact, the Minister for Health did say at the last sitting that Singaporeans can expect to live up to 80 years old. So from 60 years to 80 years, you are talking about a good 20 years. And I share the sentiments of the unionist MP that it is the training part. If we make them to continue to be useful economically, I think people will want to keep them. Sir, I would like to ask the Minister why then raise the retirement age progressively from 60 years to 67 years. Why not, at one go, raise it to 65 years, and why the magic figure of 67 years? Probably, to avoid misunderstanding, the exemption categories could be spelt out from day one, that is, which categories would stay put at 55 years, 60 years and so on. Those jobs which require more physical work and less marginal skills, are the jobs that are at stake but not those skilful jobs. The Bill actually benefits the individuals as they now have the right, especially those with marginal skills, to continue to work as their self-ego and self-esteem will continue to be there and they will have a continuous income, as the Minister has said. The employers actually also benefit under this tight labour situation where you have a lot of workers who may just wish to retire at 55 years and they are there to work and to continue to serve them. The Government will benefit as less of them will go to the Government for welfare. There is an economic contribution and they can contribute more to our reserves. So, overall, the whole of Singapore will benefit if the legislation is implementable and fair. But there is this cost-sharing and the Minister has announced that because of costs, employers want the CPF to be reduced and the Minister has announced a 5% reduction. The question is: is it fair to the individual?”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker, Sir, for allowing me to join in the debate. I declare my interest as an employer and I would like to speak first on the employer's behalf. Employers do have feelings. Employers should not be seen as cold-blooded monsters. So employers do see loyalty and experience of their employees. And I think there is no problem of employers keeping their employees beyond 55, 60, or 65 years. The point is whether they are contributing and they will continue to be productive. So, basically, we have two groups of workers here. Those that can actually look after themselves by continuously upgrading themselves, especially those on the executive and managerial levels. This group of people need not worry as they can take care of themselves, so no legislation is needed. But it is the other group, ie, the less qualified, that was put up by the unionist Member, that is a problem. And I think DPM BG Lee did say about the problems of our seniority wage system where a new company and a 10-year old company doing the same business will find that the new company is in a better position. The old clerk cannot do the word processor and things like this. There is a problem in the total system. Employers actually look at the competitive environment, look at the total package and stay competitive. This is what the employers are looking at. Because at the end of the day, if simply legislating and extending the retirement age means that the company can no longer be competitive, then it may just close shop. It is not just the few jobs that it is protecting, but the total number of jobs that we are losing that is of concern. Personally, I am sad to see good bodies laying to waste at the HDB void decks playing chess.”
“Sir, under those circumstances, it would seem more natural for Singapore to do only the net essential imports, like food and medicine, and there would be no more trading imports or raw material imports. If that is the case, then our reserves could last us probably years.”
“Under what circumstance would Singapore need to draw on the imports based on the seven months?”
“Will the Minister explain the term "imports"? Does it include all the entrepot trade imports or is it retained imports or just essential imports?”
“Will the Minister confirm that our foreign assets include only the liquid holdings of the Government and do not include investments of the GSIC, the statutory boards and STH group?”
“Sir, could the HDB not charge the cost of land into the cost of construction of the buildings? What I mean is that the car parks to serve the housing units should be charged into the cost of the building as in the private estates.”
“Sir, I notice the loss incurred is, to a great extent, due to the interest charged. It is over $100 million in the last financial year. Could the Minister of State explain these interest charges? Mr Lim Hng Kiang: The HDB has to pay the Government for the land that it has acquired for the provision of car parks. The cost of this land is paid for through development loans and there is an interest incurred in paying these development loans.”
“The land is returned to the State but the demolition cost is charged to the rental accounts. The land has appreciated in value and subsequently when new buildings are put up on the land, we take the market value and, in turn, we say it is subsidised housing to the new purchasers. It is a question of accounting, I suppose. Mr Lim Hng Kiang: The reason why the land is returned to the State, and subsequently for the development of sold flats, it is purchased from the State at the then market rates, is to accurately reflect the cost of providing sold flats. The intention in the accounting practice is that we return the land to the State and then the State sells back the land to HDB. HDB, as a developer, is no different from other developers, purchases the land at the then market rates and costs the sold flats accordingly. HOUSING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD (Losses in car park operations) 8. Mr Chia Shi Teck asked the Minister for National Development why there were huge losses in the operation of Housing and Development Board car parks and how he plans to curb the losses without resorting to an increase in car park charges.”
“Sir, thus the demolition of rental flats is not to be taken as a deficit or what you call a subsidy to rental apartments. How does the Minister treat the appreciated land value subsequently when the land is used for building new flats in the sales programme?”
“Sir, can the Minister say whether there is a compensation law for those who were subsequently found innocent? Prof. Jayakumar: Sir, the question of compensation is not provided for and does not arise. The man was acquitted because the Attorney-General withdrew the charge. A common perception on the part of many people is that this means a finding of innocence. It does not necessarily follow. In this case, the Attorney-General withdrew the charge for the reasons we have stated. HDB/URA PARKING CHARGES 6. Mr Cheo Chai Chen asked the Minister for National Development whether the Housing and Development Board and the Urban Redevelopment Authority will be raising parking charges and, if so, by how much and when.”
“Point of clarification, Sir. I am not encouraging smuggling. I am talking about neighbouring countries buying off Singapore. How they pack their things back has nothing to do with GST, and I am not encouraging smuggling into Singapore. Question put, and agreed to. Resolved, That the Goods and Services Tax Bill be committed to a Select Committee consisting of Mr Speaker as Chairman and the following Members:- Mr Chiam See Tong Mr Robert Chua Teck Chew Mr S. Dhanabalan Mr Goh Chee Wee Mr Ho Peng Kee Dr Richard Hu Tsu Tau Mr Lim Boon Heng Mr Low Thia Khiang Dr Ow Chin Hock; and Cdre (Res) Teo Chee Hean. - [Dr Richard Hu Tsu Tau]. PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS (AMENDMENT) BILL Order for Second Reading read. 5.25 pm”
“If a couple do not pay tax for seven years because of the procreation rebates, the GST rebates which they ought to have received otherwise could be credited into their CPF accounts. If they do not pay tax because of GST rebates, the procreation incentives could be deferred from seven years to, say, 12 years. I think the Government has to give incentives to take into account the loss they suffer. The Muslim community is going to be affected by GST, like the other communities. I would like to pose a question specifically affecting the Muslim community. Would GST be imposed on these items: 1) Zakat Harta; 2) Zakat Fitrah; 3) contributions to Mosque Building Fund; 4) purchase of goats and cattle for sacrificial purposes; 5) payments towards a Hajj pilgrimage; 6) public contributions to mosques? Muslims have to prepare themselves for GST. At the same time, early preparations need to be made for performance of their religious obligations. A ruling as to whether they need to pay GST on these items will make it easier for them to make the necessary preparations. This is to avoid any confusion when GST is implemented. Mr Speaker, I support the Goods and Services Tax Bill. Basically, GST is fairer as it taxes a person based on his expenditure, not his income. If one wants to pay less taxes, one would have to reduce one's consumption. This would teach us the habit of thrift. I also support the Minister's proposal to refer the Bill to a Select Committee. This reflects the Government's openness in a matter affecting the people at large. The move will give the public the opportunity to offer views and suggestions to refine the Bill. Singaporeans should welcome this opportunity and respond by submitting their representations. 4.32 pm”
“The public is worried that the prices of all goods and services will go up by at least 3%. In fact, even before GST has been introduced, there are complaints that some traders are already raising their prices. I would like to suggest that the Price Control Unit take steps right now to monitor prices in the market. If possible, publish monthly price lists of daily necessities so that we can monitor trends in the prices of goods. If there are any cases of profiteering through undue price increases, the Government should consider enforcing the Price Control Act to help consumers. I welcome the tax rebates announced. By calculations, many would be paying lower taxes. The Government expects the 3% GST to bring in about $921 million, while the rebates given amount to $1,070 million. The 3% rate will not be increased for as long as possible after the initial five-year period, provided income levels rise according to the rate of economic growth. I would like to ask the Minister, in case GST collections at the 3% rate turn out to be higher that the value of the rebates, could the rate be reduced or, alternatively, the rebates be increased? I hope the Minister could give due consideration to this. Mr Speaker, the Government has also given rebates of between $5,000 and $20,000 for women who give birth to a second child before age 31 years. A $20,000 tax rebate is also granted in respect of a third and fourth child. I would like to know how the Government would refine the incentive structure for couples who are now enjoying tax rebates for two or more children. I think the two categories of rebates, ie, the GST offsets and the procreation incentives, can be given together.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, there are some businesses done out of Singapore because we are a free port. But our neighbours do not play the same rules as we do, being totally free. So our neighbouring countries impose very heavy duties. Are we going to play the holier than the Pope's role? A lot of people who buy things here tranship and repack from Singapore and they do their own documentation to bring the goods into all these countries. So that is the transhipment business that may be destroyed. Even precious stones, TV sets, and things like these might be affected. Encik Ibrahim bin Othman (Thomson GRC)( In Malay): Mr Speaker, the goods and services tax will bring about a change in our tax system. Our focus, which hitherto has been on income tax, will now shift to indirect taxes. GST, which will start out at the rate of 3% from April next year, will restructure Singapore's taxation system to take into account our aging population. GST thus prepares us for the challenges of the future when everyone will have to be responsible for the national expenditure. Although the subject has been mentioned for a number of years now, the full details of the GST were only known about a month or so ago with the publication of the White Paper. Random surveys by local newspapers show that many are still in the dark about it, particularly those in the lower and middle income groups. It is therefore imperative that the Government embarks on a wide-scale publicity programme to explain it in detail to the public. I would like to ask the Minister what sort of publicity will be launched in the one-year period before GST becomes law. Singaporeans' concern about GST has to do with rising costs. This point has already been made by a number of Members in the House.”
“But, nonetheless, it is a worry, and the unions are waiting by the side and will clamour for higher wages if the cost of living goes higher than what they are given in return. How then can we get a wider base of people to pay tax other than just introducing the GST? I really do not know at this point in time. But could we reward those who are taxpayers more in the CPF topping-up scheme and things like that? We are allowing everybody who is above 21 to have it. But what about those who actually contribute, who actually pay? They should be given the rewards. And because they are getting the rewards due to our good performance yearly, those who are self-employed and who are earning but not paying taxes may want to get into the full picture later on. In total, I think the Minister has been very convincing. I buy and accept the concept that the system is a broad-based system. My worry is if we are going for 50:50%, then how many percent actually are we going to put in to reap the 50%? And on the taxes that we are collecting now, are we seeing something that we are not seeing here, the actual picture itself, that the Backbenchers may not see? Are we going to lose out in the COEs, collection of motor vehicle taxes, in the foreign workers' levy, or what?”
“On the unique position about Singapore, we are a free port and very few ports in the world remain that free. As the Minister said, except for those sinful taxes, we are practically tax-free, no import tariff barrier. Because of our position, we draw in a lot of businesses, entrepot trade business, transhipment business that takes place out of Singapore. A lot of these commodity traders do not produce all these commodities. Still we are rubber traders, coffee traders. All these people are very concerned - the High Street traders, Serangoon Road traders, the textile traders, foodstuff traders, electronics traders. A lot of these tradings take place here simply because there is no tax in Singapore. A lot of transhipment takes place here, and a lot of under-declaration takes place here. So people who buy goods off Singapore are actually "semi-smugglers" in the neighbouring countries. How are they are going to claim back the tax that they pay on GST? Singapore is a shopping paradise. The worry is being addressed by the Minister about this draw-back of 3%. But we are now waiting for a cheap and simple mechanism, and that is the challenge. If we cannot get that, then what happens? Singapore, as a shopping paradise, will evaporate into thin air. Currently, the world's political and economic situation is very uncertain and very frightening. Since the Budget day on 26th February till now, lots have taken place and they are not for the better. It looks like they are going for the worst. I hope the Minister would look into that part of it. The inflation part has been explained in detail and I think with Singapore's position, inflation may not get out of control.”
“We must make sure that we continue to be competitive, that the businesses that come in here can bring in profits, and the taxation part (corporate tax) is only one of the considerations. There are the other goodies, the total package that we are competitive in, that bring investors here. That was why last year we could still draw in $3.5 billion record investments. So there are these other plus sides that we have - the harmonious employer-employee relationship, stable and far-sighted government, strong Singapore dollar (particularly when people invest their money here, they know their money will grow), and political stability. All these, in total, we have to examine all the time. GST is just one of the little irritations that we are talking about. The question is whether so much energy spent here is worth the trouble, except for the fact that we were looking at a broader base of taxation. A broader base here means something like a quarter million self-employed Singaporeans, earning a lot of money, and not paying a single cent in tax. So that itself is very unfair. Our population is aging and we have to ask all of us now to run the extra mile, to work extra hard, to increase our reserves. Our reserves, we should be using them as a sort of an endowment fund. Our reserves, we should be buying resources, buying resource-rich companies, buying good investments all over the world. That itself can replace and make sure that we have good income to come. With $70 billion in the reserves, if there is a return of just 5%, you are talking about $3.5 billion. So we should assure Singaporeans that all the reserves that they have helped to accumulate would be put to the best use and would bring in incomes that will cushion them in their old age.”
“9 billion from fees and licences, and others being loans from the Development Fund particularly, $0.8 billion. So you have an operating revenue of $17.2 billion, and your expenditure of $9.7 billion and $5.7 billion for development expenditures. So which part of the taxes are we collecting that are worrisome, and may drop? The other point is, with the cut of 3% corporate tax, you are talking about $318 million. With the other 3% income tax deduction plus all the goodies given back, you are talking about a shortage of $494 million. Even if you were to go for 25% corporate tax, that is two more percent, you are just talking about another $200-300 million on the corporate side and $300-400 million on the personal side. We can still afford to do that without the introduction of the GST. With our growth and with ourselves making sure that we remain competitive and profitable and attractive, the contribution of income taxes from these corporations and high income earners will continue to rise. So the fear is that all these revenues that come in would disappear overnight. But if it does disappear and we need to increase what you call the indirect tax through GST, it would mean a big percentage, for 3% of GST only works out to about $800-plus million. If we lose any of those incomes that we were talking about earlier, to raise every $800 million would be 3% tax. If at the time when there is a recession and we need to bring in, say, $3 billion, the percentages would be quite frightening, because 3% only brings in $800-over million. So $3 billion would be in excess of 10% GST. As Dr Wang Kai Yuen said, from the figures that Mr Koo Tsai Kee gave, higher GST looks like higher unemployment. The more important thing for us in Singapore is for all of us to see the big picture.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I am enjoying some pictures. To make the picture clear on the fear of Mr Low Thia Khiang about compounding the sale prices (as a businessman) the market's law of supply and demand will dictate, and Singapore is an open market and competition is very keen. So there is no need to worry about compounding GST. The concept of GST is very well explained and I accept it totally. The Minister for Trade and Industry, Mr Dhanabalan, has put up a very good explanation and argument. I would like either the Minister for Trade and Industry or the Minister for Finance to explain some of the figures. Earlier, Mr Dhanabalan said that for the direct tax and indirect tax, the preference is for a balance of 50:50. If I looked at the Budget figures, we are looking at $17.2 billion for 1993, out of which tax revenues add to $14.5 billion. $14.5 billion is broken up into income tax, $7.2 billion; assets tax, ie, property tax and estate duty, $1.4 billion; motor vehicle tax, $1.7 billion; customs and excise, $1.6 billion; sinful tax, that is, betting, $0.8 billion; stamp duties, $0.6 billion; foreign workers' levy, $1 billion. When the Minister for Trade and Industry said 50:50, would it mean the income tax of $7.2 billion will be halved into $3.6 billion and $3.6 billion from GST? I would like the Minister to answer that. The whole point here is to control the Other Operating Expenditure (OOE). If the operating expenditure of $9.7 billion and development expenditure of $5.7 billion for 1993 are contained, then I would like the Minister to answer which part of the other taxes we are worried that may deplete over the coming years. Because the tax itself, which includes all the components that I mentioned earlier, totalled up to $14.5 billion, and we have another $1.”
“Can I talk about training? I am looking at a lot of employees working in companies where employers are not that enlightened to be training them, those small companies that do not have organised training schemes. As for wastage, when EDB brings in investment, they may need some operators for certain high-tech machines. So they may need 300 of them. Surely, we can run a course asking for applicants for these 300 vacancies where we pay them, say, $1,000 and they come in for training. That training will not be wasted. This will give a path for these older workers to get out of the present position or predicament they are in. If we look at many of these older workers, they are in jobs that have very little skills, and no employers need to send them for training. A delivery man is a delivery man; a driver is a driver. But we can give this group of people a chance to take on a new skill. If we need certain carpentry work, because of our retrofitting programme, we need 100 good carpenters, we can run a course on carpentry and let people apply, and actually pay them to learn this new skill. Then they become a good pool of skilled workers.”
“We should have a scheme financed from the foreign workers' levy, where we allow these older workers to opt out of their existing work to start afresh. The Bill in the name of the Labour Minister on raising the retirement age to 60 tells us that there are another good 20-25 years to go for these workers who have missed out in our economic development. In the present system the employers' headache in sending workers out for training is that there is poaching going on. They do not have enough workers to release for training. All these excuses will continue to be there. As for the workers, they say there is no time, too tired to get out in the night, family commitments in the evenings and things like this. I think we are not addressing this whole problem of the 400,000-500,000 older workers who actually need help to get out of the present system, and to level up into a new skill. But who is to pay? I said earlier that it should be financed from the foreign workers' levy. The other point would be for companies to think passionately for their workers. Within the companies, they may have job vacancies. Probably they could release these workers, get them out into the training market, into training schools, and later come back to the companies to assume a new post. Could an arrangement of cost sharing be worked out where companies release, say, delivery boys, odd-job workers, to go for full-time training, acquire new skills and they come back to do supervisory work or operate the machines?”
“Sir, we are now talking about a mature economy and looking at a lower growth of 4-6%. We are looking at a per capita income of US$10,000 and hoping to jump to US$20,000 for a developed economy status. Investments that the EDB and the Government are bringing in must surely be more and more high-tech and more and more specialised. Our worry here is that our workers are ageing. We have mature workers who need training and lots have been done for training. I am proposing that we should now be looking at full-time, full-pay, training for our older workers who actually want to strike out for a new second career, a second chance, so to speak. The training that they are having now, either inhouse in the companies or asking them to come out after their working hours, is very draining on them. Many of them are not given the opportunity to learn new skills to fit into the new investments that we are bringing in. Earlier, the Minister said that for the construction industry, we are very lax to allow foreign workers to come in. But the way that we are depending on the foreign workers, training them and then they return home, is actually a big drain on the training for our local workers. If we do have a scheme where we pay people who want to learn skills, say, in the construction industry and actually become a pool of skilled workers, then we may not need to depend so much on these foreign workers coming in. My point here is this. These older workers are in the late 30s or early 40s. They actually have a lot of commitments, family commitments, instalments to pay, children who are in schools. So they cannot leave the job market to take up new skills.”
“Sir, I thank the Minister for the answer. I beg to withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.”
“The point he raised was whether officers would dare to speak up and point out mistakes made by their political masters. So can the Feedback Unit introduce an award to award public officials who are bold enough to point out mistakes of Government policies? And should the Feedback Unit not come under the Prime Minister's Office to give it more teeth? The Chairman: Mr Yeo, you have 5 minutes.”
“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 JF 1500. In congratulating the good work of the Feedback Unit, I must pay tribute to the past Chairmen; Dr Tan Cheng Bock, who has been acclaimed to have personalised and started this Unit; then Mr Chandra Das who had corporatised the Unit; and now Dr Ow Chin Hock who said that he would institutionalise the Unit. I have experience in the Unit, first, as a contributor during Dr Tan Cheng Bock's term; then as a panel member during Mr Chandra Das' term; and now a resource member. The participants who come from different walks of life also give quality contributions in dialects, in Mandarin, in Malay, on various topics and subjects. In addition to gathering feedback and explaining Government policies, the participants are very serious and it is very educational. They exchange views, agree, disagree, argue and so on. The question now is whether it is time for this Feedback Unit to take a new dimension, to have more teeth, so to speak, when looking at Government policies; whether the Feedback Unit should be given the task to review key policies, study the negative social impact of Government policies that were introduced and match them with the original objectives. The point here, Sir, is that if there are corrupt officials, CPIB goes after their necks. But there are good officials who are not corrupt. But the wrong policies introduced may do more harm and damage than those corrupt officials. The question is: how do we rectify this? I remember during the recession, Dr Tony Tan, then Minister for Trade and Industry, when addressing the Administrative Service, encouraged them to read The March of Folly.”
“Sir, as we go about building up an external economy, a second wing, we must also simultaneously study other untapped areas and other possible opportunities back home. And I am talking about creating Singapore into a sports hub, a centre for world-class sports activities. We could make full use of our superb position, superb infrastructure, superb status to bring in a year-long sports calendar. I would like to dream that we have a lot of world-class activities taking place round the year like the recent Johnnie Walker Classic. We could have a baseball season, basketball season, football season. We could have World Grand Prix, SEA Games, Asian Games, Olympic Games all taking place in Singapore. Sports have mass appeal and they are also money-spinners. We can also introduce maybe the not-so-well-liked gaming, betting pools. There are a lot of advantages here. The locals could be entertained. Often we say that there is nothing much to do in Singapore. So with a year-long calendar of activities, the local spectators could be entertained, the sports fraternity could be motivated and we could be looking at professional sports, full-time sportsmen, and the tourist industry can also be well supported. How do we go about this? It is like creating things out of thin air. EDB is promoting the film industry. With the current state of the Sports Council and sports associations, I think a better agency to look into this might be the EDB, which could map out strategies to make Singapore into a real stage for world sports. Since the Hon. Prime Minister is not in favour of a Sports Ministry, there is no other choice, except to actually create, maybe, a committee within EDB to study this.”
“On behalf of all the speakers, I would like to thank the Minister for his vivid answers, particularly the assurance that Pedra Branca is not a big problem. Sir, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The sum of $102,432,050 for Head O ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. The sum of $52,810,600 for Head O ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. Head R -”
“Our people who have invested overseas could become resource people to our embassies to help our businessmen venturing in those fields or areas. The other point is that our businessmen going overseas are not calling on our embassies. Why is that so? Is it because they are not inviting them? I had an experience once that I was not even allowed to use the telephone.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the total sum to be allocated for Head O of the Main Estimates be reduced by $100. Our Foreign Office has done a good job in the political area. But under its Mission Statement, it states, "To manage Singapore's external interests in both political and economic fields". And under one of its programmes, it states, "To promote international and regional cooperation and expansion of economic and trade relations". It is on the economic and trade relations that I feel our overseas missions can step up their activities. Just about a year ago, the Institute of Policy Studies (IPS), together with all the High Commissioners and some CEOs of corporations in Singapore, had conducted a seminar to find out how they could help businesses venture overseas. To our surprise, those of us from the private sector found that the Excellencies that were called back got their wings ruffled when they were asked to do more than what they are doing now. In fact, some of them were angry and words thrown out were not very good words. They also claimed that they were not familiar, not trained, no manpower, and they were not willing to accept too many new masters to tell them what to do. So probably, here, it is again a question of mindset and whether now, with our emphasis on moving overseas, we could have the embassies work together with EDB, TDB, STPB and all our other agencies to help Singapore get this external wing. In Singapore, we often have visitors from the various embassies and the different ambassadors wanting Singapore businessmen to go to their countries. Similarly, we could get our embassies overseas to work for us. They could get staffing from the Administrative Service which I have suggested earlier and also from the private sector appointments.”
“If they chalk up more than that amount, they have to pay for the medical cost. Dr Michael Lim Chun Leng (Cheng San GRC): Sir, the Ministry of Health has done an excellent job of maintaining a high level of primary health care for children. Through the School Health Services, children have been screened for physical illnesses early and given immunisations. As a result of the success, we now have problems of another nature, ie, obesity. The School Health Services, together with other health care services for children, are housed in the Institute of Health. A new Institute of Health will be built for which primary health care services for children will be a major component of the health services provided there. How will the quality of health care services for children be improved when the new Institute of Health is completed?”
“Sir, the Minister for Finance has put a cap on medical expenditure at 2%. I think this is most timely. The question is: how do we get the people to do prevention rather than to get into the curing part? Can we have a big support for this healthy lifestyle, similar to the island-wide computerisation programme where we came up with lots of ideas to get the whole island computerised? Can we also come up with ideas to get the whole workforce to adopt healthy living? Can we help companies, especially small ones, provide sports and recreational facilities to their staff? Can we make available public facilities or give special grants to companies to put in place some facilities for their staff to make use of, so that health care becomes a lifestyle? Can the Health Ministry provide even trained personnel and nurses to companies to help them educate their staff to better living habits? What about double tax deductions - I think that is the Minister for Finance's responsibility - to help them get some equipment going? The whole idea here is to get companies and workers in the mood to a healthy lifestyle. 1.00 pm An idea to get the workers to be responsible is actually to give them incentives. If companies do provide a certain sum for individuals per year, can that sum be snowballed and given to workers as an incentive for them to keep healthy? In the case of drivers who have to pay traffic fines, say, $200 per driver, if they do not incur $200 a year per driver, the balance could be given to them. If they chalk up more than $200, they would have to pay for the traffic fines. I am wondering whether unions and companies can start working out certain sums as medical remuneration, and if the workers do not use them they could actually be rewarded.”
“As seen in the 1985 recession, it is a matter of supply and demand. The private housing actually went below replacement cost, but the HDB's prices never went down. It stayed a while but it continued to move up. So we are actually looking at the HDB's prices to peg the private sector prices. But I am not recommending that HDB go into that market. If that is your fear, then you should go in to sell apple for apple. But the better thing to do, as what Minister Dhanabalan said yesterday, is to control the supply side. In your sale of land, you could flush more land out and let the private sector do the competition. We have so many hundred thousand housing units. The question is whether there is a need to continue to build more. And, as what Dr Tan Cheng Bock said earlier, the need and the actual desire, expectations and aspirations are not the same. Is it also because of the huge sums of money that the people have in the HDB flats? I was told that in many housing estates, people have purchased their flats but have actually not moved in and the flats are left vacant and empty. Is that the right way to use our limited resources, both in land and in terms of money? And in view of our regionalisation policy, people are being geared into loans in financing their houses. The question is whether this in itself is an obstacle for people wanting to move out. The Senior Minister did say that Singaporeans are not that adventurous and not wanting to take risks. My view is that is not true. My view is that Singaporeans are very smart and a smarter thing for him to do now is actually to sit on properties and let the prices escalate, especially when there is a mission statement that MND will protect and make sure prices go up, so to speak. The Chairman: Mr Choo.”
“The problem here is that as the HDB upgrades and pushes up the prices, this may be one reason for the big deficit this year because of better quality housing, and yet it cannot increase the price according to its cost. But still HDB housing would never be the same as private housing because you are not comparing apple with apple. In private housing, the land that you sell in your housing programme is exclusive, and it is fenced up for security. The prestige is not the same. The facilities are not the same. The car park is free. Parking lots are given to the residents who buy flats in private estates. For one car park lot, the HDB now charges $50 if it is not covered. Those who buy private housing may own two cars and you are talking about $100. Over 99 years, you are talking about over $100,000 just on the car park fees. So there is a big difference between HDB flats and private apartments. The private developers tender the land at market price, as against HDB's land, ie, Government land. The density is not the same. There are less restrictions, less control and often better designs. So the question is if the HDB is worried about not building the more "luxury" housing for fear of too huge escalation of private property prices, then maybe the HDB should compete apple for apple and actually build Executive apartments or 5-room apartments with the exclusivity of the private sector. That means probably the HDB could follow URA's Pidemco's position in tendering the land and building shopping centres, as in Bugis Square. That way, maybe you can play the good samaritan if you want to price an apple to an apple. Otherwise, unwittingly, the HDB's prices, some as high as $300,000 now, are supporting the private apartment prices. And I think this is not the right thing to do.”