Chiam See Tong
Singapore
“Sir, Singapore's sovereign wealth fund companies, Temasek Holdings and GIC, returned 17% and 9.5% yearly respectively, using largely Singaporeans' CPF money. Why is CPF returning 2.5% on the Ordinary Account and 4% on the Special Account only?”
“Thank you, Sir, for allowing me to take part in this debate. Under Singapore law, single parents are treated as singles who are not eligible to purchase a Housing Board flat unless they are 35 years old and they are also given reduced children benefits like lesser maternity leave and no Baby Bonus.”
“Sir, the collection of revenue from ERP gantries is way above the total amount of revenue lost by the Government from the exemption of household TV and radio licences. I would urge the Government to review and reduce the charges at ERP gantries for vehicles entering the ERP zones.”
“Although the Government is pumping $120 million a year to support needy students in all levels through a slew of enhanced financial aid schemes, schools funds and bursaries, we should not forget to look into the plight of students who have been cheated by unscrupulous education centres by helping affected students to pay or re-finance the…”
“Thank you, Mr Chairman, for allowing me to join in the debate. I would like to touch on fairer distribution of treating scholars amongst schools. MOE should ensure fairer distribution of teaching scholarship holders after graduation from NIE to the various schools.”
“Children and adults with special needs deserve better protection. It will reduce the anxiety of both caregivers and patients with special needs, like the mentally-ill and autistic children. I urge the Government to issue special I-cards to these patients.”
The complete record
Every one of 4,205 lines we hold for Chiam See Tong, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 34 of 85.
“Before Mr Chandra Das speaks, can I clarify what Dr Ow has just said?”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, can I get a clarification from Mr Chng? He says that immediately upon purchasing an HDB flat, he could make $200,000. From my understanding, a purchaser of HDB flat cannot resell it until after five years.”
“Sir, my question has not really been answered. Is the Government making any attempts at all to cut the number of days of gambling?”
“Of course, I do not agree with the Minister that 17 times of gambling a month approved by the Government is not excessive. To me, it is excessive. On top of these 17 days, in fact, people are also gambling in the stock market.”
“Sir, I believe the Government is against gambling. We have got heavy fines imposed on gamblers. Seventeen times a month is more than 50% of the days in a month where gambling activities are condoned or approved by the Government. The first question is: Does the Government not think that this number is in fact too large? Second, as a form of curbing gambling, will the Government carry out a campaign to tell the people that we should not make Singapore a gambling society and perhaps find ways and means to curb gambling?”
“He was like a father figure giving advice on how to improve one's health and he also told me of his long years of service as the secretary of a badminton party. In those days he did not own a car. He had to cycle long distances from his home to the badminton hall at Rangoon Road. Some of you may have visited that dingy old civil service badminton hall at Rangoon Road. Anyway, he performed his simple duties as if he were performing very important duties. That is the way how President Wee took his duties. And, of course, the long hours he put into his job as a newspaper reporter. After that personal meeting with President Wee, I can vouch for all the good things written about him. He is truly a sincere, humble person, endowed with high integrity and his dedication to the service of others. I wish Mr and Mrs Wee good health and all happiness.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker, Sir, for allowing me to rise to pay tribute, together with others, to President Wee Kim Wee. I share the sentiments of the Prime Minister and all the other hon. speakers who have expressed praise just now. To me, President Wee Kim Wee is the embodiment of what a President should be. He is humble, sincere and approachable and a man of highest integrity. His philosophy in life is to serve society. On 27th August this year at the Girls' Guides farewell reception given to him, President Wee in his speech urged the guides to contribute to society when they grew up. I wish that President Wee's advice could be given to all our school children - "Serve society when you grow up." At the same reception, President Wee told those present that he shall be back in circulation again. He said, "I will be exactly the same man minus the title." To me, that is the mark of a great man. Official titles, public accolades and praises do not affect him. When he was in high office, he was exactly the same man as before he was elevated to the Presidency, and behaved so. He did his job well and served the country well, but still the same sincere, humble person. After he has stepped down, he shall still be exactly the same person minus the title, as he said. But I am certain that the majority of the present generation of Singaporeans shall still continue to give him the same respect as if he were the President. On a National Day function in 1989, when I went up to shake the hand of the President, he pulled me closer to him and asked, "Would you like to come for tea?" I naturally said that I would be happy to come. An invitation soon followed. So on a fine weekday afternoon, I went in my little VW to the Istana to have tea with the President. We spent about an hour together.”
“Sir, if I heard the Minister of State correctly, one of the reasons for gazetting foreign publications is the propagation of unhealthy lifestyle. Does this refer to The Economist?”
“Walter Woon asked the Minister for Information and the Arts if he will say when and under what conditions the restrictions on The Economist and other gazetted news magazines will be lifted.”
“Another very stressful experience at the Causeway is queue jumping. I do not know whether the Parliamentary Secretary can comment on this. Assoc. Prof. Ho Peng Kee: Was the Member one of those who jumped queue? I think this is something that disturbs all motorists. Queue jumping is something we will not feel very happy if we are affected. In any case, the Traffic Police have been deployed at the Checkpoint to ensure that there is no queue jumping. PUBLICATIONS APPEAL COMMITTEE (Criteria for publication) 4. Assoc. Prof. Walter Woon asked the Minister for Information and the Arts, in regard to the newly-formed Publications Appeal Committee, if he will state what criteria will be used by the committee to determine whether or not a publication should be banned. The Minister of State for Information and the Arts (Dr Ker Sin Tze) (for the Minister for Information and the Arts): Mr Speaker, Sir, the Publications Appeal Committee will follow the criteria recommended by the 1992 Censorship Review Committee (CRC). The Committee recommended that publications which are inimical to Singapore's national interest should continue to be disallowed. These include materials that may: (i) erode the core moral values of society; (ii) subvert the nation's security and stability; (iii) create misunderstanding or conflict in our multi-racial and multi-religious society; or (iv) denigrate any religion or race. The Censorship Review Committee also recommended that consideration and weight be given to the artistic or research merit of a publication and its context. THE ECONOMIST AND OTHER GAZETTED NEWS MAGAZINES (Conditions for lifting of restrictions) 5. Assoc. Prof.”
“Sir, as one who travels to Johor at least two or three times a year, as far as I can remember, every time I travelled to Johor there was always a traffic jam. There was never once where the traffic was clear. Anyway, I am happy to hear that the Ministry is enlarging the immigration facilities at Woodlands. On the checking of passports, can the Parliamentary Secretary tell me whether they are checking on other matters, rather than just the validity of the passports? Perhaps the immigration officers are checking too many things. That is why they are taking too much time. If the passport is valid, they should allow him to go. Maybe they are checking too many things. Assoc. Prof. Ho Peng Kee: The Member would appreciate that there is a need to ensure that people who travel through the Checkpoint have valid travel documents. That is the first point. Measures have been taken to computerise. In fact, there is a computer unit that helps to check the passports and other travel documents in an expeditious manner. I do not know when Mr Chiam passed through the Checkpoint. Maybe he chose days when it was terribly crowded. But let me assure the Member that steps have been taken to expedite the clearance process by Immigration at the Checkpoint.”
“I have got two supplementary questions. First, does the Minister envisage that with the full-day CBD congestion in fact will be caused in the outlying areas? Second, has he considered or asked the Government to decentralize the Government departments and other facilities so that traffic will not be attracted into the CBD?”
“I understand that the sites occupied by the boatels are, in fact, not affected by land reclamation. Is there any good reason why they should be moved?”
“I would like to ask the Minister whether the Government is satisfied with the way the boatels are operating their facilities there. Or is there a need to replace them with a marina?”
“Sir, can the Minister please be more specific because there are genuine worries of both the boatel operators as well as the pleasure boat owners?”
“These boats have to be parked somewhere. They cannot be parked on the parking lots on land. They have to be found a place. Can the Minister be more specific?”
“Boatel operators are, in fact, worried as to where they are going to house these 600 leisure boats. So it is important for them to know what is the time-frame they have to move out.”
“Can the Minister please give the time-frame in which these people who are operating boatels at Punggol will be asked to move from their present sites because I understand there are about 600 pleasure boats involved?”
“Sir, can the Minister please give the time-frame in which these tenders will be called and whether or not, at this moment, there are any companies which have, in fact, already been given the right to open a marina at Punggol?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, before I ask the question, I would like to declare my pecuniary interest in the question. Question No. 11, Sir.”
“Sir, may I put another supplementary question to the Minister? In view of the material change of circumstances among the countries in ASEAN and, I believe, ASEAN is now going into a new phase, is there a possibility of re-negotiating that agreement so that the newspapers could circulate in each other's country?”
“In view of the answer given by the Minister for Foreign Affairs, I would like to ask him whether there is any possibility to improve the relationship between the two countries to change that position.”
“Sir, the Minister has said that Malaysian TV and radio broadcasts are received in Singapore. But I understand that Malaysian published newspapers are not allowed to be sold in Singapore. Can the Minister please enlighten us? Dr Ker Sin Tze: Mr Speaker, Sir, Malaysian newspapers would be treated in the same way as any other newspaper. As long as they apply to the authorities and fulfil the conditions which we lay down, we would consider their circulation in Singapore.”
“Sir, whilst waiting for the Report of the Inquiry Panel to come out, can the Minister throw some light on the possible causes of the accident?”
“Newspaper reports have said that the accident may be caused by electronic pollution. Can the Minister clarify on this point?”
“That is something which I do not understand. Because, in effect, you are not complying with GATT requirements. In effect, you are just juggling with your taxes.”
“Sir, may I get a clarification from the Minister? I believe I heard him mention that import duties on cars would be lowered because of some GATT arrangements. Can the Minister please elaborate on that point?”
“Sir, I am just wondering whether the Minister would be flexible enough to take care of this group of people. Because sometimes it is not out of choice, the children are forced on him as their mother gets married to another person and they go abroad and abandon the children. Cdre (Res) Teo Chee Hean: Mr Speaker, Sir, while one is sympathetic to the plight of persons who are in that situation, the objective of the foreign maid levy relief should be seen clearly in perspective, and that is, to encourage married women to participate in the workforce. As I said, there is no necessity for further encouragement for such persons, as the Member has described, to participate in the workforce.”
“I wonder whether the Minister is willing to consider one category of men who are divorced and who have custody of their children and they have to go out to get employment and, at the same time, they have to employ maids to take care of their children. If the policy is inflexible, this group of people will suffer. Cdre (Res) Teo Chee Hean: Mr Speaker, Sir, as I have explained, the foreign maid levy is intended to encourage married women to participate in the workforce. In the case that the Member has mentioned, there is no necessity for further encouragement to participate in the workforce. So I think the incentive is not necessary.”
“Sir, I give my support to the Moneylenders (Amendment) Bill. We all, as MPs, know of the problem of loansharks who have harassed our constituents and we have seen them sitting around in the coffeeshops in our constituencies. They have caused a lot of social problems, not only mistaken identity, as has been mentioned by another speaker, but also the breaking up of families. Many divorces are, in fact, caused by harassment of the loansharks. The wife could not take it any more and she said, "I better get away from the husband." In my view, one of the root causes of moneylending is gambling. Gambling is prevalent in Singapore. What has happened is that many men, who want to get rich quick, indulge in gambling. And gambling seems to be very easily available. What has happened is that he is in debt because of his gambling activities, and he goes to loanshark A. He borrows money from loanshark A, who might charge him interest as high as 20% a month, and soon he will find that he is greatly indebted to loanshark A. He has got no other means of getting money. He has got to go to loanshark B to get money to pay loanshark A. And sometimes it even goes down the line to loanshark C, and he is owing so much money that he is really in great trouble. So it would appear to me that one of the causes of this moneylending problem and all the harassment that goes with it is, in fact, gambling which is prevalent in Singapore. If you really want to solve this moneylending problem, perhaps, we should tackle its root cause.”
“Can I clarify with the Minister in regard to my point about poor people going to the pawnshops for loans? I stand to be corrected. It seems to me that pawnbrokers are only allowed to loan up to a limit of $1,000.”
“May I ask the Minister how many registered pawnbrokers are there in Singapore today?”
“The Building Control Division, in fact, has strict control of commercial premises. Are there any premises that are particularly marked suitable for a pawnbroker's shop? We also welcome that there is insistence of adequate insurance taken up by pawnbrokers in case of damage or loss of articles. In this respect, I would like to ask the Minister what is exactly meant by "adequate insurance". I notice that the deposit of pawnbrokers has been increased from $5,000 to $20,000. Is there a need for this amount to be increased? As I look at the Pawnbrokers Act, I notice at Schedule B that some of the payments that are paid to pawnbrokers seem to be minuscule in the light of today's standards. To be fair to pawnbrokers, I would ask the Minister perhaps to look at these payments which the pawnbrokers are entitled. For example, inspection of sale book's entry per sale is only two cents; the charge on form of declaration where the loan is $2 or under, it is only one cent chargeable by the pawnbrokers; and for a loan of above $2, it is only two cents. Perhaps, the Minister could look at them and include them in the amendments.”
“Sir, I rise to support the Pawnbrokers (Amendment) Bill. The Minister has mentioned about the great increases in the number of pledges and also in the amount deposited with pawnbrokers. This goes to show that there are still many poor people in Singapore. For this reason, the pawnbroking business seems to be on the rise. In fact, it is having a boom at the moment. Usually, these poor people ask for small loans and the pawnshop is the most convenient place to go. It is also a fact that poor people are in the greatest need for cash. Of course, I would not sympathise with those poor people who waste their money on gambling and pawn their assets away, but I do sympathise with the poor who have need for quick cash in cases of emergency. In this respect, the pawnbrokers do provide a social service to improvident people. Fortunately, the law has been tightened against pawnbrokers, in particular, in keeping down the interest rates on loans at 1 1/2% per month. Also, there are now further safeguards and we note that in clause 10 there are safeguards against pledges. Tampering or destroying a pledge is going to be an offence. I think most of the people who have dealings with pawnbrokers would welcome this clause. Of course, I also welcome the further tightening and enhancing of the punishment sections to keep pawnbrokers in line, and also in safeguarding the pledges of people who pawn their items with the pawnbrokers. Sometimes they have to do it. This is really no fault of theirs. I would like to get some clarification from the Minister, in particular, on clause 3. It says here that the premises to be licensed must be suitable for use as a pawnbroker's shop. I am puzzled as to what type of premises can be suitable for use as a pawnbroker's shop.”
“Sir, the Minister has mentioned about educating offenders. I think in this area perhaps the Police are not doing enough. I hardly see any posters or pamphlets being circulated to get offenders to compound their fines. So I ask the Minister whether his Ministry is willing to widen this education process to offenders.”
“I would like to call a division on this motion.”
“Mr Speaker, if the Minister is right, everybody who enters into a contract, or anybody who puts it in writing can explain it away, "Oh, I did not mean that. I mean something else." Then it will make a mockery of all that is written in black and white. So the University is bound by what it has written. That is very clear and simple. I do not think I want to go into this point again.”
“It is very difficult to convince the Minister. You can say what you like but the fact is that the dismissal was based on clause 4(a). It is in black and white. I did not make this statement. It is the University which used clause 4(a) and they are bound by it and clause 4(a) is very clear. There is no allegation of dishonesty but it is a straight-out contractual exercise of the University's right. And please do not tell me that the University is kind. The University is an academic institution. They say what they mean. Surely, they will know how to read. [Interruption]. But then you should go under clause 4(c)(iii).”
“Give me a chance, please. We stand by what we say. If you can prove otherwise, then we will withdraw it. But up to now, there is no evidence that he has done anything wrong - first sacking, second sacking.”
“Give me a chance. The general view of the public is that there is no good reason to sack Dr Chee, and we maintain that even now, the NUS has not made out a case against Dr Chee for the reasons I have given. An hon. Member: Yes or no?”
“Our view, I think, even the public, if you just take a survey of --- Prof. Jayakumar rose ---”
“The SDP now withdraws that statement because Dr Chee himself later has mentioned that he does not wish to be reinstated. He just wants to clear his name. The purpose we are here today is to clear his name and not for reinstatement.”
“But where is the evidence? I mean, it is quite clear the University dismissed him under clause 4(a), unless this House refuses to accept that fact. But it is in writing. So his dismissal is not based on dishonesty. Let us get it very clear. It was a contractual term, either party could give three months' notice. The University has every right to ask Dr Chee, "Can you please leave? We give you three months' notice." Similarly, Dr Chee also has the right to walk out and say, "I am serving my three months' notice and I leave the University." Nobody can stop either party from exercising his contractual right. So up to now there is no evidence, even with the second sacking. If you read carefully what the University says, it is that he is sacked summarily for improper conduct, and the improper conduct is based on the fact that he went on a hunger strike and instigated politically against the University. He asked the SDP to pressure the NUS. So where is the evidence? There is no evidence at all. Prof. Jayakumar: My question of Mr Chiam was whether after having heard everything, Dr Vasoo's detailed explanation and the detailed statement of the Minister for Education, Mr Chiam still insists that the NUS reinstate Dr Chee, as was insisted upon by the SDP in its statement.”
“Mr Speaker, we believe Dr Chee is innocent. And in the circumstances, unless he is proven guilty-- An hon. Member: We have done that.”
“It is a bit unfortunate that the hon. Member did not hand in this amendment earlier to the Members of the Opposition. But from what I have heard of the speech of Dr Tan Cheng Bock, he has not brought up any evidence at all to show that the SDP, in fact, took steps to pressure the NUS or to politicise the whole matter. I think SDP gave a statement the day after Dr Chee went into a hunger strike. We categorically asked him to call off the hunger strike and to stop it straightaway. How can that be an action of pressuring NUS? Our action is that we support his claim that he was not dishonest. But we deplore this action of hunger strike. We feel that nobody should endanger his health or his life or, in fact, affect the welfare of any members of the family with anything that can affect his health or his life. So, where is the evidence that the SDP is trying to make political capital out of this and to pressure the NUS? I think this amendment should be summarily dismissed by this House for lack of evidence.”
“We look at the facts. The fact is that you went under clause 4(a) and we take what you mean. It is in writing. Now you try to explain away a point of fact which you have taken. As regards this University staff, Mrs Janice Chen, according to what Dr Chee has said, in fact, he gave his wife's dissertation without any cover. It was just plain like that [indicating] and handed to Mrs Janice Chen. I do not know whether she is in the House. If she is, she could confirm whether or not it was just handed to her unpacked, like that [indicating]. So all the headings could be seen that it is the work of Dr Huang Chih-Mei. Dr Vasoo tried to point out that he did not see it, it was under cover, it was improper for him to check. Now we want to know whether or not Dr Chee had tried to conceal it. But from what I have been told, he handed the whole parcel just like that [indicating] to Mrs Janice Chen. Let us hear from her whether or not he tried in any way to conceal it.”
“Firstly, on this question of the tape, I have to determine really whose property it is. If it is the property of the University, then I certainly owe an apology to Dr Vasoo. We are here to look at the facts and not to be too emotional about the whole matter. There is so much talk about Dr Chee's dishonesty and wrongful use of University funds. But there are no facts, up to this point of time, to show that in fact he was dishonest. What are the rules and regulations in the University governing the use of research fund which he has breached? You point out to me. There are no clear-cut procedures and no detailed rules and regulations in regard to use of the funds. The Minister has said that even if you are a research collaborator who helps him in his research work, and he spends money on it, he is wrong. But where is this rule? Or is it just out of his own mind? The other two disciplinary cases could be easily distinguished. One is definitely way out. He made purchases from Cold Storage and Yaohan, you should sack him on the spot. As regards the other case, he took an intentional step. The intention was in fact theft. He purposely went next door to make a call. There was an intentional step taken. It should be distinguished from Dr Chee's case. In his mind, the two works had some connection. This reminds me of the Colosseum in Rome - kill, kill, kill! I would be very grateful if the Minister could point out exactly which regulation he has breached. This argument can turn both ways. If you say that Dr Chee is dishonest, then it should be under clause 4(c)(iii) straightaway. But you dare not go under clause 4(c)(iii). You go under clause 4(a), and now you say, "We give him a chance." Is that being kind? But it does not match all your allegations of dishonesty.”
“Yes. I have got several clarifications to get from Mr Peh. Firstly, does Mr Peh realise that, in the first instance, Dr Chee was dismissed on contractual grounds? Does he know that? I want to ask him, if he is better than a lawyer, whether, if he was dismissed on contractual grounds, he would go to court. I want a clarification from him. He alleges that Dr Chee has committed a dishonest act. Can he please clarify and name the rule or regulation, or term and condition, of the University in which he has breached to say that he has committed a dishonest act? He says that, again, Dr Chee is ridiculous, going on hunger strike, sleeping on a bed, having glucose drink, and having a big breakfast before he starts. I will put a challenge to him. Any time, if he wants a hunger strike, challenge with Dr Chee! He will take Mr Peh on any time. Mr Peh Chin Hua( In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I think I will not be so comical as to go on a hunger strike like Dr Chee Soon Juan. I will not be so stupid to make myself a clown in Singapore to gain public sympathy. If I were Dr Chee Soon Juan, I would employ a good lawyer like Mr Chiam See Tong to defend me.”
“No. I want a clarification from the Member.”
“Yes. I said I will make available all these papers. Can I sit down and sort out these papers?”