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 8 of 85.
“Can the Minister please comment on this issue of discrimination against the older workers?”
“Sir, one issue which I am concerned is the discrimination against the older workers. I have often heard complaints in my meet-the-people sessions by residents who are 40 years old and above. They said that their applications for jobs were often unsuccessful because the employers rejected their applications because they were too old. These employers preferred to employ younger workers. I certainly want the Minister to do something against this current practice in Singapore by employers who discriminate against older workers. I would like to urge the Minister to pass legislation against discrimination of older workers. If, for the time being, the Minister is reluctant to do so, he can still act against employers who practise discrimination against workers under clause 11(1)(f) of this Bill when it becomes law. I hope the Minister would do something to protect the older workers in the job market.”
“But I think this reorganisation exercise of transferring various Government departments to a newly-created statutory body shall not help the workers very much. Changing of names will not do much. It is a case of calling a spade by another name. How can calling a spade by another name increase the usefulness of the spade? You cannot. A spade by any other name shall remain a spade. As regards the Bill itself, I see that its main thrust is to promote adult education and training. As a former teacher, I can say that the promulgation of adult education by the Government is something not new to me. The Government has adult education programmes from the early days since it came into power in 1959. In the 1960s, almost everyone then was familiar with the adult education programme carried out by the Government body commonly known as "Lembaga", which means "institution" or "board" in Malay. The word "Lembaga" is a short form for the Adult Education Board. In those days, it was more fashionable to use names of Government bodies in Malay. Hence, in the early days, the Malay word "Lembaga" was used, and not its proper English name, the Adult Education Board. As mentioned earlier, the main function of the Agency concerns the areas of adult continuing education. It would appear that the Government's adult education programme has come a full cycle. When the PAP came into power, it rightly embarked on a vigorous adult education programme and after 38 years, when Singapore has joined the ranks of the first world countries, we are still making new laws to ensure that our adult workers get a decent education and training. I hope that the trade unions make sure that this time round, the Government gets it right - to provide the right and meaningful adult education to our workers.”
“Sir, this Bill seeks to incorporate a public body to be named Singapore Workforce Development Agency (SWDA), and to consolidate within the Agency the functions, properties, liabilities and employees of the departments within the Human Capital Development Division and the Labour Market Development Division of the Ministry of Manpower, and the Skills Development Fund Secretariat, the Critical Enabling Skills Training (CREST) Secretariat and the National Skills Recognition System (NSRS) Centre, of the Standards, Productivity and Innovation Board. This exercise of consolidating various departments into one corporation is in line with the Government's overall policy of making all Government organisations slim and trim. I am certain that with this new Agency, productivity will go up. But, at the same time, I am also certain that there shall also be job losses. I wonder what the unions have to say. Have the unions liaised with the Government to redeploy the workers who may have been made redundant as a result of this exercise? If not, have the unions asked for adequate retrenchment benefits for those workers who have lost their jobs? The question uppermost in my mind is: will this exercise, bringing the various departments under one roof, so to speak, create benefits and jobs for our workers? I would like to ask the Minister: what is it under the old set-up that the Government could not do or do just as well as under this new Agency when it is formed? One would also ask: if the Government is unable to do much for workers in the old set-up, what can the Government achieve with this new Agency? Some people may speculate that under these difficult economic times, the Government is expected to do something to show the workers that it is concerned and is doing something.”
“This is not SP Services' money. This is a deposit.”
“My question is: do they have a right to make use of the consumers' deposits for their own business purposes? Because, as I understand it, a deposit is just a deposit to offset any overuse of electricity by the consumers. Now the Minister of State is saying that SP Services takes the deposit and uses it. That means they are using the consumers' money for their own business purposes, which is not right in law.”
“Is the Minister of State saying that the deposits collected are, as he has said, in fact, used by SP Services for the purchase of oil or fuel? If that is the case, then it is a misuse of deposits. As I understand it, in law, a deposit is a deposit and it has to be returned when it is due. You cannot use the deposits for your business purposes. No doubt SP Services can collect up to 1.5 months of deposits. But is it also, in law, that they can make use of these deposits for their business purposes?”
“Sir, is it correct for me to say that SP Services does not deposit these deposits in fixed deposit accounts in the banks?”
“Sir, I do not know whether the Government is too worried over the problem of inter-racial mixing in schools. Singapore is 38 years old. America is over 200 years old. I would like to ask the Minister whether our level of inter-racial mixing in our schools is just as good as in America.”
“Sir, is it true that if a precinct rejects the offer of the Main Upgrading Programme, its chances of future upgrading shall be forfeited?”
“Sir, it is true that under the Land Acquisition Act, there are many cases in which the Government can pay a $1 compensation. But the point is that the payment of $1 compensation, even if it is defensible under our law, violates human rights. My question is: if it is a violation of human rights, does this also not violate the terms of the FTA? Assoc. Prof. Ho Peng Kee: How could it be a violation of human rights when we are acting in accordance with our laws? Is the Member saying that all our laws are in violation of human rights? In any case, an important point is that there is the Land Appeals Board. We have an Appeals Board which is currently presided over by an ex-Judicial Commissioner and he is assisted by Assessors. Anybody who is not happy with the compensation - many of the landowners whose properties are acquired may not be happy - there is this recourse. That is an important point. Certainly, the Board is properly constituted. The process for judicial review is there and the valuations are given according to accepted valuation principles. I do not see any violation of human rights. MAIN UPGRADING PROGRAMME AT PANDAN GARDENS 2. Dr Tan Cheng Bock asked the Minister for National Development if he will consider granting the Main Upgrading Programme (Standard Package) to the Pandan Gardens precinct as the polling results show that a majority of 68.84% of eligible voters voted "yes" even though it fell below the 75% mark.”
“We then found this unintended effect and we are now prepared to come forward and give ex gratia payment. I think that is an important point.”
“Sir, the payment of $1 for compulsory acquisition of land is almost like an outright confiscation. This is certainly a violation of human rights. If it violates human rights, does is also not violate the terms of the agreement made between Singapore and America under the FTA? Assoc. Prof. Ho Peng Kee: Sir, Mr Chiam's premise is that the award violates human rights, but I have said that it is based on the law. Land acquisition in Singapore is something which has gone on for a long time, and $1 cases, as I have explained before in this House, are given. But when $1 awards are given, they are based on valuation principles which can be defended. So there are established categories where $1 awards may be given. For example, if there is a strip of land, part of a larger piece of land, set aside for public purpose such as a road or drainage purposes for which gross plot ratio has been transferred to the adjoining land so that the land ought to be vested in the Government, when we acquire, benefit already has accrued to the owner of the land in terms of higher and more gross floor area, then we give $1. Another instance, for example, will be when we acquire a splay corner or backlane, incapable of independent development, it is $1. Or another established category is when the owner has sub-leased the land to a sub-lessee for 999 years, so that the sub-lessee gets substantive and substantial compensation, the owner who only has a small reversionary interest gets $1. So we must not be fixated by the $1 compensation and say that it is unfair. I agree that the Church's case has aroused some interest. The Minister and I do look at these compensation awards. Because we feel that in this case, something is not quite right, that is why we asked our officials to take a look at it.”
“Would it not be better if our Government enters into agreements with those countries that the aeroplanes are flying to, to get powers to enforce certain laws in those countries.”
“They must be people with well-adjusted personality and they do not succumb to stress. They have to be highly trained with weapons and martial arts. One can easily see that air marshals should be quite special people and they therefore shall not come cheap. In this respect, I hope that the airlines shall not use the excuse of the necessity to deploy air marshals to increase their fares to exorbitant levels. On the part of the airlines, they should also play their part to provide security. I hear that certain airlines are already providing bullet-proof doors to the pilots' cabin and those doors are constructed to prevent them from being broken down by intruders. The airlines must also ensure that the aeroplane windows are provided with glass that will not shatter when they are hit by a bullet. I do hope that the Singapore Police can also provide our air marshals with special guns, or stun guns, whose bullets will not pierce the skin of the aeroplane's fuselage or shatter the glass of its windows. This type of special guns, when used by the air marshals, can immobilise terrorists, but they do not damage the aeroplane. I hope, with the passing of this Bill, Singapore Airlines' motto of "A safe way to fly" shall add another dimension to it, that is, "A safe way to fly from the security point of view". Sir, I think one day, air marshals should be as common as the seat belts in the aeroplanes. Sir, when that day comes, I wonder whether there will be law suits against the airlines if a passenger should suffer damage as a result of some airlines, for reasons of their own, not deploying air marshals on board that plane. Another point I would like to bring up with the Minister is that this amendment Bill gives extra-territorial powers to our Police Force.”
“About 3,000 deaths. They will agree that there is a need for security measures on board commercial flights. The Police Force (Amendment) Bill where provisions are made for the Commissioner of Police in Singapore to allow him to deploy air marshals on board any Singapore aircraft is timely. I understand that, in America, it was only after the pulling out of air marshals from commercial flights that the terrorist attacks took place on September 11. But of course, it cannot be said, with certainty, that the posting of security guards on board an aircraft shall prevent terrorist activities on board that aircraft. But I think most will agree that if there is some form of policing on board an aircraft, it will to a certain measure deter or even counter terrorists assaults. I hope in time Singapore can emulate the Israelis. The Israeli Airline, El Al's policy is never to give in to terrorists. As a result, despite the Israeli war with the Arabs, the El Al Airline has a good record of not having any recent hijacking. This kind of policy entails the necessity to build a commando force on standby, ready to go into action whenever it is called upon to do so, to exterminate and flush out terrorists from an aeroplane that is hijacked by them. The passing of this Bill is only a part in the building of a complex process of fighting terrorism. For a start, air marshals must be specially selected and trained. I would say that air marshals most likely shall be selected from members of the Special Operations Unit or the Police Special Force. Those selected to be trained must not only be physically fit but also mentally strong and they even have to undergo psychological tests to make sure that they are suitable.”
“Thank you, Sir, for giving me the opportunity to speak. Those of us who watched over television the events of September 11 when terrorists used commercial aeroplanes to attack the Twin Towers in New York, resulting in about 300,000 deaths, will agree --- An hon. Member: 3,000.”
“Did the LTA, during the construction of the North East Line, already know that there would be enough ridership at the Potong Pasir MRT station?”
“Did the LTA or SBS Transit at any time know that, during the construction of the North East Line, the Buangkok Station will not have enough ridership?”
“Sir, I would like to put on record that I am dissatisfied with the answers of the Minister of State as they do not reflect what appears in the provisions of this amendment Bill. Question put, and agreed to. Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House. The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. - [Dr Balaji Sadasivan]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. ADJOURNMENT Resolved, "That Parliament do now adjourn to a date to be fixed." - [Mr Mah Bow Tan]. Adjourned accordingly at Four o'clock pm to a date to be fixed. WRITTEN ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FOR ORAL ANSWER NOT ANSWERED BY 3.00 PM EXPENDITURE ON SARS EPIDEMIC 13. Mr Chiam See Tong asked the Minister for Health how much has been spent and disbursed by the Government since March this year on expenditures in connection with the SARS epidemic.”
“Sir, I want to clarify one point. If the authority occupies or takes possession of the land, my question to the Minister of State is: who has got legal title of the land?”
“Sir, I am sorry I have to take up this point again. Whatever the Minister of State says, it is not reflected in the amendment. He says that compensation shall be paid to the land owner when his land is taken by LTA. Where does it say that in clause 5? Can he point out to me? Under clause 5, there is no legal duty for the authority to pay any compensation to the land owner for the land in which it has taken possession of. It does not say that at all. And it does not say that the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act shall also have effect. It does not say that. So I do not know where he gets the legal standpoint from. As regards new section 32A, it does not say that the owner or occupier of any land or building fronting, adjoining or abutting a public street, five-footways or private footways has got any legal duty to take charge of this public street. It does not say that. As long as you are living or occupying next to a public street and somebody throws something and you have a 21-day notice served on you, you have to clear the rubbish. It is as simple as that.”
“Sir, may I get some clarifications from the Minister of State. I cannot understand when he says that, under clause 5, the authority can take possession of any land without owning it. Am I correct? So you are only taking physical possession but not legal possession. When the authority uses this land for road use, is there a transfer of legal title to the authority? I would want this point clarified. I have got two more points. As regards the point on tapping of electricity, I was more concerned of the manner in which the appeal is made. The appeal is made to the Minister and the Minister is, at least, outwardly a biased person because it is his own department that is appealing to him. So in law, not only justice has to be done, but it has to be seen to be done. In other words, when people say that the appeal is to the Minister, they would straightaway say it is not fair. But if you appeal to a neutral person, they will be quiet. So we should have the appeal to a neutral person. As regards new section 32A, I do not think there is anything in the section which says that the owner of the land, or the occupier of the land adjacent to the public street, has the duty to take charge of the street. It does not say that. As long as you are living adjacent or abutting the public street and if somebody throws some rubbish there, you are liable if a notice is served on you for 21 days and you do not do anything about it. That is how I read it. Is that correct?”
“I would urge the Minister to delete new section 32A(3)(c), under clause 18 of this Bill, and let the Authority take on itself the responsibility of preventing illegal dumping on public streets and apprehending and punishing the wrongdoers.”
“How can the owner of any land or building that is fronting or adjoining on the public street, five-footway or private footway be held liable when things or articles are illegally dumped in his vicinity? To me, he is an innocent party. He cannot be made to look out for illegal dumping in the adjoining public street, five-footway or private footway all the time. I agree that the owner or the person who throws unwanted bulky items on the public street, five-footway or private footway be made responsible, but not one who lives next to a public street or private footway. This is the first time I have come across a provision where a person is made liable for a crime by virtue of the fact that he is close to the crime where the crime took place. At Potong Pasir, there are high-rise blocks of flats which are situated close or next to the central rubbish centres. Sometimes, there are outsiders who, in the stealth of the early hours of the morning, make illegal dumping of bulky items in these centres. When that happens, my Town Council has to spend quite a lot of money to clear all the illegal bulky items that are dumped at our rubbish centres. Can I, as the Chairman of the Potong Pasir Town Council, make the residents who live adjacent to the central rubbish centre pay for the removal of those illegal items? I certainly think not. Up to now, the Potong Pasir Town Council has been responsible for preventing illegal dumping and also apprehending those culprits that we find, and we take responsibility to remove the dumped items. Similarly, I do not think that those owners or occupiers of land adjoining the public streets, five-footways and private footways should be made responsible for any illegal dumping on them.”
“Sir, at this point, I must make it clear that I am not saying or insinuating that the Minister is an unfair person, and is sure to side the officers of his own department. But in the eyes of the law, justice must not only be done but must be seen to be done. In this case, the Minister cannot be made the arbiter when his own department's officers are involved in the case. To me, I think it would be fairer if this new section 10A(6) be amended to allow the appeal to be made to a manifestly neutral person, say, either a judge in chambers of the High Court or the subordinate court. This clause, as it stands, makes the appeal to the Minister where his decision is final very unfair. The other amendment which I do not agree is new section 32A(3)(c). New section 32A(1) states: "No person shall - (a) deposit or cause or allow any article or thing to be deposited on any public street, five-footway or private footway; or (b) cause or allow any article or thing to remain on any public street, five footway or private footway, so as to create any obstruction or inconvenience to the passage of the public on such public street, five-footway or private footway." Anyone who contravenes the abovementioned clauses shall be guilty of an offence. If such an offence is committed, the Authority can go after (a) "the owner of the article or thing;" (b) the person who caused the article or thing to be illegally deposited; and (c) "the owner or occupier of any land or building fronting, adjoining or abutting on the public street, five-footway or private footway." I cannot agree with sub-clause (c).”
“So, the Government pays the landowner a compensation of $1 which is a valuable consideration in the eyes of the law. But with this amendment in clause 5 of this Bill, the Authority is armed with statutory powers to compulsorily acquire land for construction of public roads without payment of any compensation at all. So, the past practice of paying $1 to provide a valuable consideration for the compulsory acquisition of land is now redundant. I had a former client, when I was still in legal practice, whose land was compulsorily acquired for road building. He was paid $1 compensation by cheque. He did not bother to bank in the $1 cheque into his bank account. He had the $1 cheque framed up and hung on his office wall. I am just wondering whether that $1 cheque, which was in payment of compensation for land taken for road building by the Government, is still on his office wall. If it is, then it is a valuable collector's item. Because with this amendment today, the Government shall not be making payment of $1 cheques anymore to compensate for the compulsory acquisition of private land to construct public roads. The other provision in the Bill which I am dissatisfied with is new section 10A(6). Under this clause, the Authority is allowed to tap electricity from adjoining land when the Authority is carrying out construction or improvement works on a piece of land. Later, should there be a dispute in the quantity of electricity used by the Authority, the landowner's only recourse is to make an appeal to the Minister. We must remember that it is the Minister's department which is a party to the dispute with the appellant over the amount of electricity used.”
“Thank you, Sir, for allowing me to speak on this Bill. Sir, I cannot support this Bill. Some of its provisions are too unfair. For example, clause 5 which amends section 9 of the principal Act is one of them. This clause gives the Authority more power to acquire land compulsorily to build roads without paying any compensation at all to the landowner whose land has been taken by the Authority. I do not see why compensation should not be paid to the landowner. The land is acquired to make it into a public road. True, a public road does provide a public good. But the Government is not providing the public good for nothing. On the contrary, in these days of COE and high motorcar registration and licence fees, the Government is reaping millions of dollars each year from motorists for road use and the privilege of owning a car. In view of the fact that the Government is making huge profits for road use by motorists, I think it is fair that clause 5 of the Bill should be amended to include a provision for the payment of compensation to landowners whose land has been compulsorily acquired for building a public road. In practice, in the past, the Government did pay compensation to landowners whose land was compulsorily acquired for construction of public roads. The amount paid was normally $1. The reason for that token payment is that the Government wants to protect itself in law. The Government does not want to end up in a situation later on where the landowner turns around and claims the land back on the ground that his land was acquired without payment of a valuable consideration. As all lawyers know, a contract without a valuable consideration later may be declared null and void.”
“Yes. We have not increased our SC&C charges for the last six years. We have no increase in revenue, but we play our part and we spend more, by 30-50%, on water usage to clean up the place to prevent the recurrence of SARS. Does the Minister not think that the Government should play its part also to help out the town councils, otherwise we will be lowering our standards of cleanliness generally, with less income?”
“Sir, I must remind the Minister that town councils are non-profit bodies ---”
“Sir, I have two supplementary questions. One is in regard to Marine Terrace and the other is in regard to Punggol Field. In regard to Marine Terrace, can I have some clarifications? Is this an MUP? And if it is, how much has each resident there co-paid for the works? There are three contractors involved in Marine Terrace - Seatown, Hong Lai Huat and Sum Keong - and even the Minister says that he is not sure whether Sum Keong can finish the job. I am just wondering whether HDB has been soft on all these contractors and has not been rigorous in enforcing the contract. The other supplementary question is in regard to Punggol Field. It is quite obvious that, for Punggol Field, the contractors had breached the contract. They were unable to complete the job on time and even abandoned the project. I heard one complaint from a purchaser that, in fact, she had already sold her flat and could not get the replacement flat at Punggol Field in time. She had to go and find accommodation somewhere else. Such a case is clear cut that she has suffered damages. I am a bit surprised when the Minister says that HDB has not paid any compensation at all. In fact, I would also imagine that the HDB has the right to claim damages from the contractors. So, out of these 560 purchasers, how many have been compensated in regard to their claims, if any?”
“I think that is a better solution because many Singaporeans are living in very dense areas in public housing and even the present home quarantine can still cause a spread of the disease. Sir, in this time of crisis, all Singaporeans must play their part to help each other, as DPM Lee has said yesterday. The Government, on its own, cannot solve the SARS problem. It must have the help of all Singaporeans. Sir, this disease threatens the very livelihood of our nation and it is also a threat to our nation. I would like to assure the people of Singapore that my Party, the Singapore People's Party - although it is an Opposition party - shall close ranks with the Government and all healthcare workers and the people of Singapore, and do our best to support all measures to prevent the spread of this deadly disease, and to help eradicate it as soon as possible.”
“The other residents there panicked and thought that residents in that block have been infected with SARS and they quickly telephoned and insisted that the Town Council go and wash the whole block again, which we did. I have also heard that persons who died of SARS in hospitals have their corpses wrapped, not in two layers but, as reported in the press, with three layers of plastic, so much so that their relatives and next-of-kin cannot even see the faces of their deceased loved ones before their bodies were cremated. I am uncertain whether the hospitals can do something to allow the faces of the dead persons to be seen by their relatives before they are sent for cremation. I hope that the Minister will ameliorate the situation to allow relatives to be able to see their deceased patients before they are cremated. As regards social responsibilities, I would urge all Singaporeans to help their neighbours or anyone who needs help. I am referring to the better educated Singaporeans to help and teach those Singaporeans, especially those in the lower grassroots level, who are less educated and do not really apprehend what SARS is all about. I think some of them may not even know the meaning or purpose of quarantine. They may think that they are not sick and ask why should they be quarantined. Or they may even think that quarantine is a form of punishment imposed on them by the Government like a house arrest, and not a preventive health measure. Sir, I agree with Dr Michael Lim when he says that quarantine may not be effective and that persons who are suspected of SARS should be sent to a neighbouring island.”
“The whole exercise of looking at books and documents may lead to an income tax or custom and excise duty offence being discovered. These offences have got nothing to do with the health of the person investigated. I think the net thrown by this Act is too wide. If people can be given the impression that the occurrence of SARS has been taken advantage of by the Government to cloak itself with more powers, then the people of Singapore can become cynical about the efforts made by the Government to combat and eradicate this disease, and this Bill may become counter-productive. I wish that this Bill could confine itself only to provisions to fight SARS and future SARS-like diseases, and not to empower the Government with more powers than necessary. Sir, however, I agree that this Bill is necessary. But, at the same time, the Government should also approach with a softer hand to get the full cooperation of the people. I am referring to education. I believe that many Singaporeans, especially the less educated ones, do not really understand what SARS is all about. They do not apprehend the seriousness of SARS and what it can do, not only to Singaporeans, but also to the economy of Singapore. I think more can be done to teach the people at the grassroots level about SARS and, at the same time, the Government should also take care not to over-react. For example, do not send the special ambulance to every call for an ambulance service. Only last week, I was told that in two cases, the special ambulances, with their attendants all covered up like spacemen, went to pick up a resident with suspected heart attack and a boy with only a cut arm at my constituency.”
“Thank you, Sir, for allowing me to speak. Sir, yesterday, the DPM and other hon. Members have paid tribute to the doctors, nurses and other healthcare workers in combating SARS. Sir, allow me now, on behalf of my Party, the Singapore People's Party, to also thank and pay tribute to the nurses, doctors and other healthcare workers of Tan Tock Seng Hospital, Singapore General Hospital (SGH), Changi General Hospital and all other hospitals and clinics in Singapore for the heroic and splendid work they are doing, and putting themselves in the frontline in detecting and caring for patients who are affected by the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) disease. Sir, we thank them all. SARS is perhaps the worst disease to have hit Singapore to-date. It has killed about 14-16 people in Singapore and caused untold sufferings, both in terms of the sickness and to our economy, especially the retail, travel and tourism business. It is timely that this Bill is put before Parliament. I support this Bill in-principle. I say "in-principle" because, if its purpose is just to combat SARS and other similar infectious diseases, then the provisions in the Bill may have gone too far. I am referring to clause 24 of the Infectious Diseases (Amendment) Bill where it repeals the old section 55 and replaces it with a new section 55 with seven subsections comprising 20 paragraphs. I can understand why the Director wants to enter, inspect and search any premises or any conveyance in which an outbreak or a suspected outbreak of the disease has taken place, or to take samples of substances or matter or food. But I do not understand why it is necessary for the Director to be given powers to force any person to produce for inspection any books or documents within his custody or possession.”
“Sir, DPM Lee has said that the Government is going flat out to develop a diagnostic test kit. Sir, I am asking whether the Government is willing to give a prize or reward to the first person that develops this kit, in addition to his normal salary. I think this is an incentive needed because I think time is of the essence as far as SARS is concerned. Sir, mention also has been made of the super-infector. Now that her name has been revealed by MOH and also published in the papers, with such adverse publicity, I am certain that her life must be affected badly. I wonder whether MOH can do something to rehabilitate her socially, like counselling her, and also, if possible, seek employment for her, if she has not already got a job. Sir, as regards the compensation for persons who are issued with a Home Quarantine Order, if they are officially issued with this order, they are entitled to compensation. What about those who, on their own, voluntarily quarantine themselves, if they feel that they have been infected by the disease?”
“Sir, there was a school principal who was a colonial officer and I believe he was in St. Andrew's school where boxing was encouraged. Normally, any bully will be put into the boxing ring and he would let them slug it out. So I wonder whether we have boxing in our schools these days.”
“May I know whether boxing is one of the recognised sports in our schools? Mr Speaker: Mr Chiam, I do not see the relevance of that question. We are talking about bullying, not boxing.”
“I thank the Minister for his answer and I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.”
“Sir, can I have a clarification? Although the Minister says that much publicity has been given, I just want to know whether more publicity could be given. Because we still read in the papers that babies are dying in rubbish dumps. Assoc. Prof. Dr Yaacob Ibrahim: Sir, I agree with Mr Chiam that more publicity can be given. In fact, we have started to do so, as I mentioned earlier this morning, to put such fliers in the Residents' Committees. If the Member for Potong Pasir is interested, I can give him 50 or 100 fliers for him to pin up all over Potong Pasir.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head I of the Main Estimates be reduced by $10 in respect of Code ID 1500. Sir, since I spoke in Parliament on the establishment of baby-drops, many babies have been reported to have been abandoned in rubbish dumps and other places. Also, two abandoned babies were found dead. If nothing is done, Sir, many more of such unwanted babies will die. Sir, the purpose of my call for the establishment of baby-drops is to save lives. I do think that the Government has a responsibility to build baby-drops for those unwanted and abandoned babies born through no fault of their own. They deserve to live and the Government must endeavour in its efforts to change the mindset of the people to accept baby-drops and, at the same time, continue to teach morality and sex education in schools for the children. Sir, I have been told that the Minister has, earlier on in the day, dealt with this issue but, nevertheless, although he does not agree with the establishment of official baby-drops, I would ask him, for the sake of saving the lives of abandoned babies, whether or not he will allow unofficial baby-drops in places like premises of charitable organisations, churches and other places of worship, private hospitals and other suitable designated places, and these places be made known to the public so that mothers with unwanted babies could put their babies there and, more importantly, these mothers suffer from shame. I think they also fear prosecution for abandoning their babies. I wonder whether the Minister could consider a kind of compromise and not prosecute these mothers when they leave their babies in these depositories specially designated for unwanted babies and treat them not as abandoning babies, but babies left for adoption. 4.”
“Clarification, Sir. When I say the "Government", I mean Singapore and the people of Singapore. I do not mean the "Government" as the PAP. Of course, we are always against the PAP on certain issues because we do not think that those issues are good for Singapore. If we think they are good for Singapore, we will always support.”
“Sir, the Opposition has never been admitted to the community centres or any of its organisations like CCCs. How does he know that the Opposition would not support the Government?”
“Sir, I want the Minister to explain something about the PA which I do not understand. The PA's purpose is to promote racial harmony and social cohesion. One thing I do not understand is that Opposition Members who are elected by the majority of the constituents are kept out of organisations or sub-organisations of the PA, like CCCs, RCs, CDCs, Boys' Club, including the CC itself. So how can you promote social cohesion when the elected Members are kept out of these organisations?”
“Sir, since you are in a good mood today ---”
“Sir, there is money in movie making. The Hollywood movie "Titanic", a movie about the sinking of a British luxury liner, was reputed to be made with about US$252 million. But, it raked in world-wide a record sum of about US$520 million, more than double its outlay of capital. Our own Singapore movie, made by Jack Neo, entitled "I Not Stupid", is said to have made $1.6 million, and it was screened internationally, in Malaysia, Hong Kong, Japan and South Korea, and was very well received in those countries. Jack Neo's latest movie does show that Singaporeans do have creative talent to make a movie and be accepted internationally and make money at the same time. Sir, George Lucas of "Star Wars" fame, for the past 25 years in Hollywood, pioneered film-making with the use of computer technology and sound technology. Sir, I have been told that Singapore has such technology, especially sound technology as pioneered by Mr Sim Wong Hoo of Creative Technology. Sir, it would appear that Singapore do have creative and talented people, and expertise in computer and sound technology. We do have the people and the technology to make films that can be sold in the world market. Can the Minister comment on why, up till now, Singapore has not developed a vibrant movie industry of international standard? The Acting Minister for Information, Communications and the Arts (Mr David T. E. Lim): Sir, may I first thank Mr Seng Han Thong and the other Members for their support and calls to develop our cultural capital and creative industries? They have raised many good suggestions and asked many searching questions. And, yes, certainly I will take up Ms Indranee's suggestion to take a look at the art exhibition, if nothing else, to find out why it has enthused her so much.”
“Sir, the Minister has not answered my question on whether or not the Government has set aside a budget to do research to prevent myopia amongst children.”
“Thank you, Sir, for allowing me to speak on myopia in children. I would like to express my concern on the high incidence of myopia amongst children in Singapore. Myopia is a common disease amongst children in Singapore. One only has to look at the photograph of an O-level class and he will see that almost all the students in that photograph wear glasses, evidencing that they are myopic. It is inconvenient to wear glasses. Girls do not like to wear glasses because it spoils their looks. As for boys, if they have to wear glasses it may affect their chances of being accepted in a sports team, especially in contact sports. Boys with acute shortsightedness may not be accepted in certain jobs, eg, a fighter pilot or to be a commando in the Armed Forces. The best situation is, of course, one who has good eyesight and does not need to wear glasses at all. Sir, I read in the papers recently that myopia can be completely cured with lasik surgery, but the cost of such a treatment is rather prohibitive. The cost of lasik surgery for one eye is almost $2,400 and, therefore, it is not possible to get every myopic person to be cured of the myopia by this form of surgery. The more practical solution would be if myopia can be prevented amongst our children. I read in the papers that in China, the schools there have a programme to engage school children in exercising and relaxing their eyes to cut down on the incidence of myopia. Sir, do we have such a programme in Singapore? I also would like to ask the Minister whether the Government has set aside a budget to do research on how to prevent our children from getting myopia.”
“But if they voted for the PAP candidate, they would have got the upgrading. As it turned out, the residents there gave the PAP candidate about 51% of the votes. Thus, the Sennett Estate was entitled to be upgraded by the Government. Now that one precinct at Potong Pasir has given its majority votes to the PAP candidate, it is left to be seen whether the Government shall keep its promise. Initially, the Minister tried to shirk his responsibility, but now the Prime Minister confirmed that Sennett Estate is one of the private estates that shall be included in the upgrading. I would like to know from the Minister when would the upgrading at Sennett Estate begin. And I would ask that the upgrading programme includes the alleviation of floods there, the enlargement of the roads and repairs of the drains to make sure that water do not stagnate in them but can flow freely, and also the erection of railings to make the monsoon drains safer. I hope that the Government would do all these things, including erecting the signages of the estate and also other works requested by the residents there.”
“Sir, it is said that the PAP Government does not treat all Singaporeans alike. Those Singaporeans who reside in Opposition wards do not get the benefits of the national policies as of right. In 1997, residents in Potong Pasir Constituency could get upgrading of their flats only if they voted for the PAP candidate, although some of the flats at Potong Pasir were definitely due for upgrading. These flats were about 23 years old at the time of the election in 1997. However, the flats of many PAP wards which were much younger than that benefited from upgrading. In the election of 2001, the same tactics were used by the ruling Party. The residents at Potong Pasir were told that if they did not support the PAP candidate, the North East MRT line might not run through the Potong Pasir Constituency. When it became clear that the North-east MRT line would run through Potong Pasir, it was made known by the PAP that if residents in Potong Pasir did not support its candidate at the General Election of 2001, the station at Potong Pasir would not be opened. It shall only remain a "box" and trains shall not stop at that station but only run through it. The name of that station would also be called Sennett MRT station and not Potong Pasir MRT station as many have expected. Later on, during the heat of the election, the Prime Minister himself came to visit Potong Pasir and made a promise that the majority of the residents at Potong Pasir need not vote for the PAP candidate in order for them to get upgrading. Any one of the five precincts in Potong Pasir need only to give the PAP candidate more than 50% and that precinct would be entitled to upgrading. The private estate, ie, the Sennett Estate, would not normally be entitled to the Government upgrading.”