Chng Hee Kok
Singapore
“Sir, I would like to ask the DPM whether the new Securities and Futures Act will be made retroactive in the Links case. In other words, will the civil penalties be made retroactive in the Links case? BG Lee Hsien Loong: Mr Speaker, Sir, the answer is somewhere in the new Bill [indicating].”
“Sir, one cannot appreciate the enormity of the problem of a poison pen letter unless he is a victim. Imagine the power of a poison pen e-mail done in the midst of a general election. By the time the truth is established, if it can be established at all, the harm is already done.”
“And this is because the transmission is now almost direct, that when orders are placed, they are placed not only with those who supply the items, the same orders are sent to the supplier's supplier's suppliers.”
“Sir, the Minister is aware that in the case of SingTel it is quite different because it is part of our asset enhancement exercise and a fairly large number of Singaporeans own shares in SingTel. Since the announcement of the Optus deal, share prices have dropped by some 30%.”
“This is a follow up of my earlier question. If the market sentiments are favourable, will the IPOs take place this year? BG Lee Hsien Loong: Mr Speaker, Sir, PSA and Singapore Power would not have appointed investment bankers and proceeded with due diligence unless they have very serious intentions.”
“And in many cases, over a period of time, we would be happy to reduce our shareholdings down below where they are now and, maybe even divest completely. Because the original rationale for building up and maintaining these companies has to be reviewed and may or may not continue to exist.”
The complete record
Every one of 834 lines we hold for Chng Hee Kok, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 11 of 17.
“I am told she decided to return instead of pursuing a PhD programme. Back in Singapore, none of the promises came true. She even had problems securing an interview with the relevant Government departments and all because she did not have Honours for her first degree from the University of Singapore. This, despite her having given up offers of fellowships from top institutions in the US. Needless to say, this lady feels alienated and bitter. Sir, the establishment of a Singapore International Foundation is a move in the right direction. In building Singapore International and exhorting our people to venture overseas, we must give them the confidence that their children's welfare and their re-assimilation into our society does not become a nightmare. Setting up of the Singapore school in Hong Kong is a very small step in the right direction. Meanwhile, we have executives located in several other parts of the world and their needs must be met with a great deal of flexibility and understanding. Our Government should spare no efforts to maintain our ties with these expatriate citizens of ours and to bring home our brains. This campaign should take precedence over our efforts to attract foreigners, eg, those workers from Hong Kong. There should be a programme to welcome them when they return and ease their re-assimilation into their home community. Going by the examples I have quoted, one can conclude that although we exhort Singaporeans to go international, our internal structure is not sufficiently flexible or ready to accommodate these people. Red carpet welcome should not be extended only to those we are on the verge of losing but also to returning Singaporeans who might never have had emigration on their minds.”
“Perhaps they should look at this other issue for the benefit of the Government and the bureaucrats to point out to show up the problems that they are facing. The number of these people may now be small but, I believe, this is a growing problem. It is indeed ironic that we have no welcome back or relocation programme for our citizens who have returned to Singapore from overseas posting or studies. Allow me to cite two examples. A family I am personally acquainted with returned recently after a three-year foreign posting. Both husband and wife are professionally qualified - the kind of talent we say we want. Locating a fairly good school to accept their children was itself no mean feat as school principals are generally lukewarm. Imagine their frustration when, despite vigorous efforts and many rounds of letter writing, appeals and intercession, they were unable to place their children in the appropriate grades in the school, despite satisfactory entrance assessment results. In exasperation, they applied to place their children in one of the international schools. At the same time, out of desperation, the head of the family pressed for his company to offer him another foreign posting, having just returned from overseas. Needless to say, the family is naturally angry, frustrated and disappointed over a seeming injustice when they compare the warm treatment we extend to foreign blue collar workers. I am told of another case which concerns a Singaporean woman with a Masters degree in Economics from a reputable American University. Like other students abroad, she was invited to a talk by Singapore's foreign mission in the US and promised good job prospects and other benefits if she returned to Singapore. The picture painted was rosy.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of the motion standing in the name of the Member for Toa Payoh GRC. The last chapter in "The Next Lap" is appropriately entitled "Singapore International". It is forward looking and signifies that our continued growth and success must come from moving into the international arena - not only to make a living, but to continue to build more international linkages. To do this successfully, we must provide the appropriate incentives to push Singapore enterprises to set up overseas and at the same time maximise our efforts to encourage our talented to locate and work beyond our shores. I intend to focus on this latter problem and suggest that until our internal structure is changed, the vast problems suffered or faced by returning expatriates will deter increasing numbers of Singaporeans from working abroad. To counter the brain drain from Singapore, the Government has, in recent years, made vigorous efforts to attract immigrants from a number of countries. The relatively small number of foreigners that we have attracted - professional, skilled, white and blue collar workers - are received with open arms. Indeed at present, we appear to bend over backwards to help them relocate here and ease their assimilation into our society. Unfortunately, scant attention is paid, in comparison, to our returning Singaporeans. While rolling out the red carpet for the immigrants, we appear to be pulling the rug from under the feet of our returned expatriates. Returning expatriates face problems in jobs, children's education and bureaucratic neglect. Even our press is caught up with reports on how immigrants are settling in in Singapore.”
“Including the shared values in the Constitution will remind our people before they assert their rights that they have a responsibility as well; and enunciate clearly the guide for desirable Singa- porean behaviour, so that all Singaporeans, when they think of nation before community, family and self, will regard Singapore as their house and their home, and the Constitution, with the shared core values incorporated in it, as their very basic house rules. Sir, I support the motion.”
“There will be winners and there will be losers and in the aftermath, I think the country and everyone else loses. Hence the value of "Consensus instead of contention" is a very important and significant value. We have to inculcate in our young the importance of consensus which leads to teamwork. However, to make it widely accepted, we may perhaps amend it to read "deliberations leading to consensus" or some similar form, so long as the word "contention" is removed. I will support, Sir, a motion to amend the wording of this value. Sir, after all is said and done, and our shared core values are agreed upon, where shall we file them? On the subject of values and attitudes, I am all for a protected and careful approach. It will take time to sink our shared values into the people's consciousness. However, in the long run, to ensure that our core values, or national ideology, become writ in our nation's everyday life, and not end up as pious pontifications, these values should, like Pancasila, be enshrined in our Constitution. Otherwise, after the debate is over, they could be locked up in a cabinet to be resurrected only on special occasions or only when the nation is in danger of going adrift. By incorporating them into our Constitution, they should bind all Singaporeans all the time - Government, business and individuals, as well as community, social, professional, trade, business, political and any other interest groups. Like Pancasila, they should form the philosophical underpinning of our nation, and all groups will play under some very basic and same ground rules. The individuals' rights are enshrined in our Constitution. To balance these rights, our shared core values should become a responsibility statement binding all people in Singapore.”
“I will welcome that change. The last change I have in mind refers to the value "Consensus instead of contention". As mentioned by my colleagues, this has raised the most contention. It will not lessen the impact if we remove the word "contention" from it. This will not make this value any less important. On the contrary, Sir, to me, "consensus instead of contention" is a very important key value in our system. Sir, contention in its extreme form has often been a most destructive element in Asian societies. Unlike the West, where two or more parties may engage in apparently "go for broke" contention and shake hands after that, Asians literally begin to sharpen their knives for the kill after contention. Very often, there is no search for middle ground. There is this inability to agree to disagree. To concede in our society is to lose face. In the West they fight and forget. Witness the recent fight for leadership of the Conservative Party in the UK. What happened to the loser, Mr Michael Heseltine? He was appointed Minister in the Cabinet of the winner, Mr John Major. The Conservative Party and the country stand to gain when the strength of Mr Heseltine is brought into the Cabinet. This is in sharp contrast to the fight for the leadership of a major party in a neighbouring country. Victor and loser became mortal enemies, despite the fact that both are not ideologically different. Translated down the line, the country becomes divisive. There are many other examples. Suffice to say that at the highest level in the country, the way disagreements are resolved sets the tone for the country. Since Asian societies lack the cultural and traditional capacity to kiss and make up, so to speak, contention is a zero-sum game.”
“Let us invite ideas on re-naming our Shared Values. If possible, its name should make it sound an intrinsic part of our Singapore culture. The original name given by the Prime Minister, "National Ideology", is in my mind a better name than Shared Values. Even "Core Values" has a better ring to it. Indonesia's Pancasila is a case in point. I do not think that Pancasila will be as memorable if it had instead been called "Shared Values". Sir, as to the proposed shared values, I venture to propose consideration of some amendments and additions. Firstly, an addition that will be most appropriate is one concerning honest government. This has already been mentioned by a number of my colleagues and those outside this House. Although this is a political value, it is a rare virtue uniquely Singaporean and one that is instrumental in making Singapore what it is today. Honest government is made more critical due to our limited size and our limited resources. Somehow our core values will be incomplete without reference to this and it should be enshrined in our national ideology. We cannot permit corruption to creep into our system whether in Government or in our private lives. I therefore propose in relation to honest government, consideration of this value: "National and individual integrity" which could be elaborated or translated as honesty of those in authority and individual citizens, that is, embracing not only Government but all others holding any public or community position, as well as private citizens. Besides honest government, there are a number of very desirable political values which we all embrace inside this House and also for most Singaporeans. Perhaps we should group these and introduce a separate set of political values at a later date.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I join Members of this House and most Singaporeans in supporting our proposed shared values as detailed in the White Paper. However, I shall be very frank. It is not something which gets one all excited. I believe too that many other Singaporeans are not turned on by this White Paper. But then, being practical people, this paper has little or no immediate impact on Singaporeans. This may be one reason. But the fault, I submit, lies not in the substance or essence of the values identified, but in the manner of their enunciation in the White Paper on our shared values. I am in support of the substance but it is possible that in drawing up these values, something got lost in the phrasing so much so that they seem to lack soul and feeling. Granted, our shared values are not designed to galvanise our people into spirited action. But to be accepted successfully and widely, they must strike some common chord in our people and at least stir some emotions. If not inspirational, they should at least evoke some great sense of belief and participation in our people. This is absent in the reading of our shared values which are neither memorable nor easy to recite, or even to remember. Many Singaporeans can recite the pledge, but it will be difficult to expect Singaporeans to remember the shared values. I must confess that having read the document more than once, I have to think very hard to remember each one of the values. One thing we can do is to rephrase the values in the language of the poets or encourage writers of good verse to breathe some flair and feeling into the shared values. Another thing amiss is the title. The very name "Shared Values" sounds prosaic, more like the title of another academic dissertation.”
“We may not be able to prevent a crisis, but we can at least prevent such a crisis from becoming unmitigated disasters. Being a small country with our people as our greatest asset, optimising use of such limited resources is paramount. Formation of larger and multi-discipline consultancies, as encouraged by the Bills, is a step in the right direction. The pooling of resources will result in economies in use of administrative and management resources. It will also improve the quality of our manpower. The end result, it is hoped, will be to help local firms compete better and more effectively against foreign corporations and more successfully in the international arena. I wish, however, Sir, to raise one point with regard to the powers endowed upon the new Boards of Architects and Professional Engineers. Under clause 30 of the Professional Engineers Bill, the pecuniary penalty that may be imposed on an engineer is $20,000 whereas that to be imposed on an architect under clause 27 of the Architects Bill is only $10,000. I cannot see why there is this distinction when in reality the architect is as influential, if not, more so than an engineer in a building project. The proposed penalties for the engineer and architect should, in my view, in fact be reversed. If nothing else, they should remain the same. I hope this matter will be taken up at the Select Committee level. I welcome and support the Minister's intention to commit this Bill to a Select Committee.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of the Bill. The intent and scope of this Bill is similar to the Professional Engineers Bill which follows, and my comments on this Bill applies to both Bills. Singapore has one of most vigorous building programmes in the world. Our rate of building - both residential and commercial - surpasses most major cities. The world's tallest hotel, the most successful public housing programme, architectural flair and engineering ingenuity, I think Singapore has them all. To maintain this reputation of impeccable expertise, regulatory legislation governing the industry should correspond with this milieu of increasing professionalism. The three Bills to tighten control of architects, engineers and land surveyors and promote large multi-disciplinary professional consultancies in the building industry are therefore very timely. While Singapore enjoys the reputation of being relatively corruption free, we all know that private businesses can never be totally free of corruption, ie, illegal gratification to allow the cutting of corners and the substitution of inferior materials. Any dishonest act, fraud or accepting of illicit commissions may result in wrong or poor choice of materials. This will compromise the integrity of the design and the building. The result is putting at risk many lives. I think the New World Hotel tragedy is still fresh in our minds. The three new Bills will raise safety standards and cope with all conceivable contingencies, be it a high-rise fire or a mild earth tremor. Although no one can prevent natural disasters, such as earth quakes and typhoons, we can reduce their adverse impact and minimise the incidence of man-made crisis through proper control on the conduct of people responsible.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, may I have your indulgence to ask the Minister another question? Currently, there are a number of old cars whose owners have paid their quota premiums, ie, to extend the use of the car for another 10 years. There will come a time when leaded petrol is no longer available. How shall we take care of these owners who own cars beyond 10 years?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the Minister has not answered my question on whether the tax will be reverted to the old tax structure the moment leaded petrol is no longer available.”
“Sir, I applaud the Minister's move. The question at the back of my mind is on the tax structure which has been changed to encourage motorists to use the new unleaded petrol. Is there any intention to revert to the old tax structure the moment leaded petrol is no longer in use? In other words, will the tax be increased again in future?”
“The people selected to sit on the proposed National Science and Technology Board will be among our technology leaders. They must be uncommon people, fresh and dynamic enough not only to appreciate modern technology and keep pace with it, but also be able to manage such change and spot winners in our midst so as to advance our own drive for technological parity and perhaps advancement. Therefore, I urge the Minister, that apart from looking for Board members in the traditional areas, the Board should enlist the services of younger people, especially those engaged in technology related businesses. If I may add, Sir, just appointing people who are constricted by long years of regimented thinking will not do in this business. There should be a mix of some who may be the gadflies of industry who understand the technology business better and hence better able to serve on this new Board. 4.05 pm [Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Abdullah Tarmugi) in the Chair]”
“Sir, I welcome the setting up of the National Science and Technology Board. The pace of technological change in the world has been nothing short of breathtaking in the last few years. These changes take place in such quick succession that a person often finds, at the point of coming to grips with a new technology, that his newly acquired knowledge is already on the way to being obsolete, or yesterday's technology. A National Science and Technology Board is hence timely for Singapore. I shall focus my comments on the composition or the kind of talent we must recruit to sit on this Board. Just to appreciate technological change requires more than common ability, to apply and manage it, even more. The nature of technological changes suggests that the technological age favours the young and agile in mind. If you are over 30 years old, you may already be considered over the hill, in some cases. The people who will comprise the Board should therefore be uncommon people with a certain technological flair and youthful zest. They should be people who can appreciate and keep up with the speed of technological change, which threatens to be even quicker with each passing phase. As a small country with limited resources, our success depends on our ability to spot and catch the next wind so that we can focus our resources. With limited resources and a small base, we cannot spread ourselves too thin. By spreading ourselves too thin we encounter some of the problems already mentioned by Dr Wang Kai Yuen. I support him when he says that we have to narrow down some of the areas of research and we must try to do well in those areas which we specialise in. To do so, we must have people, managers and leaders who are able to pick winners.”
“Penalties against such people are definitely in order. In short, Sir, this Bill aims to protect the rights of the majority from a small minority of difficult residents and deserves the support of all Members. I will, however, voice a word of caution. In giving the Town Councils the muscle to deal with such errant residents, proper care must be made to ensure that the Town Councils give ample notice to them before they wield the big stick. Blatant errant behaviour should be dealt with decisively. But in cases of back payment of conservancy charges and other dues, the Town Councils should not act too hastily if they are genuine cases. As in all things, Sir, soft words, then stronger ones, should be used before we use the big stick. I support the Bill, Sir.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I must declare my interest as a member of the Tiong Bahru Town Council. Sir, the majority of Singaporeans are decent people. Civic consciousness and good neighbourliness are virtues not foreign to us. It is this consideration for each other that has made life pleasant in many of our neighbourhoods when times are good and bearable when times are bad. With urbanisation and highrise living, the same kampong style warmth and outgoing spirit among neighbours has, perhaps, waned over the years. But it still exists. One thing remains unchanged, Sir, and possibly never will be, is that in every community or neighbourhood, you will find at least one misfit - either a family or an individual - who goes out of his way to make life unpleasant for his neighbours, by being inconsiderate, parasitical or downright nasty. While we should try to counsel such people on the folly of their ways, there should be recourse to bring them to heel if kid's gloves tactics do not work. The provisions contained in the Town Councils (Amendment) Bill give the Town Councils one such recourse. I, therefore, support the Bill. This Bill is another important step forward in the work of the Town Councils by providing it the means to deal with uncooperative and recalcitrant residents. These residents who are the minority are responsible for indiscriminate parking and littering of the environment. Such undesirable behaviour not only causes inconvenience and discomfort to other residents, but also increases the cost of maintenance of the estate. I also welcome the measures to address the problem of late payment of service and conservancy charges. Again, Sir, this small group of residents, although able to pay, chooses not to. This means they are being subsidised by the majority.”
“My question to the Minister is: is he convinced that the sample is sufficiently representative and that it is not too conservative in favour of Telecom? That, ultimately, revenues will go up rather than reduce, or remain neutral, as he said.”
“Sir, I share the sentiments of Mr Heng. The question I want to ask the Minister is really that the sample size was only 7,000 out of one million subscribers.”
“Sir, the exit tax on petrol which I am suggesting is not the same as the exit tax in other countries. Can the Minister confirm that the exit tax in other countries apply to individuals? Here Singaporeans who go to Johor on foot, by bus, or by rail, are not penalised at all under the half-tank tax. BG George Yong-Boon Yeo: Mr Speaker, Sir, though Mr Chng is logically correct, I do not think the public perception would be as generous. PETROLEUM PRODUCTS (Retail pricing) 10. Mr Chin Harn Tong asked the Minister for Trade and Industry (a) whether he is satisfied that the Government has achieved its announced objective of creating a free market in petroleum products for Singapore consumers by deregulating the retail pricing of petroleum products; (b) whether the hefty price increases recently posted by the oil companies for their retail petroleum products are warranted; and (c) whether the oil companies have been equally prompt and faithful in their retail down pricing when crude petroleum prices fell in the past. SINGAPORE PETROLEUM COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED (Propping up cartel of oil companies) 11. Mr Chin Harn Tong asked the Minister for Trade and Industry whether it is a policy of the Government that the Government-owned Singapore Petroleum Company Private Limited should help to prop up the cartel of oil companies operating in Singapore instead of seeking to enlarge its share of the retail market by more aggressive and competitive pricing.”
“Sir, will the Minister of State consider supplementing the half-tank rule with a half-tank petrol tax, so that consumers are free to purchase petrol wherever they like? BG George Yong-Boon Yeo: The alternative of an exit levy, or whatever we want to call it, was seriously considered when the proposal was being formulated last year. We did not implement it because it would have been misconstrued as an exit tax, as a policy to discourage Singapore motorists from visiting Malaysia. So for that reason, we adopted the indirect approach of the half-tank rule. The effect is largely the same. For each approach, there are pros and cons, but since the half-tank rule has worked well and the dust has settled, we should stick to it. But at the same time, we still keep open the alternative of an exit levy for the future should new needs compel us to re-evaluate our position.”
“Sir, on the question of speculation, will the Minister consider administrative measures to slow down speculation, for example, by reporting those regular successful bidders to the Income Tax Department?”
“Of even more importance is the ability of the new leadership to establish the kind of rapport and understanding with our people - the understanding that when we reach out to the young, we are not alienating the elderly; that when we cater to the middle class, we have not forgotten the less fortunate; and that when we search for life's refinements, we are not seen to de-emphasise hard work. Sir, I support the motion standing in the name of the Member for Tanglin.”
“My view, Sir, is that we can have both. First, by continuing to emphasise and not lose sight of meritocracy as an important foundation or pillar of our system; and secondly, by working smart. Computers, office automation and the new technologies will give us the additional edge we will need to improve ourselves economically and still have the time for more leisure activities and a more refined life-style. We need not equate a more relaxed life-style as a dent in our work ethics so long as we are better equipped with the new tools and technologies. The real challenge is how to instill in our people the survival instincts of our forefathers and the older generation and, at the same time, pursue the trappings and refinements of a developed society. This, I believe, is a balance which will be struck over time. Sir, the marathon goes on. Some may say the next leaders' task is fine-tuning what has been achieved and passed on to them. I submit that our task is more than this. There are greater heights to scale and we have completed but one leg of our marathon and the end is not in sight. While we identify the goals for the new milieu, I submit we should strive not for the good years - as historically we have not yet had that many - but for better years. Our future development should not be one based preponderantly on economic yardsticks. Instead, it should now be based on social ones as well. To be judged to be successful, the Government has to meet the contradictions I have highlighted.”
“I wish to pose this question to the House and to all Singaporeans. We have reached a high level of economic development which few can deny, but have we arrived? Have we as a nation, and a people, attained that level of maturity and graciousness that marks the great civilisations of the world? We have acquired the trappings of comfortable living, but have we imbibed the nectar of life? My humble submission is that we have yet to acquire the social refinements that mark a long established and mature society. We are more like the nouveau riche. We have the money but we still lack the social graces that mark a great nation. How else do you explain the phenomenon of Singaporeans piling up on their buffet plates with more than they can possibly consume just because the price tag covers all they can eat? I believe, Sir, that we need time to grow, and to arrive in the real sense of the word. What we are is to some extent no fault of our people's. It is just that - like good wine - we also need time to mature. I would, therefore, urge our new leaders to set as our next national goals, superseding even that of economic development, the nurturing of social refinements and our people as a great people. Like the man who strives to get out of his fishing village by succeeding in the big and rough city, and then working day and night so as to have the luxury of going fishing, let us not lose sight of the philosophical and social side of economic development. At the same time, as we go for the softer aspects of life, social refinement, culture, music and the arts, we should not lose sight of what brought us here - our survival instincts and our relentless pursuit of economic growth. Are these two objectives contradictory? Must we lose one to gain the other?”
“This very fear is one which East Germans now face in the union with West Germany -the fear that a market economy tends to penalise those who are less able and privileged. Hence, the question for the Government to address is not whether we should or should not privatise this or that service. The question to ask is how do we do so without pushing our less privileged into an even more disadvantaged position. In this, I am certain the views expressed by my colleagues, Dr Vasoo and Dr Koh Lam Son, are worthy of consideration. Dr Vasoo's call for graded services is in fact the opposite side of the same coin of our progressive tax structure, and that is, the more able should shoulder more without letting this becoming a disincentive. We have always urged our people to be more compassionate and show more concern for the less fortunate in our society. Besides the 25th Anniversary Charity Fund, our people have responded positively in many other ways. As for the Government, this question of the poor has been continually highlighted in each President's Address since I became a Member of this House. It is time therefore that the Government set the example and put into concrete form by adopting some of the suggestions brought up by my colleagues. This will not only send a positive signal to our people, but will go down well with the people. I welcome the First Deputy Prime Minister's undertaking just a moment ago that more practical measures will be put into place in the next few months. Here, indeed it is the real challenge to the Government - of how to balance efficiency of privatisation and, at the same time, easing the burden of those who are most adversely affected. Sir, the last area I want to highlight is social refinements and work ethics.”
“In this I applaud our First Deputy Prime Minister when he was quoted as saying that he is not going to count hands in the Cabinet. I am also glad to hear from him just a moment ago that he will not govern by the opinion polls. There is no contradiction in his style of building consensus and putting his foot down. The art of government is indeed the ability to seek a balance between seeking views and opinions and selling a hard decision. It is not to go to the people on each and every single issue. I believe the right mix and balance will come when our next Prime Minister establishes that level of rapport and trust with the people which is enjoyed by the Prime Minister. Many Singaporeans will agree with me that when I say we want participation, we also need strong leadership. On the lower income group and the market economy, Sir, I have spoken out for the lower income group on several occasions in this House. A number of my honourable colleagues have also covered this subject with much passion in the last two days. Despite the burgeoning middle class, the plight of the lower income group is a matter close to the hearts of hon. Members. We can identify with them because most of us come from that very same background. We see in them shades of ourselves and our family. However, at the same time, as rational and thinking people, we also realise, as do many East European populations, that a market economy is the only workable system which will bring the desired benefits to the people. A market economy is efficient, effective and allocates resources with the least wastage. This being so, it seems to be a ruthless weapon and strikes fear in those not accustomed to this effectiveness.”
“Sir, over the last few days of debate, we have heard many fellow Members talk at length about our new style of participatory government - ruling by consensus - and caring for the lower income group, and many other issues, although they are not burning ones. This suggests to me that the various options open to us are an indication that the new leadership has in many ways a more difficult task to perform than our first generation leaders. The options are more varied and highlight the need to strike a balance between effectiveness and style in our government, in our economy, and in our society. Sir, I have in mind three areas - leadership and consensus, market economy and the lower income group, and work ethics and social refinements. First on consensus building and leadership. By and large, the changing style of government and governing by consensus is welcomed by a new generation of better educated Singaporeans. It is agreed that there should also be more participation from the people, but it should not be from a select group but a wider one. Consultation with people should not be seen as mere lip service but be genuine, lest the people think that irrespective of their views, the Government will push through its proposed legislation, whatever is said. However, I would like to add a word of caution in case we get carried away and forget that ultimately the Government must govern, dissenting views notwithstanding. We have to guard against carrying the question of consultation to an extreme. As in the past of hard-headed leadership, if a bitter pill must be swallowed for the good of the country and strong measures implemented despite popular resistance, the Government should not flinch, but should proceed even if consultation with the people shows its unpopularity.”
“Presently, I understand that a great number of heavy motor vehicle drivers, those who are plying the trade by carrying earth and so on, work on an incentive scheme or are being paid on a per trip basis. In other words, the more they drive, the more they are paid. Sir, a combination of slow sensory motor reflexes and high speed driving to maximise income is in my mind a formula for disaster. Will the Minister review this provision and, if necessary, set a lower age limit which I am sure has the general support of most people?”
“I hear that in Australia, the Police stake out at pubs and public places and even house parties when they expect a lot of drinking and driving. They zero in on those people after they leave their cars to make them take breathalyser tests. I do not believe our Police is doing this at the moment. Sir, I therefore support section 47C which gives the Police the authority to suspend a person's driving licence immediately he has caused death or injury as a result of drunken driving. Under existing legislation, suspension takes place only upon a court conviction. As this may take several months, it is only logical that preventive measures, such as that proposed in the Bill, be taken and the driver should not be allowed to drive the vehicle. Although the suspension of a licence before a court conviction may appear to be punishment before due process, as mentioned by Dr Arthur Beng, and the alleged drunken driver may be acquitted of the charge, I personally support that it is better to err on the side of prudence. The other measure which I wish to raise with the Minister is clause 17 which prohibits a person who has attained the age of 70 years from driving certain categories of heavy motor vehicles. Although this is in accordance with current ROV's limit for taxi and bus drivers, I suggest that the Minister further review this upper limit with a view to bringing this further down. Sir, as the Minister has already pointed out that advance age slows down a person's reflexes and that heavy motor vehicles can cause great serious injuries and damage, I think the Minister is being too generous in this instance. Although I am in support of our senior citizens getting gainful employment, driving a heavy motor vehicle at such an advanced age is not my idea of help for this group.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I will only touch on those parts of the Bill which were raised by the Minister for Home Affairs. Sir, the car in the hands of an intoxicated person is a potent weapon of death. I am pleased to support the Road Traffic (Amendment) Bill which seeks to impose tougher penalties on those driving whilst under the influence of alcohol or other intoxicating drink. Sir, strong action taken against such irresponsible drivers has a great measure of public support. In fact, there is always this lingering doubt in people's mind that the Police have not done enough or the law is too lenient whenever we read of a wanton loss of life as a result of drunken driving. In fact, I am surprised that the Home Affairs Minister, who is normally very swift and efficient, has taken three years, according to Dr Arthur Beng, to come up with this amendment. Although the penalty for first time offenders has been increased to between $1,000 and $5,000, this amount pales when weighed against the loss of a limb or life, which is what such drivers are capable of doing. In my view, Sir, the penalty for second offence must be a very strong deterrent. If a drunken driver cannot learn a lesson after having been apprehended for the first offence, he should be put away, and I would support mandatory jail sentence. Having got the second chance, he should not be allowed to hold a driving licence again. I therefore support even stronger penalties in this area. While supporting these heavier penalties, Sir, may I also suggest that the Police look into the policing aspect of the problem. I understand that in countries like England and Australia, they are so strict in their enforcement action (police action against drunken driving) that the public is very conscious about drinking and driving.”
“Sir, going by what I said and if we indeed are over-saving the CPF, should we not review our CPF policy and establish if there is room for limiting the rate of CPF contribution once a certain quantum of saving is reached? I have made this proposal publicly a few weeks ago and I do not wish to go into the details, except to add that by slowing down the rate once a certain level of savings is achieved, we can then steer ourselves back to the basic aims of the CPF scheme.”
“Sir, I wish to support the views expressed by the Chairman of the GPC for Labour on our need to go back to the basics on the use of CPF. From an original aim of using the CPF to provide for old age security, home and medical care we have branched out to allow CPF to be used for a variety of purposes, which has got nothing to do with these three basic objectives. The last stated use of CPF is for HDB renovations and we have just learnt in this present sitting that CPF is being considered for buying Telecom's shares when it is privatised. Sir, we have not been able to keep within the basic aims of the CPF mainly because we have been too successful with the CPF so much so that today an individual's major personal saving is locked up in the CPF. So long as we broach the subject of the CPF like it is an untouchable bank, there will always be a clamour for more CPF usage. To my mind, this seems to suggest that we have too much money in our CPF accounts. Hearing stories about how some Singaporeans can be careless about their Medisave account, going for the highest class hospital beds does seem to reinforce this notion that we have indeed too much money in the CPF. This is due in no small way to the fact that CPF funds are indeed untouchable and out of reach. I am confident that if Medisave funds is in the hands of the contributor that person will be most discriminating in choosing the class of hospital wards. Similarly, Sir, a person will not entertain the idea of spending a large sum of his money on his son's education unless he is convinced or more than convinced that his son has a fair chance of success.”
“Sir, I am not speaking on this amendment.”
“Sir, I thank the Minister again. I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.”
“Sir, I thank the Minister for his very reassuring reply. I can only hope that this enlightened approach will also be shared by the EDB training institute which I spoke about. I have two points to raise with the Minister. One, will he make sure that such disclosure on drug abuse will not be asked for in applications for jobs and licences? Two, I will certainly take up this matter with him further and give him the details. At the same time, can I seek his support in getting the boy reinstated into the training programme? If I have the Minister's agreement, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.”
“Question No. 3, Sir. The Minister of State for Community Development (Mr Ch'ng Jit Koon) (for the Minister for Community Development): Mr Speaker, Sir, I am replying on behalf of my Minister. The grassroots grant set aside by the Government every financial year may be used for projects which Citizens' Consultative Committees (CCCs) and Residents' Committees (RCs) organise jointly with other grassroots organisations, including the Civil Defence Coordinating Committees and Constituency Sports Clubs. The Grassroots Grant Committee has in fact approved grants for a number of Civil Defence projects organised jointly by the grassroots organisations in a few constituencies. Grassroots organisations requiring grants for joint projects should submit their requests through the CCCs and their Advisers so that there will be better coordination in the application and allocation of the grassroots grants in each constituency. Apart from the grassroots grant, the Singapore Sports Council also gives an annual grant to each Constituency Sports Club. This annual grant varies according to the number of sports activities it organises. CCC Advisers should make full use of these annual grants to organise community projects and sports activities for the benefit of their constituents. MAIN AND DEVELOPMENT ESTIMATES OF SINGAPORE FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR 1ST APRIL, 1990 TO 31ST MARCH, 1991 Order read for consideration in Committee of Supply [3rd Allotted Day]. [Mr Speaker in the Chair] Head L (cont.) - Resumption of Debate on Question [15th March, 1990], "That the total sum to be allocated for Head L of the Main Estimates be reduced by $100." - [Dr Tan Cheng Bock]. Question again proposed.”
“Sir, I have two points to raise with the Minister. Presently, members of town councils have similar functions as directors of companies. They have a fairly wide latitude in committing the town council to contracts, negotiating for services for the use of residents and setting up policy. In short, Sir, the work of town councillors has a much wider impact and affects many more lives than the shareholders of a company. Yet, Sir, a board director is governed by a set of rather sobering responsibilities and some rather onerous terms under the Companies Act. In my view, since the integrity and importance of town councils must always be maintained at a high level, I urge the Minister to consider tightening up the legislation on town councillors. I have in mind the law relating to limiting the power of town councillors' declaration of conflict of interest and profiteering in the work as town councillors. The second point I have relates to the rules on the payment of allowance to town councillors. Since the work and scope of town councillors vary widely, I suggest that the Minister be more flexible in setting the limit on the allowance and also how it shall be paid.”
“Sir, I want to raise with the Minister the subject of golf or, more correctly, the provision of public golf courses. For a variety of reasons, the demand for golf courses has increased. The game of golf is gaining popularity with rising incomes, greater publicity, starting golf at a young age and, of course, the proliferation of golf driving ranges. Sir, despite the land squeeze, I believe there is enough land that may be developed into public golf courses. By developing such land, which is not suitable for other purposes, we can at the same time maintain the landscape and the greenery. The other kind of land that may be used for public golf course is reclaimed land, for example, land at Marina South and land along the East Coast Parkway whereby the land is not likely to be developed for the next 15 to 20 years. Can we give private operators or private enterprises temporary occupation licence of, say, 15 to 20 years, for them to develop such courses? In view of the demand and need I would like to urge the Minister to direct his planners to look into this.”
“However, the budget only gives tax rebates to widows and divorced women when they employ foreign maids to look after their children. Though such tax incentives are good news, I was rather disappointed. Why has the Minister not given tax relief to widowers and divorced men who have children to bring up when they employ foreign maids? Why are they being discriminated. I think this is unfair because there is no difference between a widow or divorced woman and a widower or divorced man as far as bringing up children is concerned. Like a widow or a divorced woman, a widower or a divorced man also has to work in order to earn money to bring up his children and his need for a foreign maid is the same. I therefore would like to appeal to the Minister to reconsider my request to grant tax rebates to widowers or divorced men when they employ foreign maids to look after their children. Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to earnestly urge the Minister for Finance to carefully consider the requests I have made. At a time when we are celebrating the 25th anniversary of our independence I hope the Minister would allocate more surplus funds to give to our people in the form of tax concessions. Sir, I support the motion standing in the name of the Minister for Finance.”
“All sorts of pressures and restraints were brought to bear on those who wanted to have three to four children. In spite of these, they still went on to have the third or fourth child. (Maybe this was a foresight on their part or maybe they could foretell the decline in our population and that the Government would make adjustments to the family planning programme and encourage people to have more children.) It turned out that the population increase was not as smooth as was predicted by the Family Planning Board and because of the need to have balanced growth in our population, the Government was obliged to announce more tax incentives to encourage young people to get married and have babies earlier and to have more babies. The tax relief of $1,500 for each child is woefully inadequate in today's society of high living standards. I therefore would like to urge the Minister to consider raising such child relief so that more people would be able to enjoy the benefits of tax concessions which were announced in the budget. (This could also be a form of reward for those couples who were intrepid far-sighted enough to insist on having three or four children.) Mr Speaker, Sir, the second point I would like to touch on was the need for tax rebates for widows and divorced women who have to hire foreign maids to look after their children. At a Parliament sitting this year when I asked the Minister for Labour (in a question for Oral Answer) whether he would consider granting tax rebates to widowers and divorced men when they hired foreign maids to look after their children, he replied that the Minister for Finance would make his stand clear in his budget.”
“A woman who has a second baby before she is 31 years old will be given a special tax rebate. This is a very innovative tax incentive. It shows how the Government is encouraging our young men and women who are of marriageable age to get married and have babies earlier to ensure a normal growth in our population. This is a correct policy measure. But those working women who got married after they were 30 years old and who have already had one child will not be able to benefit if they wish to have one or two more children. This is because when they had their second or third child they would have been well over 31 years old which is the age limit for such tax rebates. There are many reasons why these young couples got married late. Some had to support their aged parents or assist their younger siblings to complete their education. Some could not get married earlier because they did not have the means or for other personal reasons, they had to postpone their marriage until they were 30 years old and had children after that. Though some couples were married at 25 years old they did not have their first baby until they were 31 years old because one of the spouses had suffered certain physiological problems. It is therefore hoped that the Minister will give them special consideration and increasen the age limit from 31 to 35 years. I also hope that a greater tax relief will be given to those couples who are beyond 35 years old and who have three or four children. The tax relief for each child should be increased to a sum higher than $1,500. Mr Speaker, Sir, during the decade from 1970 to 1980 when the family planning programme was in full swing, all married couples were urged to stop at two.”
“Without shirking its responsibilities, the Government has embarked on the course of privatising certain departments and services which have been under their charge, in order to earn more profits. On the contrary, the Government has always tried its best to serve the people, to govern the country well and to ensure the prosperity and progress of our nation. The various tax incentives and tax rebates contained in the budget show that as long as our economy continues to grow and whenever conditions permit, the Government will inject some of our budget surpluses into our economy by way of tax rebates and tax concessions to further stimulate our economic growth while, at the same time, return more money into the hands of the people for them to decide how to spend it. The reserves accumulated by the Government over the years are intended to ensure that our nation and people have enough means and financial resources to deal with emergency situations, such as an economic recession or a downturn in our economy, so that we have something to fall back on. It is a philosophy of taking measures to deal with any untoward eventuality. However, if we want to convince our people that the greater their contributions towards the development of our country, the greater will be their shares in the fruits of their labour, then we must make sure that we have to be cautious in implementing certain policies. Full attention must be given to the details of policy implementation. Also, greater considerations should be given to their sensitivities when these policies affect them. Mr Speaker, Sir, while most of the people react favourably to the budget, I still have two observations to make and I hope the Minister will take note of them. First, tax incentives on procreation.”
“However, Singaporeans would have a little more to celebrate if the Budget had also addressed my wish list which is more than the nuts and bolts of an equation on revenue and expenditure. 12.57 pm Mr Teo Chong Tee (Changi)( In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise to support the Minister for Finance's Budget. The budget which comprise a series of tax incentives and tax rebates has brought joy to the people of Singapore and is well received by them. I appreciate very much the sound and prudent budget put forward by the Minister. The various tax incentives will surely help to promote our economic growth. At the same time, the budget also takes cognizance of the livelihood of our people and will surely benefit them. I hope such tax measures will be further improved on and that more of them will be forthcoming to benefit our people. Mr Speaker, Sir, after studying this year's budget, our people will be able to see clearly and, from their personal experience, realize how the PAP Government in the past 25 years has made sacrifices and contributions towards making Singapore a well-governed country. Not only is the Government far-sighted in carrying out long term plans and sound financial policy so as to promote all-embracing economic developments, it has also formulated a comprehensive programme to lead our people towards a better life and our nation towards great heights. Mr Speaker, Sir, budget has come at a very opportune moment and has shown that the Government is not merely interested in accumulating reserves and that the various Government ministries are not merely interested in collecting more revenues, earning more surpluses or levying all kinds of taxes.”
“These multinational corporations are not only a source of national strength and pride, it in a way creates space by offering employment to their nationals outside Switzerland. To tap the world market, most countries must rely on the larger enterprises, especially the MNCs. Singapore should follow that route. It can do so by stimulating the creation of MNCs through fiscal measures and offer incentives for Singapore companies to go overseas. We may do so on a selective basis by targeting the industry and the size of the corporation which it wants to encourage. The Minister could have announced the groundwork for such a development for Singapore - or perhaps he already has a master plan but is keeping it very close to his chest. However, the Budget does not outline any such fiscal measures to develop our own MNCs or to create the environment for our larger corporations to launch more effective forays into the international market and carve a niche for themselves internationally. We have our Yeo Hiap Sengs and F & Ns who have achieved some measure of success in selling their goods abroad, and establishing manufacturing plants in other countries. But are they MNCs? Are they selling franchise abroad and making significant inroads into other countries? Are they on their way to becoming the Coca-Colas and Pepsi-Colas of Singapore? In my view, Sir, on their own, they are not. But together, they have considerable muscle and clout, which make this possible. Could the Minister help to bring this about by perhaps creating a tax structure for some of our larger companies to merge and pool their resources for faster growth in the international market? Let me end, Sir, by thanking the Minister for his celebration Budget.”
“It is timely, as we enter the 1990s, to review the entire entertainment tax system and set as a national goal the development of the performing arts and better recrea- tional services. We should place such projects on the same plane as our economic development. It should be conceivable that we accord to the industry the same pioneer status tax incentives and development assistance that we accord businesses under our economic development plan. Apart from raising the quality of life in Singapore, we would be developing yet another service industry which will be another source of revenue for Singapore. To encourage big corporation sponsorships to provide more funds for the arts and recreational activities, the Government could make sponsorship even more attractive. One way is the introduction of double taxation relief for those contributions for sponsorship of such activities. Other ways could be devised as well, so that such companies contribute not merely as a public relations measure but to do so because of greater commitment towards the national goal of raising the quality of life in Singapore. To create space outside Singapore, the Minister may like to fashion some incentives for private enterprises to invest overseas. Such incentives are for the creation of large recreational projects which may be enjoyed by Singaporeans. Hence, instead of just urging Singaporeans to create space outside Singapore, the Government must take a lead and the offer of incentives is a clear indication of the Government's intent. Wish No. 2 Sir, the Switzerland of today has a number of well-known multinationals in the food, medical, industrial and consumer goods industries.”
“Lest I be accused of being too critical, I shall respectfully submit for the Minister's consideration what I shall call my wish list. Wish No. 1 This concerns the quality of life in Singapore. Now that we have provided the incentives for our population to procreate, how about making life and living more creative for the offspring? Singaporeans today enjoy one of the highest standards of living in the world, at least materially. They have comfortable homes, abundant food, good educational, health and other social services, an efficient transportation system, more recreational facilities, easily available swimming pools in housing estates, our own symphony orchestra, Swing Singapore and more entertainment outlets. Yet, we hear the oft-repeated remark - "nothing much to do in Singapore". This is due in no small way to rising affluence and more free time. Our leaders speak of creating space outside Singapore, yet the 1990 Budget does not provide us with such a blue print. Allow me to comment on some areas which go towards creating a better quality of life. Performing Arts I would like to direct the Minister's attention to the entertainment industry. Taxes on the performing arts and those engaged in it have remained largely unchanged over the years, though the hefty entertainment duty on each ticket sold has been reduced to 10%. Due to our small market, impresarios and other entertainment companies have to incur large costs to bring in foreign entertainers. Coupled with other costs and imponderables, it makes these ventures highly hazardous for those in the industry. A number of publicised failures suggest that we may not be doing enough to promote this area of our leisure pursuits or cultural life.”
“Otherwise, such dual roles can give the public and international businesses wrong signals, eg, that such organisations, because they are headed by a senior civil servant, are therefore special. They may be perceived as enjoying special privileges and clout and we may not be able then to ensure fair competition and improve efficiency in our economy. Vision of 1999 As this is 1990, and we have a special date with 1999, I was expecting more from the Budget in directing our efforts to reach our vision of 1999. Hence, I cannot in all honesty call our Budget for 1990 a creative one. If anything, we may at best call it a procreative budget, but not something that takes us beyond 1990 and into the 1990s. While the Budget and tax packages reflect the buoyant mood of our economy and country, it lacks specific direction, especially as it is the first year of our entry into the 1990s. This is, we are told, the decade when Singapore is supposed to achieve the status of a developed country, and achieve the standard of living of the Switzerland of today. There is, I submit, a lack of strategic direction in trying to attain that state, or to fashion Singapore after the economy and standard of living of the Swiss. There seems to be a lack of the master plan for achieving that status and making Singapore an even better place to live in. The 1990 Budget does not lay the foundation or structure for promotion of that society. We have entered that phase in our nation's history when our minds turn from the basics of making a living to the arts and to a better quality of life in all its tangible and intangible forms. The Budget is preoccupied with procreation in industry and in the bedroom, but forgets to prolong the pleasure that should follow after that.”
“Besides the statutory boards, there are a number of Government-owned companies which are suitable for privatisation. The free market principles have served us well and the path we have followed should be less government where less is needed, and government only when it is sorely needed. Privatisation of our large Government corporations has many benefits: removal of the government as a backstop against failure is more likely than not to improve efficiency and provide incentive for profit. But of greater importance is the floodgate which such a move could release: we will be providing the environment for them to move abroad to sell their services and expertise. Some of our statutory boards, like the Jurong Town Corporation and the Port of Singapore Authority, are already doing so. These large corporations have the expertise and the capability to market themselves abroad and provide a valuable service to other countries. We should provide the necessary incentives and create the scenario for them to do so. Privatisation is one such way. Infusion of managers from the private sector, imposition of a corporate tax structure on statutory boards similar to the private sector, are bound to make them more competitive and accountable. If private enterprises could be allowed to enter the areas currently monopolised by such statutory boards, we lay the groundwork for greater competition, efficiency and profitability, all to the good of our country in the long run. Privatisation will also allow some of our senior civil servants, who are heading such statutory boards on corporations to become captains of industry, and move out of the civil service structure.”
“In 1986, the Minister, in reducing the rates of corporate tax, expounded the principle that the top rate should be in line with the personal income tax. It is surprising to me that the Minister has not sought to standardise the maximum rate of personal income tax from 33% to 31% now that corporate tax has been reduced by another 1% to 31%. This 2% disparity may encourage businessmen and other professionals to resort to tax avoidance measures so as to avoid paying the extra 2% in personal tax. Perhaps it is time for the Government to review the entire tax structure. Such annual largesse, be it 5% or 2%, while welcomed, also gives cause for uncertainty as to what the Minister might design to distribute the following year. Cost of Doing Business The Budget has proved painless for the business community. However, the cost of doing business has gone up in recent years -what with higher office rentals, motor vehicle taxes for both cars and commercial vehicles, higher car parking charges, and higher CPF rates. As costs are already high, the Government should observe caution in implementing the increase in employer's CPF contribution in July, to ensure it does not damage our international competitiveness as a business centre. In this respect, Sir, I welcome the relaxation on the employment of foreign workers. This not only reduces the cost of doing business but actually makes business much easier to do. Without workers, doing business in Singapore is difficult. The Minister has announced his intention to focus on the private sector as an engine for further growth in Singapore. Although he has reinstated his intention, it should have broached further on the subject of privatisation.”