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 7 of 17.
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise to support the Bill which gives JTC some flexibility in its operations. But I would like the Minister to exercise some caution in allowing JTC subsidiary companies to invest abroad. I have a contrary view on this. I am not sure whether the JTC has the culture, manpower or the expertise to invest abroad. The conditions in countries overseas are quite different. Our laws are very definite. Our people in JTC know what they are doing in Singapore. But in China or in India, the rules and laws are not that precise. Here, we have a situation where the JTC is allowed, of course, with the Minister's approval, not just equity participation but also allowed to guarantee loans. This is a very serious matter. Because in the case of a major political upheaval, the Government could be placed in a very embarrassing position. I would prefer a provision to allow JTC to set up subsidiaries which will work in conjunction with Government-linked companies as an investor, and provide the expertise, rather than be a direct investor and guaranteeing loans in the development projects. I would like the Minister to keep that in mind and give this House a suitable response.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, like Assoc. Prof. Woon, I support this Bill. It minimises a lot of wastage. I would like the Minister to clarify on the question of the full financial statement that is requested by shareholders. Currently, under the present regulations, the report is received a certain number of days or period before the calling of the Annual General Meeting. But this regulation is not very clear. Because when a shareholder opts in to receive a report, will there be time for him to receive the report and analyze the report before attending the Annual General Meeting? The provision is not very clear as it says that the company is obliged to do that before the Annual General Meeting. There is no point in getting a report after the Annual General Meeting.”
“Sir, I will make it very brief. The present Home Protection Insurance Scheme only applies to HDB mortgages. There is a growing band of Singaporeans who are owning private property and I feel that it is about time that the CPF Board re-considered allowing this scheme to be extended to private house owners for the very simple reason that they are CPF contributors. At the same time, also, many of these private house owners are HDB upgraders and they may not be aware that they are supposed to take up private insurance policy to cover their mortgages.”
“Sir, can I speak on my amendment for 5 minutes?”
“Sir, an elderly constituent of mine was served with a legal letter claiming for unpaid hospital bill some 2-3 months ago. The son of this particular person has used up all his Medisave to support his parent. On top of that, I think he has paid in additional cash to pay up the bill. Despite that, he was served with a bill from a large very well-known private legal firm. This is a very worrying development. We always profess that no Singaporean will be deprived of medical treatment by the Government. And here, we have a particular instance of a patient's son using his Medisave and additional cash, and yet for the balance of the bill he has been served with a legal letter. There are two aspects of this case which bothers me. Firstly, to what extent has the hospital made efforts to study the background of the case to see how this patient can be assisted? We always claim that in hardship cases, the bills could be waived. I do not know to what extent this has been done. Secondly, I think it affects the image of the Government. It is lamentable that the Government has to resort to using a private legal firm to actually make claims for unpaid bills. It used to be that a bill from the Government is something that the Singaporean worries about. He sees the Member of Parliament and makes attempts to pay up. But now the Government has to use a legal firm. I think it is very bad for the image of the Government. I shall like to know what is the basis for using private legal practitioners to do the job which Government should be doing. At the same time, will the Minister consider reviewing this policy and do away with using private legal practitioners?”
“Sir, thank you very much for giving me the opportunity to speak on the topic which I have raised under the same cut, ie, the question of economic forecasting. Since 1985, when we went into recession, we were told that a new econometric model has been implemented in MTI. But year in year out, we find that we have been under-forecasting the actual performance of our economy. This may come as a pleasant surprise to the population but, for planning purposes, I think it is obvious that accurate forecasting is necessary, both for Government as well as industry. Last year, we forecasted the growth to be around 6% to 8%. At the end of the year we had 10.1%, and that is 40% to 50% off the mark. I wonder if the econometric model is accurate, but the Ministry is moderating the numbers. Or is it that the numbers are not accurate at all, in which event, we should not spend money and waste our time having a Statistics Department and spend money on personnel? Maybe, the Minister can enlighten us on why is it that the econometric model is so way out of line, or is it that the Government is overly cautious in presenting the forecast?”
“Sir, I have a number of questions for the Minister of State. First, when did the Ministry start using the services of private legal practitioners to assist in debt collection? Second, what is the basis for deciding which legal firm should be used? And, lastly, what are the criteria for referring these cases to private legal practitioners for debt collection?”
“I am sorry I have to correct this point, Sir. Perhaps the Minister will confirm this ? but I will raise a Question in a future sitting ? that interest rates on housing loans are not effective interest rates.”
“If the Minister checks with the MAS officials he will find that the rates charged by banks on housing loans are not effective interest rates because they charge on an annual rest basis divided by 12 months, whereas effective interest rates mean on a monthly-rest basis.”
“Sir, the question of effective interest rates has been raised several times with the Minister. Many Singaporeans are house-owners and today banks are not charging effective interest rates, despite what the Minister has said. Would the Minister at least look into making sure that banks charge effective interest rates or inform consumers that they are charging effective interest rates?”
“To make sure that my children, my son, can be where I am today, and hopefully, making further advances is the issue that Singaporeans have to address. Sir, there is only one point I would like to make on this benchmark and that relates to the inclusion of the share option scheme. Share option varies widely and the benchmark will have been more precise if it had been based on basic pay. Forget about the discount. Why should the Minister's pay be worked on a discount? If that is the Minister's pay, it should be based accordingly. This is an important approach because when the variability is high, in good years there can be a very big jump in salaries. Then the Government will be faced with a problem of whether it is politically correct to adjust accordingly. In other words, can a Minister's salary jump up 40% in a year when private sector salaries go up by only 7%? I think this is an issue which the Government should address. Will it then be a rubber benchmark? When 40% jump is high, there will be a bigger discount. This will not be a politically wise approach to adopt. This is why I favour a benchmark without the share options, but a benchmark based on salaries. I hope the Government will take this into account. I urge this House to reject the amendment standing in the name of Mr Low Thia Khiang, Sir. Mr Speaker: Can I remind Members that we are not debating the substantive motion and they should therefore confine their remarks to the amendment proposed by Mr Low.”
“You say, "Look, if the job can cost me a lot one way or the other, that person can make me a lot of money or can also be costly to the company, you have to adopt the value for money approach." If there is someone you trust and has a good track record, you have to pay a premium. This is what it is all about - value for money. Or would you entrust that particular job to someone who claims he can do the job but comes from a background which you think is dubious? Therefore, I think this value for money approach must also be adopted when we address this issue of Ministerial salaries. Let us leave aside the personalities, leave aside what is the number of hours the Ministers have to put in the job. I think these are all irrelevant issues. The Prime Minister made it very clear yesterday that to spend $20 million to govern Singapore, produce the result that we have every year since 1985, means we have to address the issue of how much money should we pay to maintain such a system. How much more money should we pay versus what we have to live through in a different country where corruption is rife, there is civil strife and problems in society and the future of our children in doubt? In other words, when a society makes progress we see there is potential for our children. If there is no hope for our children when the society is corrupt and only those who are well-connected can make it to the top, I cannot see why we should support such a system. So I urge this House and all Singaporeans that when they look at ministerial salaries, they must look at it from the point of view of what are the consequences, and forget about how much we pay an individual Minister. To me, to pay $20 million to keep this Government going is really, I agree with the Prime Minister, very small beer.”
“In France today, two Ministers have been arrested for corruption. As a French citizen today, how much should you pay the Ministers? And this is happening not just in France and the UK, it happens in Italy as well. What is the price to make sure that our political leaders govern us and take the best interest of the people into account? In many parts of Asia today, if you are a citizen of that country, you ask yourself whether your children have a fair chance of making it in society. I come from a poor background. I feel that our society has given me the chance, Mr Speaker, to be where I am today, because we believe in the system of meritocracy. If you are a citizen of another Asian country, perhaps you will ask yourself if your children are going to have a chance to makr it in life in 10 years' time? Because I am not connected to any powerful political figure or anyone of influence, is there a chance for my children? I think if you are a citizen of that particular country, you will also ask yourself how much you would pay to have a system like Singapore's whereby anyone can make it to the top as long as one is prepared to work and has the intelligence. If the system is not fair and not equitable, there is no way for an ordinary citizen to make it to the top. That is why in the private sector, whenever I employ managers, I adopt the philosophy of value for money. If you have a job whereby the person is entrusted with heavy responsibilities or that person is going to be your manager in a different country and whatever decisions he makes will cost you a lot of money one way or the other, you adopt the value for money approach.”
“Sir, I am speaking on the amendment. Sir, I shall like to ask the House to reject the amendment of by the Opposition Member, Mr Low Thia Khiang. The issue of Ministerial salaries is not a new subject. This subject was discussed very extensively in 1989 and we went to the people in 1991 and this issue was again discussed a few months ago on the salary revision for 1994. That revision was based on income data that were already two years old. The Government then felt that it was necessary not to implement the full changes as reflected in the income of the private sector at that particular time. Sir, I think this issue will always be an election issue. My colleague, Mr Peter Sung, has already mentioned that the Opposition Member will be able to raise this issue in this House at ny time by way of Question for Oral Answer or a Motion. There is really no need to postpone a decision on this White Paper. I am in support of the White Paper. In the last salary revision debate in 1993, I suggested that the Government set up a commission to review Ministers' salaries on a regular basis. At that time, the Government's reply was that it was hard to sell it to the people. The benchmark has been set, and this benchmark is an idea which I support. It is close to what I then asked for in the form of a commission. The question of Ministerial salaries cannot be measured in terms of hours put in by the Ministers. It is a very difficult topic. I think what the people really have to ask themselves is this, if today you are a citizen in a developed country like France, or a developed country like Great Britain, you will ask yourself: how much money would I pay the Ministers to make sure that they keep out of trouble, to keep out of corruption?”
“Sir, I support the original motion standing in the name of the Prime Minister.”
“In general, I support this change except that I have to study some of the details. I would like to ask the Minister to speed up the information process as to how he intends to establish a register. Currently, there are 93,000 applicants who want HDB flats. And I think there may be a frantic rush and creates fear in the people. Given the fact that the scheme is not fully announced, they do not know how to go about registering and so on. So I would suggest to the Minister to speed up the process of getting the information out to them.”
“Can I bring the Minister back to my original question, ie, how does the HDB set the mixture of flats in a new town or new estate? Is it based on demand?”
“Does this imply that in future sale of resale flats, those upgraders will have some difficulty in selling their smaller flats in view of the high demand for larger flats?”
“Sir, I would like to ask the Minister whether in setting prices, the HDB takes into account the latest transacted price as in the market.”
“Sir, has the action of the Ministry resulted in a rise in prices for such units?”
“Sir, will the Minister say that the higher demand for open car parks is a result of the lower charges for open car parks at the moment and not because of utility? Mr Lim Hng Kiang: When we first introduced car parking charges, the main principle was cost recovery. That is why car parking charges for surface car parks were set lower than that for multi-storey car parks. Now we accept the other principles involved, ie, utility, demand and supply. And we will have to go towards a more differentiated way of charging car parks. HDB'S SCHEME TO REPURCHASE 3-ROOM FLATS 14. Dr S. Vasoo asked the Acting Minister for National Development whether the Housing and Development Board's scheme to repurchase 3-room flats is being actively pursued and whether the response to the scheme has been so far positive.”
“Will the Minister confirm that they are not using purely economic rationale for moving up or reducing car park charges? In effect, what we have done in the last exercise is that we have reduced the charges for covered car parks relative to that for open car parks. By not raising the covered car park charges, we are actually lowering those charges. In other words, the rationale is not purely economic. That is my question.”
“Sir, car parking is part and parcel of the infrastructure. Will the Minister confirm that recently the car park charges for open car parks were raised, but not for the multi-storey car parks?”
“In view of the Minister's reply, will he instruct the Telecommunication Authority of Singapore to be more flexible or lenient in its interpretation of the monopoly granted to Singapore Telecom? This is in view of the wider picture that Singapore must maintain a technological lead in this particular area.”
“The design-and-build scheme has both features of cheap land and good design by the private sector. Naturally, it encourages a very high demand. In view of this, do you not think that it is high time we started to move away from this? This land can be tendered out to the private sector.”
“Sir, in view of the fact that land is being tendered out by the HDB to the private sector, is it necessary for us to continue with this design-and-build scheme?”
“Will the Ministry be more liberal in considering the applications of these people if the number of relapse cases is very small?”
“Sir, will the Minister indicate whether there are any relapse cases out of the 88 ex-drug addicts who were given licences? In other words, were any of these licences withdrawn since then? Mr Mah Bow Tan: I do not have any records so far of any relapse cases among the 88 ex-drug addicts. If there have been any relapse cases, they would be drawn to my attention. But so far, I have not received any such evidence.”
“Sir, how will the Government favour first-time house owners over those who are upgrading from a HDB flat and who have already taken advantage of the Government's subsidy? In other words, how does the Government favour the first-time house owners in this exercise?”
“Sir, will the Senior Parliamentary Secretary say that the fact that the level of demand is so high for these flats is an indication that the prices are justified?”
“Does it mean that the Ministry's policy is too liberal with upgraders for HDB flats?”
“The very fact that there is public perception that prices are rising and the constraint in supply is making the situation worse. In other words, with rising prices, a limited number of new flats, and more people jumping into the queue for flats, how do we find ways to make sure that we build enough flats to meet the demand and not to set targets like 30,000 flats, which is way out of line with public demand.”
“Sir, for the building programme, how is the number of flats decided? Is it based on the demand or is it based on some criteria set by the Ministry? From my understanding, the demand is very high at the moment, but we are building only 30,000 flats a year for the next three years.”
“Sir, there are reports that the policemen are not particularly sympathetic, especially when the spouse making the report is a lady.”
“Sir, will the Minister define what is "serious hurt"? The second question is: Are all perpetrators of domestic violence given a mandatory reprimand or warning or counselling?”
“Sir, I would like the Minister to clarify whether there is any loss to Singapore if Singapore is not given the opportunity to hold the first World Trade Organisation's meeting in Singapore.”
“Sir, the question I want to ask the Minister is this. The limit of $3 million was set sometime ago and property prices have gone up. The $3 million house which Dr Wang mentioned is now worth $6 million. So the family will still have to dispose of the house in case the owner dies. The aim of the $3 million limit was to prevent a family from disposing of the property. Dr Richard Hu Tsu Tau: That may be true. But I think for those who own properties exceeding $3 million, the estate probably has a good deal more in other assets. For people in that category, surely they cannot only own one house. We have estimated that only 11,000 or 1.7% of all the houses and properties in Singapore are worth $3 million or more. Therefore, we are talking about a very small group of people who are generally very wealthy and therefore need not require additional help, I hope. SIGNING OF URUGUAY ROUND OF GENERAL AGREEMENT ON TARIFFS AND TRADE (Significance for ASEAN Free Trade Area and Singapore) 16. Dr Kanwaljit Soin asked the Minister for Trade and Industry what is the significance of the signing of the Uruguay Round of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade for the ASEAN Free Trade Area and Singapore.”
“I have two points for the Minister. First, these curved roads which are banked for certain speeds. Will the Minister indicate what are the speeds? Or does he have road signs to indicate at what speed one should not go round the curved roads? As for the flashing green man, the system which I have just mentioned, I think the Minister is ignoring reality. People tend to rush across the road when the flashing green man is still on. To me, that poses a lot of danger. So something has to be done about it. Make it a flashing red man instead of a green man, for example. Otherwise, people will still dash across as long as it is green.”
“Otherwise, the car tends to over-run to the other lane. When that happens on the main roads, buses coming behind the cars result in a dangerous situation. The last item is the improvement in the design of the red-man-green-man traffic light system. Presently, the green man system suffers from the fact that pedestrians are not able to discern when or which phase the green man they are on. Is it the early phase of the flashing man or is it the later phase? The pedestrian may make an attempt to cross the road when the green man is actually towards the end of the phase. And, of course, when he rushes across, this causes congestion and sometimes also poses a danger to the pedestrian himself. Can the Ministry look into modifying this system? Instead of a green man system, it could be modified into a numerical countdown system. When we have this system, pedestrians will be able to discern when it is safe or not safe to cross the road. Instead of racing across the road, they will then decide whether it is safe or otherwise. In that way, hopefully, it will lead to improvement in safety as well as ease traffic congestion.”
“Sir, I think I can speak without reservation that Singapore has one of the best road systems in this part of the world. Personally, I feel that the PWD deserves a pat on the back. Actually, I am prompted to speak on this topic as a result of the unfortunate death and accident of a National Junior College student some months ago. I am concerned that such an unfortunate accident can happen and wish the Minister to outline the measures which the PWD is taking to make sure that roads and pedestrian walkways outside school compounds are made safe for our students. These particular areas suffer from congestion and are usually very crowded at peak periods, especially during the periods before and after school hours. Now that the road building programme is maturing, I shall like the PWD to look into some of the other measures which I notice will hopefully improve our road traffic safety and traffic flow. The first item I have in mind is the filter lanes into and out of expressways. From my own experience, some are found to be too short. And when they are short, getting in and out of the expressway is a hazard to roadusers. I notice that the PWD is already making some changes to those filter lanes coming in and out of the PIE, but there are also others which need to be studied. A number of curved roads going out of the expressway at the moment are banked incorrectly. And on a wet day, one will find that one's car turning down the curve tends to slide outwards because the road is not properly banked. Another item of concern to me is about minor roads which are built at an acute angle to the maun road. These minor roads pose a serious hazard for vehicles turning left from the main road into the minor roads at an acute angle. Cars have to slow down literally to a stop.”
“May I beg your indulgence, Sir. In other words, as long as this is not changed, right now CPF members have no choice. On that note, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.”
“Sir, the Minister has just mentioned a moment ago, in reply to Dr Ow, that some funds are too small for this to be allowed. In other words, he is encouraging members of small balances in the Ordinary Account, not in the Medisave (I have never intended to talk about Medisave at all), to invest in, say, a three-year fixed deposit with a bank. If he allows it, will he make amendments or changes to the Basic Investment Scheme then?”
“I do not think this is necessarily a good suggestion, by just challenging all members to put their money in the stock market. Not all CPF members are fully apprised of the workings of the stock market. The recent downturn in the stock market in January has hurt a number of CPF investors who are not familiar with the workings of the stock market. If the Minister is prepared to pay a higher rate of return in this way, it will also go towards some way of rewarding certain groups of Singaporeans who are more conservative in nature and are mindful of making sure that their Retirement Funds are not easily squandered or lost in the stock market. I express this concern because by encouraging more members to go into the stock market without sufficient knowledge is not necessarily a good political move. The recent downturn in the market has shown this to be the case.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head S of the Main Estimates be reduced by $10 in respect of Code SA 1500. Sir, I welcome the Government's intention to pay the extra 1.25% interest on the Retirement Fund and the Special Fund. More importantly, I welcome the Government's explicit recognition that certain parts of the CPF fund should be paid a higher return than what members are currently getting. However, since these funds which are locked up in the CPF are very long term in nature, I think the Minister should consider pegging this additional 1.25% against, for example, three years' fixed deposit rate of the bank rather than on the savings' rate, which, of course, is very short term in nature. Alternatively, the Retirement Fund which is set aside perhaps should be managed or invested separately by the Government instead of being loaned to the HDB. In this way, if these funds are managed separately and invested in instruments with higher returns, I think members will get much better return on their CPF funds than what they are currently getting. By getting a higher rate of return on this Retirement Fund, it will also help the Government to achieve the aim of getting more Singaporeans to meet the new Minimum Sum. At a wider level, I should also like the Minister to consider giving this higher rate of return to all CPF members who are risk-averse and not inclined to speculate in the stock market. I know the Minister's stock answer and I hope he would give a better reply this time. He has always challenged members who are not happy with the CPF rate of return to put their money into the stock market if they want a higher rate of return.”
“Some of them also made some suggestions, for example, raising the interest rate for CPF deposits and specifying the components of the Minimum Sum. These suggestions have been accepted. I hope that the Government will also consider the other suggestions, for example, allowing part of the Minimum Sum to be used to pay for insurance premiums and allowing tax incentives for topping up the parents' CPF accounts. I also agree with Mr Chng Hee Kok's suggestion yesterday that the tax incentive be extended to topping up of the spouses' CPF accounts. From the feedback received, most people are concerned with three points in its implementation. First, the lower-income members are worried that they may not be able to accumulate the $40,000 cash component within the next 10 years. I hope the Minister will accept the recommendations of Dr John Chen and Encik Othman Haron Eusofe, ie, to provide a top-up scheme for the lower income group in respect of the Minimum Sum. Second, some CPF members who are close to 55 years are unhappy with the new measures. They are unhappy because they have already made plans for the amount that they are going to withdraw at the age of 55. With this new measure, they can only withdraw half of their CPF savings. Third, for the higher income group, they are not happy because they feel that the Government has been interfering too much, and assuming that they are unable to manage their own money. I hope that the Minister will reply to these three points. Furthermore, some people are again worried that the CPF withdrawal age will be extended. Others are harping on the same tune that the CPF Board has no money and hence, the Minimum Sum needs to be raised. I hope the Minister will give his assurance and clarification on these concerns. 1.45 pm”
“One, the impact of the increase in CPF Minimum Sum on the use of CPF for purposes like housing, investment and Share Ownership Top-Up schemes. A CPF member has about 40% of his gross salaries each month in his CPF account. We know that there are sub-accounts in his CPF balances. May I know from the Minister how is the 40% monthly contribution being allotted to the various sub-accounts? Will there be any effect on the CPF members with regard to its use? The second question is that there may be elderly persons with children who have got substantial CPF balances in the children's accounts. Is it possible for the Minister to consider allowing the children to transfer the accounts to their parents so that the parents can withdraw the money that they have and to use the children's accounts as their account. Dr Ow Chin Hock (Leng Kee)( In Mandarin): Sir, I support the raising of the CPF Minimum Sum because this is consistent with the basic objective of CPF, ie, to ensure that there is protection for the members after their retirement. Moreover, with increase im the average lifespan and extension of retirement age, we must make preparation for a rainy day and to protect ourselves against any adverse effect that may result from the aging population. With inflation, the present Minimum Sum of $34,600 may not be adequate to sustain a basic living 10 years from now. Therefore, I would like to ask the Minister for Labour what is the inflation rate, in percentage terns, that has been used in calculating the Minimum Sum. During the debate on the Presidential Address, I reported that in a dialogue session held on 12th January, 1994, the vast majority of the participants agreed, in principle, to the raising of the Minimum Sum.”
“Sir, I beg to differ. They are all related. The point is whether the Minister of State will confirm that not all participants in all these activities really enjoy the benefits, because they had enough of dinners and golf tournaments. But because of insufficient financing from the Government they feel that it is their social duty to take part in these tournaments. I do not see the need for the income tax department to be so petty on such an issue. Perhaps the law should be revised. Cdre Teo Chee Hean: Sir, the two issues are quite separate. Whether or not Government funding is sufficient or not is a separate issue from whether or not income or donations should be exempt from tax. The principle for exempting donations from tax is based on whether or not any benefit is derived from such a donation, and the deduction of the benefit derived from the donation constitutes the amount that is tax exempt. That is a fair principle. ESTIMATES OF EXPENDITURE FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR 1ST APRIL, 1994 TO 31ST MARCH, 1995 Order read for consideration in Committee of Supply [6th Allotted Day]. [Mr Speaker in the Chair] Head S (cont.) - Resumption of Debate on Question [16th March, 1994], "That the total sum to be allocated for Head S of the Main Estimates be reduced by $100." - [Encik Othman bin Haron Eusofe]. Question again proposed. Mr Loh Meng See (Kampong Glam GRC): Sir, with regard to the recent announcement by the Minister for Labour on the adjustments to be made to the Minimum Sum Scheme, I am in full support of the adjustments. I am also in support of the requirement to have the CPF members set aside at least half of the value in cash even if he has a property. Sir, I would like to raise two concerns by CPF members.”
“Sir, will the Minister of State clarify whether all these fund-raising tournaments are really necessary if the Government has provided full funding for the schools and other charities? Cdre Teo Chee Hean: I think that is quite a separate principle from whether or not income like this is brought to tax.”
“Sir, the Minister of State is clarifying that if a person who takes part in a golf tournament and refuses to play, he can claim for a full tax exempt receipt. Is that correct? Cdre Teo Chee Hean: If he does not partake of the benefits, then he claims full tax exemption.”
“However, in recognition of the fact that the amount paid for such an event invariably has an element of donation, the school is allowed to issue a tax exempt receipt for the contribution after deducting the value of the benefits enjoyed by the donor. If, however, a donor turns down the benefits offered, he can claim a tax exempt receipt for the full amount donated.”