Edwin Tong Chun Fai
Singapore
“These questions have been answered in the reply to Questions Nos 26 to 31 for Oral Answer on today's Order Paper. [Please refer to "Addressing Issues Identified in Legal Profession Sustainability Study", Official Report, 7 July 2026, Vol 96, Issue 32, Written Answers to Questions for Oral Answer not Answered by End of Question Time secti…”
“I am answering in my capacity as the Minister charged with the responsibility for the People's Association. The Community Development Council (CDC) Vouchers Scheme was first introduced in June 2020 during the COVID-19 pandemic with two key objectives: one, to help Singaporean households cope with daily expenses; and two, to support hawker…”
“If the incident is a result of bilateral obligations relating to data protection and inviolability of equipment not being complied with, then the Government will consider all available legal and diplomatic options, in accordance with the bilateral RTS Link treaties, as well as the relevant international law.”
“In 2024, community sentences under part 17 of the Criminal Procedure Code 2010 (CPC) were imposed in 86 criminal cases handled by the State Courts.”
“It is a five-minute journey across both ways; and with the availability of closed circuit television coverage and the real-time monitoring that will be done by the officers on both sides, we did not think that this will be necessary.”
“The Ministry of Law will provide an oral reply to this Parliamentary Question, together with other Parliamentary Questions which have been filed on this topic at the next available opportunity.”
The complete record
Every one of 2,221 lines we hold for Edwin Tong Chun Fai, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 44 of 45.
“In his Address, the President has also emphasised several times the need to strengthen our safety nets to make sure that the vulnerable and disadvantaged Singaporeans are well cared for. I agree wholeheartedly. But this means that our social programmes, which already play a key role in our fiscal policy, will have to play an even bigger part. To sustain these programmes, Government spending will inevitably have to increase over the next decade, and probably beyond that. And this leads me to what I regard as one of the key aspects of the President's Address during the reopening of Parliament. There are two points. First, each of us in this House has a duty, and I quote, "to ensure that our social spending can be sustained, and that we have enough revenue to balance our Budget". This is echoed by the MOF's Addendum which has stressed that we must be anchored in a system of sound and sustainable finances as Government spending goes up. Second, this increased social spending "must be matched, and I quote again, "by individual and community effort and initiative". More than once, the President has stressed that even as we continue to do more for the vulnerable, we must also give people the means and the incentive to help themselves, to preserve and build dignity and self-worth. Those are values which have formed the bedrock of our social programmes over the years, and we Page: 79 must continue to place them at the front and centre of our programmes as we advance. Sir, let me elaborate on this with a few other points. First, we have to learn quickly that there is no free lunch. We cannot just dip into our reserves, like the NIRC, to fund our social spending as if it were a bottomless pit. That would be completely irresponsible.”
“Further measures since then, to safeguard the interests of and give priorities to families with children, singles, divorcees and parents – all issues debated in this House – have all been positive refinements. We have also continued with the restructuring of our economy to spur increased productivity and uplift our workforce, to drive wages up. The transport sector has also been overhauled. There will be more trains and buses, in response to waiting time and Page: 78 overcrowding. There will also be more hospital beds, and healthcare costs will be alleviated by MediShield Life and, of course, the Pioneer Generation Package. There will also be a review of the CPF scheme to improve life annuity schemes. Our children's education choices have been opened up significantly through an assortment of different pathways. But we are far from done and I am sure this House will see and debate further improvements to our policies. Many Singaporeans will, however, agree that we have come a long way. Our Prime Minister, in his first National Day Rally after GE 2011, described issues which Singaporeans face as "a powerful storm causing a difficult ride for all of us – bumpy, stormy and causing anxiety". But I think the steps that have been taken so far have gone a long way towards smoothening that ride. I would add, too, that these measures to improve the lives of Singaporeans did not happen by chance. They happened because we have a Government committed to the constructive politics of proactive consultation, robust debate, and then, most importantly, translating that debate into real tangible outcomes for Singaporeans. That is a real value of having a robust debate. Taking a position in a debate is not a means to an end. This leads me to my second point.”
“At the same time, Singaporeans felt the tangible effects of the influx of foreigners on our shores, competing for space, not only physically in our already limited common spaces but also on our MRT trains and buses, and also for better paying jobs and for places in schools for our children. Our education system, widely regarded as being amongst the best in the world, was also not spared. It was criticised as being too prescriptive, unduly pressurising on our children, too high-stake and not having sufficient pathways. In response, the Government consulted widely with many Singaporeans to understand and embrace these and other issues which Singaporeans cared and were concerned about. Through various platforms like the Our Singapore Conversation, in public forums, in coffee shops, on cyberspace, mainstream and social media, small groups and large groups, these issues were raised and we had robust debates in this House and outside. Many suggestions were given to the front bench on how these issues could be tackled. Some worked very well, some less so. In the end, the result was an array of measures – a broad range of them – which were introduced over the last three years to address and tackle the concerns of Singaporeans on the ground and to improve lives both in the long and short term. Take housing, for example. We have seen broad sweeping changes. In fact, I recall that well before Members of this House had even been sworn in, Minister Khaw and his team had already taken steps to revise the income ceiling upwards for HDB applications, thereby ensuring that more Singaporeans would qualify for HDB housing. As the hon Member Mr Zaqy Mohamad said yesterday, the number of appeals that we see at Meet-the-People Sessions from first-timers has fallen dramatically.”
“Sir, as we embark on the second half of our term and debate the direction of the Government as set out in the President's Address, I think we should get a sense of perspective of where we came from and where we go from here. Allow me, therefore, to start, not with the speech that was delivered by our President two weeks ago, but with his inaugural Address three years ago. In October 2011, just a little more than 30 months ago, there was a broad spectrum of challenges which Singapore and Singaporeans faced at that time. These were significant challenges. Some were easy to solve, some less so. I think it is fair to say that this House had our work cut out for us from day one. In 2011, we had just come off an excellent economic rebound, and quickly moving into more uncertain and increasingly difficult times. Cost of living was on the rise. Singapore's very open economic and geographic position, and the fact that we are not naturally blessed with rich resources, meant that there was little that could be done to curb this rise. The increasing income gap was also a serious challenge, and we had to find ways to sustainably raise wages to bridge the gap and also to deliver specific targeted assistance to the vulnerable groups. In addition, healthcare costs were on the rise. These costs, fuelled by a Page: 77 combination of a shortage of hospital beds and a rapidly ageing population, showed no signs of abating. Home ownership, which signified every Singaporean's tangible stake in Singapore, was a particularly pressing issue. Short supply and long queues meant that many Singaporeans had to delay their plans to marry, settle down and have children. That itself played a part in exacerbating the problems with fertility and a shrinking population that we have.”
“" Madam, the sentiment expressed in this email tells us that the need for this Bill is unarguable. It is absolutely necessary, it is for the protection of people in Singapore, and it is to ensure that we can go about our lives as it is supposed to. With that, Madam, I thank the Minister and his team for introducing this Bill, which I support strongly. Page: 119 5.16 pm”
“It sends a strong message to would-be offenders that we do not tolerate such conduct, which is often perpetrated anonymously and is, indeed, very cowardly. It also provides an assurance to victims of such harassment that they do not necessarily have to go through a long protracted trial, often reliving the same offending material which caused them so much distress in the first place. It is often not a "win" in Court that these victims seek, or even damages which may be awarded later. All they want is for there to be a ready platform which can render access to justice and for the appropriate reliefs to be dispensed quickly. And this I see in the architecture of the current Bill which I strongly support. Madam, before I end, let me just read out from an email that I received from the same resident who saw me six months ago whom I called "Sally". She sent me this email just two days ago, and she said: "Hi Mr Tong, during your house visit on 8 March, you mentioned that this case will be heard in Parliament shortly. We are deeply appreciative and would now like the Government to quickly pass this Bill. The harassment and stalking have caused much anxiety and distress not only for myself but also to my family members, particularly my elderly mother and two young children. Owing to this, our lifestyle and daily routine have changed dramatically. We do not dare to even step out of our house, for fear that we would bump into him. We do not feel safe even at our own doorstep or at our home. Do you know that when we met you at the opening of the garden last weekend, it was also the first time six months after this incident that we dared to even bring our kids downstairs for a stroll and for them to play.”
“Such protection is limited not only in their application but, more importantly, in the range of available remedies:- Indeed, the High Court, in the 2001 Malcomson case, which the hon Member Mr Hri Kumar raised earlier, threw doubt over whether harassment committed over the mobile phone could even amount to an offence under the Miscellaneous Offences Act. Of course, the mobile phone in 2001 – 13 years ago – is quite different from that today, but still. The most recent judicial pronouncement in AXA Insurance, we have heard from other Members, threw doubt as to whether such a law could be found in the annals of the common law and, instead, the High Court Judge invited Parliament to deliberate on it and to decide whether or not, indeed, it would be part of our legislation. If we in this House accept that harassment is anti-social and wrong, then we have an obligation to fill the lacuna in the current state of law and provide for clear parameters on how we view and remedy harassment. Madam, in that context, this Bill is not only timely, it is very necessary. The omnibus legislation on harassment does not just dispel doubts in the law in light of the recent judicial pronouncements for this Bill – the legislation that we now have – and put all the provisions into one convenient place, it actually does Page: 118 much more in at least two further areas. First, it offers a range of remedies which strike at the heart of what distresses the victims most. We have heard other Members deal with the different aspects of the Protection Orders and I would not go into that. Secondly, and perhaps more importantly, the enactment of this Bill as law will signify where we in Singapore choose to stand as a civil society against harassment.”
“They can include creating a fake social media profile on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram or hacking into others' social media accounts to impersonate them and posting scandalous and/or embarrassing content, or simply facilitating "hate-talk" on online forums, all of which can be done not only in minutes but also from the comfort of one's home. We have heard the Minister and several Members detailing anecdotal examples of very devastating tragedies arising from children or youths being unable to handle the distress of the harassment. These examples are very sad Page: 117 but they are also very real. Our children are being exposed to the Internet earlier and earlier. They have grown adept at mastering the computer which has also become easier and easier to manoeuvre. So, in a few clicks, they are well on their way in cyberspace. However, the people they meet there are less forgiving, and our children are not always sufficiently mature to handle this type of distress. I, therefore, see this Bill as a step forward in further protecting our young and vulnerable from cyberbullying and stalking. Which brings me to my next point as to why this Bill is necessary? Currently, the statutory framework is somewhat disparate and piecemeal – with most of the provisions appearing in the Miscellaneous Offences Act and a series of other specialised ones found in other pieces of legislation, such as the Women's Charter, the Moneylenders Act, Computer Misuse and Cyber Security Act, as well as the Penal Code.”
“And of all of these users, a large majority of them are teenagers. The Microsoft survey has been quoted several times and we have seen the ages of the people surveyed. Those are the people who are actively on the Internet four to five hours a day. This rapidly rising trend, coupled with a proliferation of a multitude of different social online platforms, can only mean that cyberbullying, stalking and other types of online harassment will remain a serious concern. Further, the Internet, being what it is, often makes it difficult for posters of online comments or pictures to be traced effectively. The Internet also allows postings to be made anonymously, which we have heard several times from other Members of this House, and studies have shown that this veil of anonymity serves only to embolden perpetrators and bring out the worst in them. Online commentators have called this the "Online Disinhibition Effect". These people who are anonymous are likely to do and say things which they would otherwise not do, if only they had to disclose their real names. In real terms, just in the last decade, Singapore has witnessed a growing trend of cyber bullying amongst youths. Again, we go back to the Microsoft survey which Minister referred to, which, certainly to me, threw up very alarming results about the bullying rates of youths between the ages of eight and 17, and which found Singapore to be second, only behind China in the world, in relation to the rate of cyberbullying amongst youths. Cyberbullying can take place in so many different forms.”
“It transpired that there was a male acquaintance who had been harassing her for the past few months. It started with several emails and text messages. It grew to more than 50 messages a day, often late into the night. And then persistent phone calls. It then progressed to him loitering around her workplace and then her home. He would sometimes drive his car just to be alongside her as she walked home from the MRT. The message that she showed me demonstrated that her stalker knew which childcare centre her daughter was in and had, in fact, seen her that very same day. The stalker's intention was clearly calculated to cause mental and emotional anguish and to cause fear and apprehension that her young daughter could be hurt. And we all know what this can do to a parent of a young child. Madam, this scenario is, unfortunately, not all too uncommon. They often arise from a failed relationship, or an employee who had been let go, or sometimes, having heard the Minister's many different examples, for really no good reason at all. But make no mistake; it is a serious problem. This Bill is, therefore, both a timely and necessary recognition that harassment, bullying and stalking are serious problems which have absolutely no place in the kind of society we want to build. If left unchecked, we can almost certainly expect the pernicious and insidious effects of harassment to get worse. Let me explain that with reference to the growing platform of the Internet. Singapore has one of the highest Internet penetration rates in Asia. We have a Page: 116 penetration rate of 73% and a Facebook penetration of 59%. That means, of the nearly 5.5 million people in Singapore, there are approximately four million Internet users and 3.2 million active Facebook users.”
“Harassment can take many different forms. It can take the form of physical bullying of our children in school, or as cyber bullying in the online space. It can take the form of stalking, again, both the online and the offline versions. Stalking is often characterised by a series of acts, all of which, on their own, can be perfectly legal and infringe no laws, but which can lead to no less distressing outcomes. It can be carried out by and affect many different people from across different walks of life – the young, the old; harassment is often gender-neutral as well. It can also take place in many different places: in the real spaces, such as schools, offices or the home. Or, online, where the space and time continuum merge and remain in posterity, often to devastating adverse outcomes. All of these different forms of harassment are characterised by the intense, often prolonged, hurt and distress suffered by the victim, sometimes with serious, and perhaps, even unintended consequences. Often, it is not only the Page: 115 victim, but also the people and loved ones around the victim, who suffer. More than anything, what is needed in such situations is for the victim to find relief; for quick access to justice and for any offending material, if online, to be taken down quickly. Madam, let me relate a recent incident. About six months ago, a resident came to see me at my MPS. When she saw me, she held out her mobile device and showed me a message. The message read, and I quote, "Saw your lovely daughter in school today. She looks just like you, in her pretty blue dress and matching shoes." To any other mother, this would have been a very nice message to receive. But this resident – let us call her "Sally" – she looked fearful and gave me a very despairing, hunted look.”
“45 pm The other benefit of having the NPCs close to the ground is something which I find quite laudable, which is the use of non-traditional means to also engage the public. I believe some NPCs have their own Facebook pages, and this in turn has assisted with the apprehension of suspected criminals. Some advertisements have been put up on Facebook. The community has also responded with various suggestions and tips. Using that, I think the Police has been able to better apprehend the criminals. Finally, the importance of the community as the key partner of the Police can only grow with time, given the challenges of the increasing changing environment for the Police and crimes being more complex. The trust, confidence and support of the community are critical for the Police to be successful in community policing. To stay effective, Police forces around the world will need to continually evolve in the way they serve and engage the Page: 57 communities and to keep up with the operating landscape. It is in that context that I invite the Deputy Prime Minister to comment on these issues. Community Policing”
“Like Policemen wearing shorts, community policing is actually not new. It has been around for about 30 years, since the early 1980s and it was modelled after the Koban system in Japan. We launched Page: 56 our first neighbourhood Police post in 1983. It was these NPPs which brought the Police closer to the ground, closer to the community and making them more effective as patrols were made on foot, on bicycle and the familiarity of the Policemen and community was seen as an advantage. Over the years, the system has been reviewed to ensure that it is kept up to date and in tandem with the operating environment. In 1997, the NPP system was redesigned to the Neighbourhood Police Centre (NPC) system. The NPCs were empowered with more resources and capabilities for community policing. In May 2012, the transition of the NPC system to the Community Policing System (COPS) was made and this was in response to the changing needs of our population. Under this system, we strengthened localised crime fighting capabilities with the creation of crime strike force in each NPC. The officers in the crime strike force are familiar with local terrain, and therefore more effective and responsive than tackling crime. A community policing unit was also set up to deepen our community engagement and Police Officers now interact more with residents in these local communities. Today, I think COPS has about 20 over presence in the 30-odd NPCs that we have. It has been about two-and-a-half years or so since the programme started. In that respect, I would like the Deputy Prime Minister to comment on whether the results have been encouraging, what improvements, if any, should be made to the system and the extent to which this would be continued to be rolled out to the rest of the NPCs. 1.”
“Madam, I raise these points because all of them require a few challenges to be met by the Home Team: one, the increase in resourcing which Mr Hri Kumar has touched on; and two, the increase in the amount of training to deal with these ever-changing and evolving threats through different means will continue to be a serious challenge to the Home Team. In that context, I would ask the Deputy Prime Minister what MHA is doing to ensure that the Home Team is able to rise to meet these operational demands as well as to remain constantly vigilant and ready to deal with these threats on the horizon which one may not be able to anticipate today. Page: 49 Manpower Adequacy”
“Third, counter-terrorism measures, which Mr Vikram Nair has outlined earlier, I would simply say that the recent apprehension of Masyhadi tells us that extremist terrorism remains a real and potent threat. The underlying structures, which have training camps supporting terrorism, remain in place. Self-radicalisation remains a growing phenomenon and we cannot afford to assume that no terrorist threats will materialise. To deter terrorism in Singapore, we need strong operational capabilities with a variety of different skill sets just to be commensurate with the ever-changing methods used by these small cells to evade detection. Fourth, Madam, on civil defence readiness, a seemingly simple and straightforward issue, but one must look at the underlying numbers as well. We have seen an increase in the emergency ambulance services by 5.3% year to year. But the demand from the elderly alone, which comprises 10.5% of our population, has accounted for 36% of those requests or calls for emergency assistance. That illustrates that there already is and will continue to be, in light of our ageing population, an increased demand on the resources of the civil defence operators. Finally, on immigration, we have seen in 2013, 203 million travellers cleared for entry into Singapore, a slight increase of about 3.6% compared to 2012. The ICA faces the constant challenge of accommodating these increasing traveller volumes while at the same time having to clear them efficiently and ensure that security is not compromised.”
“That has been the main contributor to the increase in commercial crimes. It has seen a rise from 238 cases in 2012 to 509 cases in 2013, almost more than double the number. Further, there have also been significant increases in multiple payment online purchase scams involving culprits who posed as sellers of various products and advertising them on the Internet and failing to deliver at all. The number of cases demonstrates that the Internet-savvy audience, typically the young, the vulnerable, had been targeted and we have to pay particular attention to how these crimes continue to evolve on the Internet. We have also seen in the last year how various high-profile prominent websites had been hacked into. This hacking into the servers and websites of entities, which are otherwise considered to be the most secure in Singapore if not the world, in a matter of days if not weeks, almost with impunity, makes for interesting news. But they highlight just how much of a threat this can be and how much this will cripple the day-to-day life which relies so much on technology. Second, on the areas of drug enforcement, we have seen how in recent times the number of drug-related arrests has gone up. Just in the month of February 2014 alone, and based on the CNB website, we have seen that in that 28-day period, two-and-a-half kilograms of heroin and more than two kilograms Page: 48 of cannabis were seized, with a street value worth more than hundreds of thousands of dollars. The number of drug abusers arrested has gone up. The number of repeat abusers has gone up. The number of new abusers has gone up.”
“Mdm Chairperson, the crime rate in 2013 fell to 549 cases per 100,000 population and it was the lowest in 30 years. It also fell 4.3% compared to the year before in 2012. But, Madam, these are statistics and numbers. These are not numbers that we can afford to be complacent about and we need somewhat to look into the details as well. The decreases were in relation to crimes against persons, housebreaking, theft and other miscellaneous crimes like vandalism, trespassing and disorderly behaviour. But what is troubling and remains troubling is that there were Page: 47 increases in violent and serious property crimes as well as commercial crimes, such as cheating and other related offences. Anecdotally, we have seen how the Kovan murders, the Little India riot and other such fairly high profile newsworthy incidents have dominated the headlines in the course of 2013. And it is these concerns which I would like to focus on. Madam, the Home Team is responsible for various aspects of security in Singapore and it is something that we can never take for granted. There are other issues which remain pertinent to security in Singapore today and will continue to evolve. It is a threat that will continue to evolve over time and I would like to highlight a few. The first, cyber crimes. The usage of the Internet has grown. It has proliferated to an extent that we have an Internet penetration rate of 160% of our population having broadband access; a mobile penetration rate of 150%. Access to wireless, location-based cloud computing and other such technologies has become pervasive in daily life. That itself has led to an increased Internet usage and penetration, with a corresponding increase in the number and type of cyber crimes. Take, for example, cheating using e-commerce.”
“The recent article in September 2013, just about two months ago, the Wall Street Journal opined that the repeal put many hardened criminals onto the streets and quoted the criminologist, Mr P Sundramoorthy of the University Science Malaysia as noting that gun seizures alone more than doubled since the repeal. We have heard the number of gun cases and that is quite staggering. The same period saw many reports of serious and vicious crimes being committed in Malaysia. We do not want this in Singapore. Singapore remains particularly vulnerable because of our geographical position, our boundaries are porous. So, the real question in this debate is – what kind of society we want to live in. The Malaysian experience tells us that we cannot afford to take our relatively low crime rates for granted. We, therefore, have to strike a balance between Page: 82 ensuring that our society is protected against serious crimes and ensuring that judicious application of these powers is carried out with a scrupulous and thorough review of each, and every Detention or Suspension Order made. Madam, with that, I support the Bill. 5.00 pm”
“Third, a Detention Order can be made on the basis of evidence or materials which would not, otherwise, be admissible in Court. We have discussed this before, and we can see the reasons why that is so. However, our law enforcement agencies have a primary duty to prosecute all suspects in a Court of Law. They should not be able to think that they can get away with a less than thorough investigation and simply bring a Detention Order against a suspected, but not proven, criminal. This would, inevitably, lead to complacency and make for a less rigorous law enforcement agency. With that in mind, may I suggest that provisions be strengthened to add the requirement that the Minister be first reasonably satisfied that a criminal prosecution is not possible or that there is insufficient available admissible evidence before choosing to invoke CLTPA provisions. Madam, this legislation is tough and I can see why there could be detractors. But it also signals very clearly our Government's firm interest in keeping Singapore and Singaporeans safe and free from the harmful effects of serious, vicious and pervasive crimes. If we have robust safeguards, I am sure no law-abiding citizen would disagree that there is a greater interest for our people in society to be kept safe. We have heard the Malaysian experience quite graphically by some Members earlier. I will just add a couple of short points. The Emergency (Public Order and Crime Prevention) Ordinance that allowed the government to hold suspects for a long period without charging them, was repealed in December 2011.”
“And I think I heard the Member for Aljunied mentioned a recent case in 2007, where in that case, as the Member would know, not just that the Court found that it was capable of being judicially reviewed, in that case, I believe the detainee was also represented by a reputable Senior Counsel. Mdm Speaker, all of these measures, including the review by this House today are safeguards against abuse of such an extensive power. I am myself satisfied that these safeguards have worked well and are sufficient. However, notwithstanding that, I would like to put forward a couple of additional measures for the Minister's consideration. First, section 30 of the CLTPA, which is the section that confers the power of the Minister to issue detention or Police supervision orders, requires that the Minister be satisfied that the person "has been associated with activities of a criminal nature". The Minister has also to be satisfied that any Detention Order would be in the "interests of public safety, peace and good order." There is no requirement that the activities of a criminal nature be of a sufficient severity or culpability as to warrant the making of a Detention Order. In that context, would the Minister consider raising the threshold to one where the activities are of such a serious criminal nature, or at least where the activities have or are likely to cause serious and widespread harm to Singapore and Singaporeans? Page: 81 Second, whilst a detainee under the current CLTPA and the rules has the right to counsel at every level, at every hearing, he cannot always afford or instruct one. Accordingly, would the Minister consider an amendment to be made where the state will assign a counsel to any detainee who requests one?”
“Madam, I move on to the second issue, which is – even if this Act is useful in keeping Singapore safe, how do we ensure that the power is not abused? That is a key consideration for this House in deciding to continue with the Act for the next five years. We have heard the in-built CLTPA regime and safeguards, the Detention Order has to be concurred by the Public Prosecutor, and then confirmed by the President upon the review by a separate Advisory Committee, the detainee is entitled to make representations and must be given reasons for Page: 80 the detention to allow him to make an effective challenge. I have myself previously served on such Advisory Committees set up under section 39 of the Act, and I can personally attest to the robustness of the Committee's work. Each committee member is given the details of the case; they have access to all documents including statements and eye-witness accounts. The detainee and witnesses are often heard, and the detainee can make full arguments against the Detention Order. The detainee can also be represented by counsel at such hearings and all of this material is then carefully scrutinised, critically, by each committee member before a conclusion is drawn. And I can assure the hon Members for Aljunied and Ang Mo Kio that this Advisory Committee does not have any connection or speak to the Minister; we do not have any one from the MHA discuss the case with us, save for administrative details concerning the hearing. In addition, a detainee retains the right to seek judicial review of Detention Orders in Court. There have been several challenges in the Singapore Courts for the past few years.”
“Mdm Speaker, Singapore is not rid of these problems by any stretch. A look at some of the statistics will give us a sense. Drug arrests have gone up over the last three years. The first half of 2013 alone, we have seen a 13% increase in drug-related arrests over the same period in 2012. As Minister mentioned earlier, the street value of drugs seized have had a record high. Between 2004 and 2009, we have seen a year-on-year increase, every year increase in the number of harassment and loansharking complaints. In fact, the number of complaints in 2009, more than triple the number of complaints in 2004. So, there is therefore a strong need to ensure that these activities are kept firmly in check – which leads to my second point, one which many Members of this House have canvassed. These activities are often syndicated and well-organised, with a complex hierarchical structure. These crimes are inherently difficult to prosecute in many instances because of the lack of direct admissible evidence and the obvious unwillingness of witnesses, whether they be members of the public or even members of the same syndicate, to testify. They are often concerned about the reprisals against themselves and, perhaps, more importantly, against their families. Madam, I therefore believe that the Act, used judiciously, is not just a powerful tool for law enforcement. The fact that we have such tough laws would itself be a strong deterrent against anyone even contemplating such activity in Singapore. It would also be a clear message to organised gangs outside Singapore that this is not a place to even start to think about to base or to anchor such activities.”
“There are three threads which are common and run across all of these three activities: First, these activities are pervasive and they afflict a broad spectrum of society, not just the victim, not just the offender. These activities infiltrate and affect society, and cause a sphere of damage greater than just the offence alone. Take drug trafficking, for instance, which is a serious social ill. The true victim of drug abuse is society. Drug abuse is a great tragedy which really cannot be measured only in terms of the harm caused to the individual drug abuser who suffers from the addiction. There is a much greater cost to his family, to his friends, to his colleagues and the social and economic infrastructure around him. It affects many families and destroys a person's life and it destroys the fabric of society around that person, the drug offender. There are also problems caused by drug-related crimes, commonly, stealing, housebreaking, robbery, or more serious, desperate crimes which an abuser is driven to commit, in order to fuel the addiction. All of these lend to a less safe Singapore. It is the same for unlicensed moneylending. Many of us in this House would have received many complaints from residents on this issue and see for Page: 79 ourselves that the intention of these loansharks is often not just to target the borrower, but also the people living around the borrower. Loansharks threaten, and many of us have seen the chilling messages designed to strike fear and create embarrassment not just in the victim, but also the people around him. And these activities often take place at or around the victim's home – our home, our neighbourhood and this is the heart of our residential neighbourhood, where one is supposed to feel and be safe.”
“Mdm Speaker, a cornerstone of the CLTPA is the power to impose executive detention without trial. It is a very serious incursion into a fundamental civil liberty for a person to be detained without trial, without legal proof that an offence has been committed. One of the most fundamental human rights in the criminal justice system is the right to a fair trial. In this case, in this Bill, Detention Orders can be issued without even a trial, let alone a fair one. Page: 78 One of the safeguards built into this piece of legislation is the sunset provision. The Act has to be renewed every five years by this House, properly considering, evaluating and debating the factors to determine if this Act should merit continued approval. In considering the renewal of this Act, in my view, this House has to be satisfied on two counts: first, that there remains a need for such executive detention powers today, almost 60 years after it was first promulgated; and second, if so, then we have to be satisfied that there are sufficient safeguards to ensure that these powers will not be abused. Mdm Speaker, the Minister has explained that the CLTPA is intended principally to disrupt and dismantle secret society and organised gang activities. Of course, the sort of problems that Singapore faced in the 1950s and 1960s are no longer troubling society at the same level today. But we would be very naïve to think that these activities no longer pose a threat to society. The Minister has outlined the areas of organised illegal activities in three areas which the CLTPA has been principally targeted against. They are namely secret society activities, drug trafficking and loansharking.”
“If she approaches the HDB, she will no longer be a first-time buyer and there will be restrictions and a debarment. And there will also be considerable time pressure on the wife because, once the sale is complete, she and her children will have no roof above their heads. It is not possible for her to join the queue for another BTO or SBF or wait for an allocation even after taking into account the debarment period. And even if you overcome that, the normal rental housing queues would be so long that by the time that allocation takes place, it is likely that the matrimonial home would have long been sold. So, in that connection, I wish to ask if the Minister would be prepared to consider designing another scheme aimed at extending to this group of persons a priority allocation either for the purchase or rental of a flat, depending on the financial position of the wife. I end by asking the Minister to bear in mind that this is a very vulnerable group of persons, normally a single parent with one or maybe more young children. So, I hope that this can be favourably considered. Flats for Singles”
“Sometimes, there could also be young children involved and, in such a situation, it is their interest which is paramount. In this context, I would like to ask the Minister to look into how we can better assist in giving a divorced parent with custody of the children priority in the reallocation of another flat. Let me just briefly describe the circumstances. A matrimonial home is usually jointly held in the names of both the husband and the wife. When the couple undergoes a divorce, the usual court order, in relation to joint property, provides for the HDB flat to be sold on the open market and the proceeds distributed to the couple after the CPF funds are repaid. This is usually also ordered to be done within a prescribed timeframe. Once this sale is made and the proceeds are apportioned, very often, the wife – of course, I am generalising but not all situations – usually with custody of the children, will be left with some cash but with no flat. It is, of course, possible for the wife to buy out the husband's share, but this requires a substantial disposable income which the wife is unlikely to have available. The sale could be deferred so that the wife and the children could continue to stay in the matrimonial home. But for how long? And this would effectively only be kicking the problem down the road and would probably also be detrimental for both parties in a falling market. Very often, the husband himself would also want the matrimonial home sold quickly so that he gets his share of the cash and moves on with his own life. So, it is likely that the wife will have to buy or rent, leave aside an open market purchase, which is possible but will Page: 130 require a stash of cash.”
“Sir, MND and HDB have worked very hard to redress the mismatch between supply and demand in the housing sector. Some 110,000 units of new residential public housing will be completed in the coming years, with at least 23,000 of those units to be launched this year in 2013. The ramped-up supply, together with the recent cooling measures, has also combined to keep public housing costs affordable to Singaporeans. In addition to generating more supply, the HDB has also put in place many new programmes and schemes which have been carefully calibrated to meet Page: 129 the needs of certain targeted and specific groups of people. There have been several schemes aimed specifically at promoting parenthood to ease the anxieties of parents who are concerned, to ensure that they and their children will have a roof over their heads. Two examples of the schemes are, first, the PPS which my colleagues have mentioned earlier, and, of course, the Parenthood Provisional Housing Scheme (PPHS) as well. These are just two examples of the several schemes available which have been very well received by Singaporeans. I take this opportunity to commend the Ministry for the work that has been done in improving the overall supply of flats in Singapore. It is also obvious that the Minister and his team have been very careful, very deliberate and thoughtful in the way they have gone about designing the various schemes to provide targeted assistance and priority. In particular, the schemes which I have outlined above underpin the broader national agenda in promoting family and parenthood. However, Mr Chairman, despite best efforts, not all marriages work out. Some marriages, unfortunately, come to an end.”
“Sir, we are all deeply saddened by the tragic accident in Tampines a few weeks ago when two little boys lost their lives on the road. My colleagues have already covered all the aspects of road safety, but I feel we should use this sad incident to remind ourselves not to take road safety for granted. One of the more vulnerable groups of road users is the motorcyclists. They are particularly vulnerable to the carelessness and recklessness of not just their own but other road users as well. Further, the motorcyclist population is also rising and we can probably expect this to be so in the coming years, in part because of the rise in price of cars. To that end, may I ask the Deputy Prime Minister what steps are being taken by the Traffic Police to ensure that this group of road users is properly equipped and trained with the right skills, the right safety on our roads to ensure not only their safety but the safety of other road users? Drug Offending and Rehabilitation”
“Sir, we have a Community Policing System in place, at least the roll-out since last May. The full roll-out across the island will continue over the next three to five years. It takes time because we need officers to be well-trained in their position and something like 450 new positions have to be filled. Once they are filled, this will allow the Police to methodologically plan and deploy the resources for new crime strike force and other components of the reorganised Neighbourhood Police Centres. I wonder if we could leverage on this scheme to deal with another aspect of community disputes, which I mentioned earlier, between neighbours. I think this scheme could be used where some people could be deputised to handle and mediate such community disputes. These will be people who will be trained in mediation, dispute resolution and be given some powers to make orders with Page: 129 which could be enforced in the usual way through the courts. These people would be chosen from a pool of community and respected grassroots leaders and perhaps people who themselves live in the area concerned. They would be a little like the village head controls of old whom residents look up to and respect and whose words of advice in the first instance would often be paid heed. I think in the majority of these cases, that is what is needed to resolve tensions between two warring neighbours. And I wonder whether the Deputy Prime Minister could comment on that. Policing”
“I hope that the MHA could also look into this. Just like my colleague Mr Seng Han Thong has mentioned earlier, I do think what I have sketched out is only a fraction of what the MHA covers. It is also, as Mr Seng said, an "all mountain, all sea" Ministry. In that respect, I do ask the Deputy Prime Minister to outline its priorities for the year 2013 in the face of these changing challenges. Terrorism”
“Madam, the Government should make it easier for victims of these harassments to seek recourse, even if on interim basis. There must be a way in which damaging articles and publications be forced to be taken down, before it becomes viral on the Internet. And in which point in time, it is often too late. Victims must also have the tools to track the source and author of the offending publications through the Internet service providers. These measures are necessary to ensure that there is a fair prospect of apprehending the often unknown cowardly persons. As Mr Hri Kumar noted earlier, there is also a recently growing trend in community disputes. This is when neighbours get into disagreement. These issues often revolve around encroachment, sometimes of space for quiet enjoyment. Mr Kumar gave some examples and there are others like high rise littering of old racks, newspapers, leftover foods or cigarette butts. At other times, the complaint is about the inconsiderate neighbour who generates too much noise at an unearthly hour. These are less serious than hardcore crimes, but no less difficult to resolve. Some of these community disputes in fact could give raise or lead to more serious ones. Sometimes, it is a minor scuffle, sometimes it is a more serious one. Sometimes racial or religious sentiments could be invoked in these disputes which threaten neighbourliness, and sometimes even our social fabric and harmony. [Deputy Speaker (Mr Seah Kian Peng) in the Chair] In these disputes, most of the time, all that is needed is a little intervention and mediation by an authority figure. I will speak more about this when we talk about Community Policing because I think it is a feature that can be embedded into the concept of system of COPS.”
“Madam, the home front landscape has changed and continues to do so. It evolves each day. Traditional crimes – the Penal Code type of offences, property and drug-related offences – have come down. Over the last few years, the crime rates have been encouraging, hitting an all-time low in recent years, whereas drug-related offences or arrest have gone up. We continue to muster resources to combat acute problems, like gambling, unlicensed moneylending and loansharking. These crimes do not just have a single victim. The people around the alleged debtor often suffer the consequences of the harassment of the loansharks and scare tactics which are employed by these people. In fact, it is intended for the innocent people around the alleged debtor to also suffer these inconveniences and threats. It is a menace to society. Those who are caught are dealt with severely, using strong deterrent punishments. This is entirely necessary to reflect society's abhorrence of these crimes. But we cannot assume that this landscape represents the universe of threats which Singaporeans face today. For one, the cyber threat is growing. Online gambling and vice activities have been on the rise. Syndicates are getting bigger, better organised, sometimes not even located within Singapore. They are more difficult to track, and often target the vulnerable groups like the youths and elderly. Other less traditional offences but no less serious or insidious are online harassment actions. This is often anonymous and cowardly attack on the person's reputation and can often do cause serious damage. A victim's recourse is presently limited. And even if the perpetrator is caught, which in the nature of the Internet, it is difficult enough. The damage Page: 126 would inevitably have already been done.”
“Madam, we must not lose sight of the fact that even as we applaud this Budget, even as we say that this is an inclusive Budget, many Singaporeans continue to need help. I hope that the Government will look at all appeals for assistance carefully and compassionately and pay heed to the particular circumstances of each individual case and not just issue standard replies. I started this speech by saying that the Budget means different things to different people. All that is right, but it cannot mean nothing to some people in Singapore. Madam, with that, I support the Budget.”
“Singaporeans cannot depend on the Government alone, and we have to ensure that all the handouts and transfers which the Budget provides for that they do not make for a softer and less resilient population. Madam, having said all that, at the same time, we must continue to look out for many individual Singaporeans who may, for one reason or another, have fallen through the cracks of our policies. I have a resident who is in her 50s, Mdm J. She is single. She is employed and lives in a one room rental flat. She has no dependents, but also no family to support her. She is physically disabled and wheelchair bound. She has been so since birth. But she endeavours to be self-sufficient so she is gainfully employed. She has worked hard and recently got a pay rise. In the weekends, you will find her at the marketplace in her wheelchair, peddling little knick knacks and other wares to make some extra income. She came to see me several times as she is facing mounting costs of living like many of us do. But unlike us, she cannot walk to work or even take advantage of the free public transport proposals that some of my colleagues here have made. She has specially arranged transportation. She has to have this transportation specially arranged, but she was just told that the cost of that transportation will double next month. Her HDB rental will also go up, because of her salary increments – she is now at the next band. She is not entitled to Workfare because of the level of her salary, especially after her raise. In truth, she is probably better off without the pay increment and that is a travesty. In fact, she tells me that she is almost better off not being employed and just getting the benefit of assistance schemes.”
“Hence, in addition to expanding capacity and having more anchor operators, could the Government also consider initiating a character development program which starts at a child's pre-school years and also investing more in training and equipping pre-school teachers specifically to be able to help our children in character development and building a strong value system at that age. Those are the formative years in a child's learning path, and I feel we could do well to take advantage of it. Madam, this Budget has been well received in many sectors, and it is easy to see why. It is balanced, with immediate steps in place to arrest pressing issues, and longer term measures to restructure our economy to remain competitive and to remain ahead of the curve. To me, however, the key to a successful Singapore and a successful Budget is best encapsulated by some of the Deputy Prime Minister's final words when he concluded the Budget, and they are, "But our policies will ultimately succeed by building on the strengths of Singaporeans – the skills and mastery in every job, the compassion, the sense of collective responsibility, and the belief in this country. They each tell us something about our strengths, and about why we will have a better Singapore ahead." We have to instil in each Singaporean a strong fighting spirit, a determination and resilience to overcome the competition, and there will be stiff competition. Our people have always been our best resource and it remains the case. No amount of rebates, vouchers, credits or other social transfers can help if we do not play to our strengths and work hard and with the courage of Page: 42 conviction, to succeed.”
“So, it is on that score that I am very heartened by the latest initiatives to strengthen opportunities, especially for the low- and middle-income pupils in our education system. In particular, the emphasis on pre-school education is, to me, a significant step in the right direction. On the topic of pre-school education, this is not a new debate. There have been previous calls, even in this debate on the Budget, to nationalise early childhood education. The Ministry has previously resisted a system where pre-school education merely becomes an extension of the formal school system, where numeracy and literacy skills get emphasised at the expense of other developmental goals. Page: 41 Madam, I agree with that, and I am not advocating an extension of formal education, but to borrow a phrase from MOE itself – "Teach Less, Learn More". But I do believe that more could be done to start the process of inculcating core values and character development from an early age. It has long been recognised that children between the ages of three and seven have a strong cognitive ability and that this can be nurtured through play at that age. The pre-school years are a critical period for the development of our children. We must not lose them. They lay the foundation for our children's education prior to formal schooling. I hope this will be seriously considered by the MOE and the Early Childhood Development Agency when formulating the kindergarten curriculum. Pre-school curriculum content is not currently regulated by the Government.”
“Stripped away from the jargon, what this means is that all Singaporeans regardless of background or station in life must be given equal opportunity and access to be able to improve themselves and move up the socio-economic ladder. I used to believe that meritocracy alone was enough. In fact, when I was introduced as a candidate for general election in 2011, I said exactly that. I now think that that is not entirely right because there will always be children who are born into different family backgrounds that will carry very different relative advantages and disadvantages. I realise how much of an effort my own parents have made to put me here. But it will be very different for different families – some better, some not so good. So, we have to apply a bit of the socialist brush to meritocracy, to nudge it slightly to the left in order to find the right equilibrium and balance. Not everyone will achieve the same success – that is in the nature of life. But everyone must, as far as possible, start from the same point. Education has been said to be the great leveller. It is supposed to be, but that may not always be true in our system. Children who come from well-off backgrounds inevitably get a head-start. They start in brand name kindergartens and get enrolled in extra-curricular classes to improve academic as well as soft skills. By the time they get into Primary school, there is often already an appreciable gap between those who are more well off and those who are not. This is sometimes further exacerbated at the Primary school level where students are almost expected to have some sort of tuition or other. If they do not, then they may lose out further.”
“It becomes an economic and social burden that the future generation of South Koreans – the younger generation – will have to carry. But the real lesson in this is that in the last 10 to 15 years, the social spending budgets of Hong Kong and South Korea have grown steadily. Yet the income inequality in those economies remain wide, if not became even more acute. These experiences tell us that social transfers address only the symptom, but not the cause of income inequality. They help alleviate poverty, but do little to fix the underlying issue of income stagnation or minimal income growth. Madam, I am not suggesting that social transfers in this Budget form our only strategy – far from it. But at the same time, we have to be careful not to end up on the slippery slope of welfarism and becoming overly dependent on handouts. I was troubled last year, as I said, by the permanent transfer – introduced by our GST Vouchers – and I had raised that concern in my speech then. This year, this has been reinforced in the ways I have described earlier until 2020. I am concerned that we do not create a dependency on such transfers which are not paired with co-funding or co-payments. In contrast to off-set packages, once we introduce a permanent transfer, especially over a sustained period, it will be difficult to withdraw or even re-calibrate. Come 2020, we may either have to find a way to top up this fund, or create another one. Page: 40 We should therefore place more emphasis on other ways of closing the income gap. A key pillar of the Budget is the need to ensure a fair and inclusive society. Central to that must be social mobility.”
“However, much as I support them, we should equally be careful not to see transfers as a long-term solution to income inequality. Singapore is not unique in having an acute income inequality nor are we unique in seeking to address that by increasing the level of social transfers. It would thus be useful to consider briefly the experiences of two comparable economies which have spent gradually increasing amounts on social transfers over the last decade. Take Hong Kong and South Korea as examples. These are two of the Asian Newly Industrialised Economies which the Deputy Prime Minister referred to as comparison in looking at the real growth of median total household incomes against our own. Page: 39 Hong Kong has had a new government. About the same time as we did, they announced the budget for 2013. Hong Kong too grapples with rising property prices and a widening income gap, and it too seeks to bridge this gap with increased social spending. Hence, in the latest budget, they have put aside HK$50 billion into a package of measures aimed substantially at alleviating poverty and they include measures such as outright rental housing waivers and direct electrical subsidies. South Korea, which has also seen a new President installed recently, faces the same issues, perhaps on a more aggravated scale. The income divide is somewhat more stark and acute particularly for their ageing population. As at 2011, 45% of those aged 65 and above were living with less than 50% of median household income. The gap is so pronounced that the South Koreans have now planned to introduce a further means tested National Happiness Pension that comes on top of the existing pension scheme. All of this, Madam, comes with a cost.”
“Hence, a very tangible and marked emphasis in the Budget this year is the deliberate stepping up of social policies, to provide what Deputy Prime Minister calls "Direct Assistance" to a range of less advantaged Singaporeans in our society. It is a deliberate and focused tilt in favour of the low- and middle-income Singaporeans via a combination of progressive taxing and social transfers. Take GST Vouchers, for example. At last year's Budget, I noted that the Budget then introduced – I believe for the first time – a permanent transfer scheme by way of the GST Vouchers. This was distributed to Singaporeans in a variety of measures. This year's Budget reinforces that in two ways. First, by having an extra GST Voucher this year which doubles the payout and, second, by topping up the GST Voucher Fund by a further $3 billion so that it is sustainable each year until the year 2020. It is likely that social policies and transfers aimed directly at helping the low-income will become a regular feature of our future Budgets. Indeed, the GST Voucher Fund is an example of a permanent feature of our fiscal policy and not just a temporary offset measure. This signifies the Government's assessment that the income gap will not be significantly bridged anytime soon, and, by extension, we are also likely to see progressively enhanced social policies to assist lower income Singaporeans. Madam, these enhanced social policies, which are an integral part of an inclusive Budget, have received widespread cheer when Deputy Prime Minister announced them, and I support them. I particularly support these measures where they assist the disabled and the elderly who may find employment difficult to come by.”
“We have high wages to attract the best talent and retain them, but also lower wages so that we can keep ourselves competitive. We face the same concerns as cities like New York and Hong Kong. The array of measures introduced in this Budget shows that the Government is determined to close the gap. It has deployed a blend of both short- and long-term measures to achieve the needs and aspirations of Singaporeans today and their dreams of tomorrow. Income inequality, however, threatens those dreams and aspirations. If we believe the results of some income elasticity studies that are made across generations, then one of the consequences of an acute inequality, left unchecked, is that social mobility will be diminished resulting in poverty being transferred across generations. The Gini Coefficient in 2012 has gone further up to 0.478. The Department of Statistics put out a press release about two weeks ago to say that there are different methods of calculating the Gini Coefficient and by some standards, it could be lower than 0.478. But by whatever method we use, it is quite clear that income gaps today have become even more pronounced. Indeed, if the trend of the last 10 years is anything to go by, then we can expect that in the next 10 years, it will go up further. Looking back 10 years, it has gone up from 0.43 in the year 2000 to 0.459 in 2012 even after accounting for some Government transfers. It is true that the more advanced Asian economies such as Japan, South Korea and Hong Kong, have also experienced rising Gini Coefficients in the same period. But what is troubling and significant for us in Singapore is that Page: 38 the rate of that increase over the last 10 years has been faster than these countries.”
“Yet, we sit here today in this debate and we now angst over the cost of living, and how slow income growth has been and how much it has not kept pace with society. Well, Madam, the two points are related and I hope that those who think that our workforce population strategies can be decided in a vacuum and without a real hard look at how it affects our economy will think again. Another example of how the population strategies are linked to the economy. The hon Member Ms Lee Li Lian argued yesterday that there must be more "affordable access to foreign domestic workers" and all families with a child or elderly have to have access to a foreign domestic worker. She says Page: 37 domestic help is a necessity. I tend to agree, and I think the Budget recognises that in making foreign domestic worker levy concessions and help make domestic help even more affordable. But what she may have forgotten is that her suggestion alone will see an increase in the number of foreign workers in Singapore. Based on information that we can obtain from the MOM website alone – public information – this suggestion means that there will another approximately 250,000 foreign workers in Singapore, just on that suggestion alone. How then does this square off with the Workers' Party's proposal made not quite so long ago in this Chamber of having zero foreign labour growth? It simply does not. So, it tells us that the policies have to be looked at, on a macro level. We cannot just go about making politically expedient points without linking it to the larger picture and making sure that it is consistent and that it works. Madam, I want to come back to the income disparity and a growing Gini Coefficient. This is an inevitable consequence of Singapore being a global economy.”
“Mdm Speaker, the Budget means different things to different people. Over the last few days, we have heard many hon Members of this House express different views, different perspectives on the Budget. But at its heart, Budget 2013 sets out a vision to build a better Singapore for Singaporeans not only in the shorter planning horizon, but in the longer. We have to deal with the shorter term needs as well as meet the longer term aspirations of all Singaporeans. In striving to meet these objectives, two key concerns have been identified in this Budget. They are not new issues. In fact, they are rather quite old chestnuts, but they need tackling with more urgency today. The first is a growing income inequality, as our economy develops. We have one of the greatest income disparities in the world and this has caused serious societal tension. The direct, tangible result of this is really that the poorest households in Singapore have been hardest hit by inflation. Higher healthcare and housing costs have contributed largely to this. Real income growth at the lower end of the income scale has also been a challenge and it looks like it will continue to be so. Second, at the same time, we have a declining population resulting in a workforce that is growing in number all too slowly, but growing old all too quickly. This affects the ability of the workforce population in our economy to generate GDP and consequently real income growth. Madam, these twin concerns are formidable issues. Not too long ago, this House debated the White Paper on Population. Many of us sitting here vexed over the population strategy and some even asked if the relevance of GDP growth and economic progress had been overstated as we debated the Population White Paper.”
“Sir, I will end off with one last point. This is an important debate on a policy which will affect all Singaporeans up to 2030 and beyond. This House has been asked to endorse the White Paper, and I fully agree with the amendments which the Member for Holland-Bukit Timah GRC, Mr Liang has made. The debate, however, should not end there, and I urge the Government to continue to consult and receive views, and refine the projections in this Paper, both Papers. It should be a dynamic process. The Government should continually review the implications of the policy not only in terms of the big picture, but also the small. Look at the picture through the eyes of the average Singaporean and what it means for him. It is only then that we can really strike the right emotional balance in our policies. Sir, on that basis, I support the Motion. 5.36 pm”
“In fact, I think we have to pull out all the stops on this one because that is the one strategy that, if we get right and are successful at it, will cut away at the population problems which we now face, and, in the longer term, will alleviate our reliance on foreigners for labour. We have had the Marriage and Parenthood Package since 2001, with the latest instalment coming last month. That is good and it gives young expectant couples a leg up. But we must recognise that the decision to start a family is not just about financial incentives or rewards or even parenthood leave. The entire parenthood eco-system and the infrastructure for bringing up children have to be reviewed and encouraged – not just about the availability of childcare centres or Foreign Domestic Worker levies, housing, education, work-place Page: 109 environment ethics, reforms, changes to tax structure and so on. I think we are in urgent need of a transformational change to the way we promote fertility rates. The Marriage and Parenthood Package can only take us so far. I would propose that the Government considers setting up a specialist committee tasked specifically to look into revamping these measures. Go well beyond the present paradigm. A starting point could be to study the Swedish family policies. I know there is a different dynamic there and a different ethic consideration but in Sweden, family policies are placed as a priority and are co-ordinated with educational and flexible labour market policies. There must be something in it, because in a declining European TRF, Sweden is the one country that has consistently maintained a healthy TFR over the years. We should not only go out of the box on this one, but perhaps break up the old box and build a new one.”
“Hence, for the short to medium term, whilst we find a solution to improving the TFR, we will need immigration to supplement our resident and workforce population. Page: 108 The truth is that we do not want to get to 6.9 million, let alone get to that number by having more foreigners, which will dilute the Singaporean population core. That is what I understood from Deputy Prime Minister when he says, and I quote, it is his "hope that… our population will not reach 6.9 million". But at the same time, should we plan for it now? You heard Minister Khaw a few minutes ago. Of course, we should. It is only prudent and sensible. We will take time to plan, develop, to build and we should do it now when we are still a vibrant economy, do it now ahead of the curve with time and with a buffer to spare. Coming back to what we should do for the Singaporean Core of the population. Other Members in this House have spoken at length about it – the twin objectives of improving our TFR and eliciting more productivity out of the untapped economic resources, especially in mature workers, something that the Member Ms Low Yen Ling has touched on very eloquently earlier. I will not go into those points again, save to emphasise one key point. I think we all agree that we do not want to be in this House again in 2030, having the same debate over the same problems. I think if that happens, we will be in serious trouble. The only way we can be sure we can avoid that is to grow the organically Singaporean population. Deputy Prime Minister himself says that this is, and I quote, the "best and most fundamental way". Minister Grace Fu yesterday emphasised that marriage and parenthood remains top priority for the Government. I agree but I think we can and we should do more.”
“More housing, more transport options, more hospitals are being planned, but these will take time. Can the pace of these developments keep pace with the number of foreigners coming in? Second, just because other countries are doing it does not mean we should do too, at least at the same rate. We ought not comfort ourselves with living density numbers and comparisons because we cannot easily compare ourselves with these other countries simply because Singapore is small with no natural hinterland. We are not like people in London, New York, Tokyo or even Hong Kong who can choose to live elsewhere in their own country if one city becomes too populated. We cannot. This, and only this, island is our home. Third, we must never compromise the Singaporean heritage and identity. Too much immigration over a sustained period would weaken it. Our Singaporean Core is rich in diversity and multi-culturalism. We are not xenophobic, but integration and assimilation are not uniform and never achieved overnight. Being Singaporean is not only about having the same colour IC, but rather, it is about having built up a collection of shared experiences and having a commonality of ideals and goals. This takes time to nurture, and it has to be done each time a potential new citizen lands on our shores. In addition, we have to be careful not to rely only, or even substantially, on immigration. If we do get to 6.9 million in 2030 and we still find ourselves short, where then would we go? Hence, immigration cannot be seen as a long-term solution. The root problem of a declining TFR has to be fundamentally addressed. In the nature of things, TFR cannot be turned around overnight; and even if we are to be successful, we will not see the effects until around 2035 at the earliest.”
“The main headline reads: "Several foreign firms prepare to leave S'pore", but the headline just below says, "Thinning Singaporean core troubles MPs". We cannot fully satisfy both concerns. This aptly reflects the dichotomy which, to borrow Deputy Prime Minister's words, the White Paper seeks a "judicious balance" of. If we tighten too much, our businesses will suffer – as amply demonstrated by the Business Times headline on Tuesday. You will also just have to look at the immediate reaction of the Singapore Business Federation in response to some of the Workers' Party proposals in Parliament yesterday to know that this is a matter we cannot afford to strike a wrong balance on. This could well set us on a road that Japan has taken, but minus the buffer which their natural resources give to them. So, I agree that we have to be open to immigration to shore up our workforce. I myself do not see any other choice. We could be more selective, more discerning in deciding who we allow in, but it would be wrong to shut it out or keep it constant as the Workers' Party has suggested. But at the same time, we have to strike the right balance when doing that. The White Paper has proposed a significant slowdown in foreign labour and I agree with that. But even at this reduced rate, I would caveat that topping up our population with immigration is an easy option and we cannot let that mask Page: 107 our fundamental problem which is that of the declining TFR, which I will address a little later. In some ways, using immigration to arrest a declining workforce population is a bit of a textbook solution because many other countries are doing likewise. But we have to be careful. First, can our physical infrastructure cope? Not in a few years' time but now.”
“Equally, however, it would be wrong to pretend that economic growth does not matter, or that we should just work out what kind of economic growth, if at all, a declining population can yield us, and then just be happy with that. No, we should plan to achieve a judicious growth rate that would be sufficient to sustain our economy, keep income levels up and improve our overall standard of living. Singaporeans all want better jobs. Those who have a job want their jobs to be secure and stable, with good promotion prospects. We want a good bonus at the year end. We want our children to be able to find good jobs when they come into the job market. Do we all not? All of this Page: 106 depends on having good strong employers who will stay in Singapore, run a stable, viable business and operate in a competitive and vibrant economy. Take Japan as an example – an economy that has been dulled over the years by an ageing population and an almost cultural aversion to immigration. Businesses have moved out and unemployment rate has reached an all time low in 2009. In his speech, Deputy Prime Minister made the point about the sale of adult diapers out-stripping baby diapers. Another example – in 1994, the number of males in Japan eligible for the national defence services – that is, aged between 18 and 26 – stood at about 9 million. As at 2010, about 16 years later, this figure dropped to 6 million, a 30% decrease over 16 years. What does that say about its other workforce? Which brings me to my second point of balance – that of immigration. Sir, this is a most delicate balance because it affects every Singaporean directly on a daily basis. The front page headlines in yesterday's Business Times best illustrate, Sir, how difficult this balance is.”
“Yet, we are now being asked to endorse a plan that could see us share that limited space with more people, many of them foreigners, such that the Singaporean citizen population drops to 55%. I think, in that context, Singaporeans are entitled to ask some very hard questions about this proposal, and I think the answer lies in finding the right emotional balance between the different competing interests which are at stake for Singaporeans. Let me elaborate. The White Paper has identified a clear problem with our declining TFR and an increasingly ageing population. We are amongst the world's best in terms of a low TFR – not a record we should be proud of. Our ageing population is ageing at a rate faster than even Japan's. [Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Charles Chong) in the Chair] So, there is no doubt that we have to address this problem, although it is not a problem which is unique to Singapore. It is a global phenomenon – also called the "Ageing Century" by some commentators. Korea, Japan, Taiwan, China, Hong Kong, they all have the same problem. Many countries in Europe have the same problem. But unlike these other countries, we have no natural resources to count on, to weather slow or negative economic growth which impact income gains and ultimately the standard of living that we will enjoy. On that score, let me comment on the first balance which we have to find – which is economic growth. GDP growth is not, and cannot be, the end game. We cannot use GDP growth as a starting point and then work backwards to see what kind of a population resource we might need to sustain it.”