Gan Kim Yong
Singapore
“Consumer complaints relating to the secondary resale market for tickets to major events and concerts have generally remained low. Nonetheless, to protect the public from scams on secondary ticket resale platforms, the Police have imposed Code of Practice requirements under the Online Criminal Harms Act to require designated online service…”
“Singapore does not condone the use of forced labour. We criminalise forced labour in Singapore under various laws. Relevant Government Ministries and agencies, such as the Ministry of Manpower, Ministry of Home Affairs and Singapore Police Force, play their part in investigating complaints of suspected breaches in domestic laws that relat…”
“The Association of Banks in Singapore (ABS) discontinued the PayNow nickname feature as scammers had been exploiting the use of nicknames to impersonate legitimate entities and trusted individuals.”
“As of end-2025, around 6,900 private residential buildings have registered their solar installations with SP Group for the export of excess solar-generated electricity to the grid. The installed solar capacity of these residential buildings is 115.3 megawatt-peak (MWp), or around 5.5% of all current installed solar capacity in Singapore.”
“The one-year pilot extension of liquor trading hours has seen strong interest from businesses. As of 31 May 2026, the Police have approved 88 applications for the extension of liquor trading hours from public entertainment outlets in these areas.”
“The Government does not make projections of domestic or regional demand for renewable diesel or sustainable aviation fuel. Demand depends on commercial considerations, evolving market conditions and regulatory developments across different jurisdictions.”
The complete record
Every one of 3,841 lines we hold for Gan Kim Yong, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 77 of 77.
“We have also heard stories about ITE graduates being successful in business. ITE has, undoubtedly, done a good job. Its graduates are well regarded by their employers. Unfortunately, Sir, the image of ITE has been somewhat less than what it deserves, partly due to its association with its predecessor, the VITB, and partly due to the show I Not Stupid. I would like to ask the Minister whether he would consider putting in more resources into ITE to further expand and upgrade its programmes, as well as to have a proactive programme to improve its profile and image. I note that the recurrent budget for ITE has been reduced by 2.6% while the recurrent budget for the overall Ministry of Education has increased by 1.5%. I hope that we are not sending the wrong message. However, I note that the capital expenditure budget for the ITE has increased substantially. I hope that the Minister would also consider encouraging the ITE to have academic exchange programmes with reputable similar nature. This will undoubtedly inject greater professionalism into ITE. It will also help raise the international standing of ITE and boost its image. Then, we can change the image of ITE and it is no longer the end but to change it to the Institute of Technical Excellence.”
“Sir, I am not sure if we should thank Mr Jack Neo for thrusting ITE into the limelight with the film I Not Stupid because "it not good"! Sir, ITE plays a crucial role in providing the much-needed skills training, as well as continuous training. One good thing about the recession is that it reminds us that skills training is an integral part of our economic survival. As Singapore restructures our economy, there is an even greater need to increase the pool of skilled workers. Those who do not possess relevant skills will find it increasingly difficult to keep their jobs or find new jobs in time to come. The ITE produces more than 10,000 graduates a year, and many of them have done well. In fact, more than 1,400 of them thereafter. This shows that ITE indeed is not the end. However, I feel compelled to remind ourselves that the success and the contribution of ITE should not be measured only by the number of graduates who proceeded to polytechnics or universities. We need to redefine success and, to do so, we must first recognise that ITE provides a wide scope of curriculum, ranging from cutting-edge information technology to biomedical technology. ITE graduates are professionals in their respective fields, and they can excel and make positive, even critical, contributions to the economy and the society, even if they do not proceed to the polytechnics or universities eventually. Without them, we will not be able to attract good investments to Singapore. The Minister said earlier that even in the year 2001, when the recession was at its worst, 88% of the ITE graduates were able to secure a full-time job within three months and their average salary ranged between $1,100 and $1,400, not bad in a recession year.”
“Sir, once again, children are precious, and all of us will agree that we must remake our education system, where necessary, to ensure that our children can grow up with a balanced character. I hope that the Minister will take these suggestions into consideration and, hopefully, we will not see the day where we need to introduce a Bill on protection of our children against stress and pressure. 1.15 pm”
“In this regard, I would like to volunteer myself to participate in any review of the streaming exercise, and explore alternatives to see if we can help our students. The third area of stress comes from the students themselves, from their own desire to do well. This is good. However, when their results are not up to their expectations or the expectations of their parents, some of them may have problem coping. In this regard, psychological and emotional support for the students is most critical to help them cope. I believe that the problems faced by students are often multi-faceted. It may involve parental problems or problems with their siblings. Sometimes, it may involve financial problems at home or others. Therefore, I feel that it is crucial to provide a holistic, psychological and emotional support that may be beyond the capability of the non-professional counsellors. Hence, I would like to ask the Minister whether he will consider providing the schools with funds so that they are able to engage professional counsellors rather than retired teachers or, better still, allow them to tie up directly with professional organisations, such as the Family Service Centres, to provide professional and holistic counselling services to the students and, sometimes, to the parents of the students. This will also help ease the load of the teachers, who should really focus on teaching. Direct link-up between the schools and the professional organisations will also help build up rapport and enhance the effectiveness of the support provider. They can also become more pro-active in helping the school to identify students who are potentially at risk, so that problems can be dealt with at an early stage.”
“Sir, we have debated on legislation to protect our children from parental abuse, to protect them against child labour, etc. Maybe, one day, we will need a legislation to protect them from excessive pressure and stress. Sir, our children do face stress from many directions. Firstly, they face stress from their schools. Teachers and principals are mindful of the results of their schools, because they are ranked every year based on the performance of their students. I believe that some pressure is good to push the children to go an extra mile. But excessive pressure may push them over the limits. I would like to urge the Minister to consider replacing the current school ranking system with the banding system. The ranking system has created substantial tension among the schools as they compete with one another. I believe that the banding system will ease the pressure on the schools and, in turn, ease the pressure on the students, while still having sufficient pressure to encourage the schools and the students to do their best. Secondly, our children face pressure from their parents. Many young parents today want their children to do well in the schools, yet they spend little time with their children because, very often, both parents are working. They can only send their kids to the best tuition classes and hope that they will outperform their neighbour's kids. This is particularly prevalent in the streaming year. Many MPs have spoken about streaming and I would not belabour this point. However, I would like to point out that it is true that streaming has created stress. I would like to request the Ministry to be open to alternative ways and explore some of these to see if it could be done with less stress on the students.”
“I am glad that the Government has promised that it will absorb the proposed GST increase for healthcare services. But if healthcare cost continues to rise, it will negate the goodwill gesture of the Government. I would, therefore, like to urge the Government to monitor the situation and take steps to contain the rise in healthcare costs. The increase in healthcare costs over the last few years, coupled with the unemployment and wage reduction, may also result in more people needing help for their basic healthcare services. It is, therefore, important for us to ensure that our basic safety net, such as the Medifund, is adequate in responding to the needs of the people. The fact that the utilisation rate of Medifund is high is also evidence that perhaps more people would need help. Therefore, I would like to ask the Minister to consider expanding the Medifund scheme to meet the greater needs arising from higher healthcare costs. 4.15 pm VISIT OF THE HON. MR MOHAMMAD JAVAD HAGHSHENAS, LEADER OF IRANIAN PARLIAMENTARY DELEGATION (Presence in Gallery)”
“Sir, the Medifund was an endowment fund set up by the Government in 1993. With an initial capital of $200 million, the fund has now grown to $800 million. A total of $27 million has been disbursed in 2001, out of $30 million available. This represents a 90% utilisation rate. This implies that the fund has been well utilised and has served its purpose of helping the lower-income families cope with their healthcare cost. However, I am rather concerned, like other MPs before me, with the consistent increase in healthcare costs. If we look at the Economic Survey which was distributed last week, at page 98, there is a table showing the consumer price index, broken down by categories. First quarter 2002 saw the overall CPI decline by 0.9% over the same quarter in the previous year. In contrast, healthcare cost increased by 2.4% over the same period. The healthcare category has the highest rate of increase. If we take the whole of 2001 compared to the year 2000, the overall CPI increased by 1%, while healthcare costs increased by 3.3%, more than three times. Again, it is the highest category. If we take a longer time horizon and compare 2001 with 1997, the overall CPI increased by 2.1%, while healthcare costs went up by 10%, almost five times, over the last four years. Again, it is the highest category. Perhaps, the quality of healthcare services has improved. But we need to keep in mind the affordability of healthcare cost. Sir, even when the economy recovers, the job situation will remain weak for some time, as the same Economic Survey has already pointed out. Unemployment will worsen before it improves. Wages are likely to be further reduced. Given this likely scenario, Sir, our people would be very concerned with the rising healthcare costs.”
“The Ministry of Health has explained before that the Medisave amount is sufficient for Singaporeans to pay for about 10 or 11 bouts of hospitalisation. Could the Minister enlighten the House as to whether in making this estimation, the Ministry has taken into account the fact that many Singaporeans today are not taking care of only their own hospitalisation needs, but they also have to provide for elderly parents who do not have Medisave savings of their own? Sir, the truth of the matter is also that, today, those who feel the most pressurised are those in the middle income, as the poor and the lower income have a lot of assistance in the form of grants and subsidies from the Government. I would appreciate a response to these issues which I have raised for the Minister.”
“If we look at technology in other sectors, such as computers, for instance, we will see that, over time, the price of such technology invariably goes down. So, should not one expect the same for medical technology? The new products will be expensive but, over time, the same product should be cheaper, and this should translate into cheaper medical costs. At the very least, it should not be cited as a reason to justify the increasing medical costs. Also, on the point of technology, is there any control over new technology that is being used to determine whether they are really necessary, or just good to have? Sir, Singaporeans are also asking, and they want to know, whether all these big hospital buildings that we now see are adding to the increasing costs. For instance, will it not cost more to maintain these buildings and keep them clean, compared to the minimalist and spartan hospitals of old? After all, what anyone who goes to the hospital wants is good and affordable medical care, and he/she will be too sick to appreciate the wonderful ambience. Sir, I hope that the Minister could throw some light on this very fundamental issue of why our healthcare costs are increasing, and what productivity and control measures have been put in place to prevent the spiralling of healthcare costs in Singapore. Would the Minister consider setting up an audit committee, a body, for instance, comprising health economists and members of the public, to audit increases in healthcare costs in Singapore similar to the role played by the Public Transport Council? I would also like to ask the Minister whether with the average 6% yearly increase in healthcare costs, the current Medisave contribution rate will be sufficient to meet the medical needs of Singaporeans.”
“If there is a significant surplus, then would it be possible to either reduce the premium to encourage more Singaporeans to sign on, or to enhance the scheme without increasing the premium? Sir, as we continue to enhance the MediShield scheme, I am not sure we can afford to always do so without raising the premium. I believe that there is no free lunch and we will need to raise the premium at some point in time. However, it is important that the premium remains affordable, especially for the lower income group, as they need it most. I would like to urge the Minister to ensure that future increases in the premium, if any, should take into account affordability. Mdm Halimah Yacob: Sir, in 1993, the Government published the White Paper on affordable healthcare in Singapore. Despite this, Singaporeans today remain concerned about the affordability of healthcare. There is some basis for this concern as, on average, healthcare costs have been increasing at the rate of 6% per year. Singaporeans are asking what are the main causes for the increase, and is there no control on such increase in costs? Is the increase in costs due to the increased salaries and fees of doctors and specialists due to the need for the Government and restructured hospitals to catch up with the private sector's pay scales and fees? If so, then, surely, some long-term solutions will have to be found, such as increasing the supply of such specialists or providing more competition for specialist care in Singapore. Or is the rising cost of healthcare in Singapore due to improvements in medical technology? If new technology is the culprit, then I am a little bit puzzled as to why the logic that prevailed in the case of new technology in other sectors did not apply in the medical services.”
“Sir, the MediShield scheme was introduced in 1990 to complement the Medisave scheme in helping Singaporeans meet their medical expenses from major and prolonged illnesses, which the Medisave alone may not have sufficient balances to cover. Sir, MediShield is an important safety net to ensure that Singaporeans will not be denied critical medical treatment when they are suddenly struck by chronic illnesses which may require protracted and costly treatment. It is a risk-pooling mechanism to reduce the overall cost of obtaining medical treatment for those who are unfortunate enough to need it. It is, therefore, crucial that all Singaporeans are covered under the scheme. I, therefore, share the same sentiment as Mr Yeo Guat Kwang that we should encourage all Singaporeans to come under this scheme. Otherwise, when they cannot afford the medical treatment they need, they will invariably turn to the Government for help. I would, therefore, like to ask the Minister whether his Ministry has plans to encourage those who are not yet covered under the scheme to sign up for the scheme as soon as possible. One of the main setbacks of the MediShield scheme really is that it is an insurance scheme and, as such, the premium that is paid is not recoverable. For a person who remains healthy, he actually gets nothing in return. Perhaps one could argue that his greatest return is his health. This perspective is not wrong. But we should still ask: is the scheme cost-effective? Therefore, I would like to ask the Minister whether he could let us know how much premium has been collected over the last five years and how much has the total pay-out been.”
“Therefore, Sir, I would like to urge the Minister to consider the use of MVA, or a modified form of it, to help older workers before deciding on cutting the CPF rate.”
“Worse, it may deal a double blow to those who have taken a voluntary pay cut in order to find a job, or just to stay in their current job. Sir, I would like to suggest to the Minister that it may be useful to consider promoting greater use of a flexible wage system, instead of cutting employer's CPF contribution for older workers. Some years ago, the concept of monthly variable allowance (MVA) was introduced. It may not have been as widely accepted as we wish because of the recession. But as Senior Minister of State Mr Khaw said just now, let us have a little faith, give it time, let us give it a try and it may work after all. So instead of the across-the-board annual increment in our seniority-based wage system, perhaps the MVA concept can be modified and extended to deal with the seniority issue. For example, workers can be given a lower annual increment just to reflect inflation while additional increments should be given in the form of MVA, and this will be adjusted from year to year to reflect the productivity and contribution of the individual workers. This means that the wages of older workers may go up or may go down, or may stay the same, depending on the individuals. Workers who can contribute more due to their experience and maturity can continue to be rewarded through higher MVAs as they get older. On the other hand, those who have been doing the same job all the time will not become costly as they get older because the MVAs can be reduced. I believe the greater emphasis on a flexible wage system, such as MVA, is a more effective long-term solution than cutting the employer's contribution to the CPF.”
“Sir, as many of my parliamentary colleagues have highlighted, job security is one of the top concerns of our people today. Minister George Yeo mentioned yesterday that while our economy will recover, the job situation is likely to deteriorate further before it improves. The problem is more acute even for the older workers. Manpower Minister Dr Lee said on 13th May that only 8% of the job seekers aged above 40 who approached his Ministry for help was successfully placed. This situation is rather worrying. Workers aged between 40 and 50 are likely to be at their most productive age. At the same time, they are also most likely to be at a point where they have the heaviest financial commitments. Being out of job at this age will pose great pressure not only to the workers themselves but to their families, including their children. 6.45 pm The Manpower Minister also said that one of the main reasons commonly cited includes high wage costs resulting from our seniority-based wage system. Sir, I would like to ask the Minister what plans his Ministry has to encourage our employers and employees to shift away from the seniority-based system to one that is based on workers' productivity and contribution. I know that there has been some talk about possible reduction to the CPF rate contributed by employers in order to help employers lower their cost of hiring older workers. While the details have not been announced, I would like to urge the Minister to consider these changes very carefully because any reduction in CPF will have far reaching implications and may affect the workers' ability to service their housing loans. Furthermore, these changes will not only affect those who are retrenched, but will also affect those who are currently productively employed.”
“Secondly, should there be a major disruption to the LRT service in future, the operator should be asked to compensate the commuters, say, by providing free rides for a week, or even for a month. In this way, more pressure will be exerted on the service operator to improve their services. Thirdly, I would suggest that if the operator is unable to resolve the problem, and frequent disruptions continue, the operator should be replaced if they are unable to comply with the requirement to rectify the problem within a prescribed period of time. If there are more interruptions, I think we should terminate their contract and get a new service provider to replace them.”
“Mr Chairman, since the Bukit Panjang LRT was launched in 1999, it has encountered a lot of problems. The Senior Minister of State has already explained why these problems occurred. But these problems have yet to be resolved. Moreover, a number of bus service routes have been withdrawn in Bukit Panjang, and the residents there have to rely more on the LRT service. As such, the frequent interruptions of the LRT service have caused them a lot of trouble and inconvenience. Students who have to go to school by LRT will be late, workers depending on LRT to go to work will be late and, worst of all, those who have examinations to take will lose precious time when they turn up late for the papers. This is certainly cause for concern. If we do not take immediate steps to rectify the situation, very soon people will lose confidence in LRT, and the LRT will be deemed to be an unreliable form of transport. I am glad that the Senior State of Minister has acknowledged that the Bukit Panjang LRT service has not been performing satisfactorily. But I would like to ask the Land Transport Authority whether it has got any plan to improve the LRT service. I know that at the moment, there is some fine or penalty imposed on the service provider if their service is not up to the mark. But such penalty does not help ease the problem faced by the residents. I know that the operator does provide a back-up shuttle bus every time there is a breakdown. This is good but not entirely satisfactory. It is no replacement for reliable and efficient service. Therefore, I would like to suggest to the Minister or the Senior Minister of State that unless and until the operator is able to provide a reliable service, regular bus services should be restored to service the area.”
“And if he follows PM's call and have several children, we may also have to bear the cost of his children's education in international schools there. Sir, going to China is a very expensive affair. Sometimes, it is twice as costly as the same person working in Singapore. I would therefore like to request the Minister to consider providing financial and tax incentives to support and help local companies to venture into China. In particular, would the Minister consider providing financial and tax incentives to support and help local companies to venture into China? In particular, would the Minister consider providing incentives to help defray part of the cost of sending staff overseas? 6.15 pm”
“Sir, historically, we have been very successful in attracting foreign investments into Singapore and the recent tax reforms proposed by the Finance Minister will help in some ways to attract additional foreign investments here. But I would like to suggest that maybe it is time for us to expand our economic boundaries beyond our shores. China has been touted as a threat to our economy, but I would suggest that China is not just a threat but also an opportunity. Sir, I would like to ask the Minister therefore to elaborate what are the strategies that we have to help our local companies, our local enterprises, to venture into China. In particular, I would like to ask the Minister whether we could encourage the GLCs to take the lead in spearheading our thrust into China. These GLCs, as DPM Lee has mentioned yesterday, have size and management expertise. They are also much more experienced in overseas ventures. They are therefore well positioned to establish a beach-head in China. Thereafter, they can then help bring along the local small and medium sized enterprises, which may be ready to go abroad but may need some initial help. This is probably one positive role that the GLCs can play in helping the SMEs here. Sir, indeed, for SMEs venturing into China is not an easy task. Take human resource, for example. It is very difficult and often costly to persuade Singaporean senior managers to work in China. Having identified a suitable and capable candidate, we need to pay for his relocation cost. We need to give him additional overseas allowance. We need to bear the cost of his lodging and, if he has heeded the call of the Government and got married, we need to pay for his spouse's allowance and even, sometimes, compensate her if she needs to quit her job.”
“While the Government provides a conducive competitive environment, the business community must take the lead in spearheading our economic expansion and our people must be nimble and be prepared to be flexible and adaptable. This way, Sir, we will be able to stay ahead of our competitors, attain economic excellence and realise our Singapore dream. Sir, I support the motion. 4.18 pm”
“I think there may be a need for an agency to monitor the general trend of cost of living, to provide feedback and make recommendations to the Government from time to time. Perhaps, the role of Mr Chan's Committee can be expanded for this purpose, rather than just looking at the GST impact. Finally, it is important for us to give Singaporeans a vision, a dream that they can strive for, a realistic goal that we can hope to achieve. This common vision and dream will serve as a platform to unite all Singaporeans as we sail through the restructuring process. Looking forward, Sir, the task ahead of us is a challenging one. The recession last year might have been a crisis, but I think it might have been a blessing in disguise. It reminded all of us that we are vulnerable, despite our past successes. Our competitors are no longer the store next door; our competitors are no longer our neighbouring countries. We are competing against China and the whole world. We need to quickly reposition our economy on a stronger footing to meet these challenges. Sir, we have the mandate of the people to lead them out of the recession and to provide them with better prospects and opportunities. They have trusted us. They are willing to make short-term sacrifices. We must keep faith with the people and deliver results. The financial policies outlined by Deputy Prime Minister Lee is the first step towards restoring and enhancing Singapore's competitiveness. To eventually succeed in repositioning our economy and fulfill the task entrusted to us by our people we need a strong tripartite collaboration among the Government, the business community and the people.”
“In this fast paced world today, very soon, I am afraid, you will find that there is no more fish in the water and, therefore, teaching him to fish is still not enough. We have to teach him basic survival skills. If there is no fish, he must learn to hunt. If there are no animals left, he might have to go back to farming. Just like the mice in the book "Who moved my cheese?", he needs to look for new cheese all the time. Therefore, we need to look at our education system, not just to impart knowledge and skills, but also the survival instinct that is so crucial in the world today. Our people must also have realistic expectations. Many of us are used to the fast economic growth in the 80s and 90s. Many of us are used to see significant annual increments and promotions and with the tight labour market in the past, employers used all kinds of ways and means to retain staff. This may not be the case in future and we need to get used to the new environment and be realistic in our expectations. We need to make serious efforts to reform the seniority-based wage system to one that is based on productivity and contributions. And perhaps, we could start with the civil service. Having said that, we must still recognise that there would be invariably people who are unable to cope with the changes, or those who might need a bit more time to adapt to changes. We have to put in place an adequate social safety net to help these people. We must ensure our cost of living remains affordable in general. Healthcare and education, in particular, are of the greatest concern. For this reason, I am glad that the Government will be absorbing the GST increases in both these areas. The Government has also set up this Committee to Combat Profiteering chaired by Mr Chan Soo Sen.”
“A lot has been said already. But China, undoubtedly, is a challenge as well as an opportunity. It is important for us to look at China, but it is not easy to do business in China. Venturing overseas, especially into places like China, has inherent risks and difficulties. Many of us do not have the resources nor the know-how to venture abroad. It is also difficult and at times, costly to recruit or persuade senior managers to go overseas and work there. These are perhaps where the Government can play a significant role. For example, the Government could consider providing incentives for Singaporeans working overseas, either to the individual or to the employer to help reduce the high cost of overseas postings, and encourage our companies to venture abroad. Thirdly, the people. Sir, we must prepare our people for the challenges ahead. As economic restructuring picks up momentum, changes are going to take place at a much faster pace. Certain sectors of activities in the economy will find themselves becoming obsolete very quickly. They will need to innovate and change to stay relevant. Employees who are unable to keep up with the pace of change will soon find themselves being phased out. It is, therefore, critical that we step up our training and retraining programmes to help these workers adapt to the new economy. More importantly, we need to inculcate in them the spirit of flexibility and adaptability. They need to change their mindsets. There was a saying, "give the man a fish and you feed him for a meal; teach him how to fish and you feed him for life". This is a very well-known saying, but unfortunately, I think it might not be true today.”
“I would like to urge the Government to consider setting up a permanent high level Inter-Ministerial Committee with the objective of ensuring a competitive business environment. This Committee will then help to coordinate among the various Ministries and provide inputs and feedback on the implications of the policies implemented by the various Ministries on the business environment, as well as recommend measures to continuously improve our competitiveness. In this way, we can ensure that the efforts to strengthen our economy's fundamentals will be sustained. Next, the business community. The tax cuts and various incentives mentioned in the Budget will, undoubtedly, give our businesses a much needed boost and attract more investments here. However, we will need to supplement it with more refined tools, such as the pioneer incentives, to attract the right types of businesses here and not just those that are primarily motivated by the low tax regime in Singapore. The incentives for the financial industry and the shipping industry are moves in the right direction. Our local businesses, on the other hand, must not just sit back and enjoy the ride of lower tax regime because they must know that their seats do not have safety belts and, instead, they are fitted with ejection buttons. If they do nothing, it will not be very long before competitors will catch up and they will be promptly ejected. Instead, our business community must take this opportunity for them to restructure their business. They must not lose time in upgrading themselves and in seeking new opportunities. I would like to urge the Government to consider taking proactive initiatives to help local companies upgrade and venture abroad. Much has been said about China. I would not go into the details of China.”
“It is important for the Government to be conscious of the overall business environment and take steps to further reduce operating costs here. Let me share with you my experience. My company, Natsteel, is in a highly competitive industry. It is a wonder that we are still alive today. We have to constantly battle cheaper imports from low cost overseas suppliers. Margins erode as competition intensifies. The only way for us to stay afloat is to make sure that we are always more cost-effective and provide better quality and service than our competitors. Sir, review and restructuring happen every day in my company. It is a way of life where I work. In the same way, the Government must not let up its efforts on streamlining its bureaucracy and to oil its machinery, so as to provide an ever more cost-effective business environment. I am glad that the Minister for Transport announced yesterday that a sum of $18 million would be put aside to upgrade our ports. Yes, indeed, our port must continue to upgrade its facilities and improve its operational efficiency to stay ahead of competition. Similarly, our banking sector must be reformed to provide world-class services. So too our bureaucratic processes must be streamlined to facilitate business transactions. Our regulatory systems and our laws must be reviewed regularly to ensure greater flexibility while preserving the integrity of the system. Sir, this is a continuous process and will become increasingly more important as the world becomes increasingly more competitive. The Economic Review Committee seeks to reposition our economy for the new era, but we must not stop here.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I did not say that Mr Low does not support philanthropy. What I said was he was suggesting that we should not give tax rebates for those who have donated, for those philanthropists. Sir, may I now continue with my speech? Sir, our economy has undergone tremendous fundamental and structural changes over the last few years. The external environment has definitely changed. Our market has changed, our competitors have changed and we too must change in order to survive. The objective of this year's Budget is in response to those changes to keep Singapore competitive. These measures, the tax cuts, are much welcomed by our business community. However, Sir, there is undoubtedly a price to pay. To balance the budget, the GST rate has to be raised. The Budget does provide for a comprehensive compensation package to cushion the impact of the GST hike. However, it is not without pain. I agree. I have no doubt that our people are fully aware of the challenges that we are facing today and I am confident that they are all prepared to make short-term sacrifices to achieve long-term stability and prosperity. But it is crucial for us to ensure that our efforts to restructure our economy succeed so that we keep faith with our people, and so that their sacrifices will not be in vain. Mr Speaker, Sir, to succeed in restructuring and repositioning our economy, I would like to suggest to the Government, in addition to the change in the tax regime, to consider three aspects - the Government itself, the businesses and the people. Firstly, the Government. True, taxation is only one of the many components of business cost. Reduction in corporate and individual taxes is helpful, but tax cuts alone are not sufficient to ensure Singapore's overall competitiveness.”
“If we have travelled to other parts of the world, we would realise that Singapore, comparatively speaking, has one of the cheapest car park charges in the world. And most of the cosmopolitan cities have very expensive car parks, and it is often that you find that it is a lot cheaper to take a taxi, take the underground or take a bus, or most likely, just walk to where you want to go. Therefore, for this car park issue, it is a matter of cost recovery, rather than compensation for those who want to buy cars and keep them at home without driving them. Sir, having spent so much time addressing the issues of our Opposition Members, I have very little time left for my own speech.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I do hear Mr Chia clearly, but I just said earlier that cutting personal income tax is a must, if we are to attract foreign talents and foreign high income earners and entrepreneurs to come to our country and to retain them here. Even our local entrepreneurs will benefit from this. Given this point, my next point will therefore be valid, that if we have to cut personal income tax and we still want to cut corporate tax further, then there is no other choice but to raise taxes from elsewhere. The fourth point that Mr Chia mentioned is that GST increases in future should maybe warrant some kind of exemption. That perhaps is an item for the Minister for Finance to consider, but my personal view is that there is a very high cost of policing exempt items. Coming with this high cost would mean more resources would have to be put in. It would mean, again, more taxes to be collected. At the same time, giving exempt items would mean the collection of GST overall must come down and, therefore, again, it implies higher GST rates. So again I am not sure whether Mr Chia is suggesting higher GST rates. At the same time, it would be far better for us to come out with a package to target at those in need rather than general exempt items, because if we exempt sushi, the poor eat sushi; the rich also would eat sushi. Similarly, if we exempt rice, the poor eat rice; so do the rich. Lastly, Mr Chia said that we should continue to subsidise car parks. This is not an issue, whether we buy a car to keep and not to drive it. Mr Chia is entitled to buy a car and keep it and not drive it, although we will wonder why he would bother to buy a car. But, nevertheless, the issue on car parks is a matter of cost recovery.”
“Mr Chia has mentioned five points in his speech: GST for the poor, cut in personal income tax, corporate tax cuts are not bold enough, GST increases should warrant certain exemptions, and that we should continue to subsidise car parks. Sir, with regard to impact of GST on the poor, Mr Chia has suggested that we should perhaps give special waivers for retirees, the lower income groups and for those who suffer most, those who are poorer. But Mr Chia, again like Mr Low, has forgotten that we have a compensation package. Mr Chia keeps repeating that tax is tax, it is money from the people to the Government. I would like to say that a package is a package, it is still money from the Government to the people. Secondly, Mr Chia also mentioned that cuts in personal income tax are not effective in attracting foreign investments. Granted that I do agree that cuts in personal tax alone are probably not enough to attract talents to Singapore, but if we do not cut personal income tax at the highest end, Sir, no matter what we do, those higher income earners will think that Singapore is trying to cream off what they have contributed and, therefore, it may not be enough on its own, but it is still necessary. Thirdly, Mr Chia mentioned that our corporate tax is not bold enough, suggesting that perhaps we should reduce corporate tax even further. Yes, probably a further cut may be even more effective in bringing in foreign investments but, if we do so, we need to then increase GST. So I wonder again if Mr Chia is suggesting that we should review whether we should increase the GST even further in order to finance the further cuts in corporate taxes. Mr Steve Chia Kiah Hong rose ---”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I do not have the fortune of Mr Seng Han Thong, who can keep "kok kay" at home, but I do have eggs at home. My fear is that our economic restructuring package is like an egg. My concern is that the Opposition Members of this House are trying to have an omelette while the rest in the House here are trying to hatch a chicken so that, hopefully, we will have more eggs for the days to come. Sir, I would like to share with you that there are probably three types of people in this world. The first type of people make things happen, the second type watch things happen, and the last type do not know what is happening. And, Sir, I would like to suggest that perhaps today there is a fourth type of people, and they are sitting there criticising everything that happens. Sir, I would like to take this opportunity to respond to several comments made by our Opposition colleague, Mr Low, as well as Mr Steve Chia. Mr Low has denied and refused to acknowledge the compensation package that the Government has put in place. He has criticised the Government's efforts to restructure the economy. He even criticised the Government for giving recognition to encourage philanthropy. He also said that we should not reduce the cost of car ownership. I wonder whether Mr Low is therefore suggesting that we should restore the cost of car ownership. Sir, restructuring is not without pain. There is a Chinese saying, "liang yao ku kou li yu bing, zhong yan ni er li yu xing". I wonder whether Mr Low prefers morphine, painkillers, rather than cure for our economic ills. Sir, I would now like to turn to Mr Steve Chia.”
“Sir, can I ask the Senior Minister of State whether he will consider allowing schools to partner with professional voluntary organisations which are professionals in counselling as this, to a certain extent, will also alleviate the workload on the teachers? And, bearing in mind that some of these problems are not just within the school, it could involve the family as well as the parents and the siblings. So, would it not be more efficient and productive to allow professional organisations to collaborate with the schools in providing counselling support?”
“Sir, can I ask the Senior Minister of State whether there are any programmes or any efforts made in identifying students who are potentially at risk and, if such a programme exists, what follow-up programmes are there to help these students cope?”
“Sir, can I ask the Minister whether he would consider extending the scheme to allow disabled patients to be treated at GP clinics rather than polyclinics? Secondly, would he also consider extending the scheme to allow patients who require long-term regular treatment to be under this scheme? And, thirdly, would he consider allowing the low-income groups who have not achieved the age of 65 years old to also benefit from this scheme, so that they would be able to save on their travelling cost?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the medical condition on whether a patient is fit to be discharged is decided by a doctor but could the Minister of State consider whether the decision to charge him fee for overstaying can be determined in consultation with the medical social workers to take into consideration the financial and social aspects? The medical condition is decided by a medical doctor but the decision to charge a fee should be decided including other elements as well.”
“We need an equally strong and cohesive people, different aspirations and dreams perhaps, but cohesive nonetheless as our source of strength when we face the challenges and explore the opportunities the future holds for us. On this note, Sir, I support the motion. Mr Speaker: I propose to take the break now. I suspend the sitting and will take the Chair again at 3.00 pm. Sitting accordingly suspended at 2.30 pm until 3.00 pm. Sitting resumed at 3.00 pm [Mr Speaker in the Chair] Debate resumed.”
“It is perhaps useful for us to revisit the curriculum of our schools to see if it is possible to strengthen those components relating to moral education and character building, and to provide more opportunities to allow them to interact and develop their social skills. I think pre-school education in particular should perhaps focus more on character building rather than academic work. I read with great interest the Ministry of Education's Addendum to the President's Address wherein the Minister said that his Ministry will pay particular attention to curriculum design, teacher training and regulation in pre-school education. I hope the Minister will take into account the need for greater emphasis on character building in its reviews. In primary and secondary schools, we should perhaps consider enhancing the community involvement programmes. Some of these programmes may be conducted in collaboration with selected community and welfare organisations so that there is greater professionalism and more meaningful focus. Effective and early participation in community and volunteer work will allow our students to develop a strong sense of responsibility to the community during their formative years, which ultimately may become the foundation of their character as they mature into adulthood. Mr Speaker, Sir, as the President has said in his Address, the world has changed. We must change too if we want to remain relevant. A good Government and a cohesive people are what brought us here so far. We will need an equally good Government, different style perhaps, but good nonetheless to lead us forward.”
“I will stay and help solve the problem, because I am involved in building the home. Singapore is not a hotel. It is a home. It is our home. The five-star facilities it has do not make it a home. It is you and I that make it our home. It is therefore important for us to continue to encourage Singaporeans in all quarters as we build our nation to involve them. Greater participation and involvement by Singaporeans will undoubtedly give them a greater sense of ownership. When the country needs them, they will stay and help because this is their home. Mr Speaker, Sir, I believe the starting point to build a nation is to build a sense of belonging, a sense of responsibility and a sense of ownership. And the starting point of that process is education. We take pride in the academic achievements of our students which have been outstanding compared to many other countries, even better than some of the developed countries. It is perhaps equally crucial to develop the character of our students, their moral standards and their value system. In the early years, this has primarily been the task of parents. Other than verbal instructions, parents also serve as role models. But as our society progresses, I am afraid this is fast becoming a lost art. Many young parents today are no longer equipped to impart sound moral standards or value systems to their children. In many instances, both parents are working and they spend little time with their children during their formative years. Granted that parents cannot absolve their duty in bringing up their children properly, we need to recognise their practical limitations.”
“It is also important for us to develop a greater capacity and tolerance for failures. There was a Chinese saying se pai nai chng kung chi mu, failure is the mother of success. Indeed, failure is but a stepping stone to success for as long as one continues to try. One will truly fail when one stops trying. Our emphasis on excellence and achievement might have caused us to be somewhat less tolerant for failures. We need to be mindful of the risk of becoming a perfectionist society, be it our education system, our economy or our society at large. We need to consciously enlarge our tolerance for failures. We can then begin to build not just a progressive society but also a responsible, caring and tolerant society. Mr Speaker, Sir, the third area of focus in building a people is to develop a sense of ownership. Many Singaporeans own a home today, be it a Housing and Development Board flat or private property. In fact, quite a number of them own more than one property, and not just in Singapore but overseas as well. Therefore, property ownership is no longer the sole factor in Singaporeans' minds when they consider the issue of national ownership. I travel widely in my private job and stay in hotels regularly. It is clear to me that hotels are not my home. If the hotel I stay in is poorly managed, I will switch to other hotels next time. If the hotel suffers a major crisis and has to shut down, I just move on to another one. I have no say in how the hotel is run and I have no relationship with the hotel. But my home is not a hotel. My home is where my family is. My home is where I have a say in how things are done after consulting my wife, of course. If there is a problem in my home, I do not run away and move on to the next home.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the second thing I believe we must do is to inculcate among Singaporeans a sense of responsibility, not only towards oneself but to fellow Singaporeans, to the society and to the nation. As we push for economic progress, there is a risk that some Singaporeans may become somewhat individualistic, and seek progress at the expense of others. We are beginning to see some signs of this among our younger generation. If we are to build a cohesive society, we will need to constantly remind ourselves that we survive and thrive not as individuals but as a collective people. In my university where I studied, there was a very popular sports event - boat racing. Boat racing is one of the most demanding team sports. Other than physical fitness, coordination and team work are often what give the team a winning edge. We are like rowing a boat. We need everyone in the boat to pull in the same direction in order to arrive and win as a team. If one of us decides to push ahead at the expense of others, we will simply go around in circles. As our economy progresses and our society matures, income gap is likely to widen and social tension likely to increase. To ensure social cohesion, it is necessary to have a safety net to help those who fall between the cracks. However, I think it is equally important, if not more important, to strengthen the social fabric by promoting mutual help and support. It is particularly crucial for us to remind our younger generation that as they strive for higher achievements, they have a responsibility towards fellow Singaporeans, especially those who are not as economically successful. We need to encourage charity and volunteerism and to provide the necessary framework to facilitate them.”
“We are all members of the same family, regardless of our academic or financial achievements. We are a small nation. We need to constantly strive for excellence just to survive. However, in our pursuit of excellence, it is inevitable that some members of the family may lag behind. Some of them would eventually catch up, but some may not be able to do so for various reasons and would feel a sense of despair. They are nonetheless members of the Singapore family. We need to reassure them that they remain so and there is always a place for them here in their home. Through the actions of the Government and the society, we must not label them as a burden or as a liability to the nation, but as an asset. While it is critical that we attract foreign talents to help make us internationally competitive, we must also be mindful to intensify our efforts to nurture and develop local talents as well. Recently, I had a meeting with a neighbourhood primary school principal. She told me that her school had a banner that said, "Every child is a gift to us, taught and cared for as a gifted child". She wanted to remind every teacher, every student and every parent that each child is special and a gift to be treasured regardless of their results. I am sure students and parents of that school would feel proud to belong to such a school. Sir, if we can succeed in making Singaporeans feel that they are a gift to the nation and that we treasure them regardless of their achievements, they in turn will feel proud to be Singaporeans. We will then have taken the first step towards building a united Singapore people.”
“You can expect quite a different perspective from the younger generation. Furthermore, as we become increasingly globalised, many Singaporeans will be travelling overseas, and some of them may end up working overseas, especially the younger generation and the entrepreneurs. The attraction of better pay and perceived greater opportunities in these countries may cause some of them to think of migration. It is therefore crucial that we deal with the aspirations and expectations of our younger generation in order to prepare them for the future. In our search for new economic opportunities, we must also be mindful of the need to strengthen our social cohesion. In his speech, the President also mentioned that in addition to economic restructuring, the Government will also focus on promoting social cohesion. Mr Speaker, Sir, I am glad that other than the Economic Review Committee that was set up to chart the new direction for our economy and develop new engines of growth, the Government has also set up the Remaking Singapore Committee to look into the non-economic aspects of our renewal. Indeed, nation building is more than rebuilding the economy. In fact, to build a nation, we need to start with building a people, because our people are our only real asset. With a strong and committed people, we will then be able to build a connected and cohesive society. And with that, we can begin to build a progressive and prosperous nation. Sir, to build a Singaporean people, I think three areas need to be looked at. Firstly, we need to inculcate a strong sense of belonging. We are, first and foremost, Singaporeans. We may speak different languages or practise different religions and traditions, but we are Singaporeans.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I speak in support of the motion by the Member for Marine Parade GRC. Sir, I know the daunting task of holding the attention of Members after seven speakers before me. Therefore, I intend to keep my speech brief. Mr Speaker, Sir, Singapore is at a crossroad. As we look back into the history of nation-building, we have indeed come a long way. We saw the nation struggled for independence. We felt the anguish of Singapore's separation from Malaysia and we saw the turbulence of racial conflicts. We enjoyed the unprecedented economic growth and prosperity. We went through the Asian financial crisis in the late 1990s. We experienced world economic recession and the emergence of international terrorism in the new millennium. Many of our parents had witnessed the birth of our nation, the struggle it went through and the success it achieved. They identified readily with the first generation leaders who have led them through the early dead years of our history. They have developed a strong sense of comradeship. They understand the sacrifices and the price that one has to pay for the security and prosperity that so many of us have enjoyed and taken for granted today. They can appreciate the necessity of building a strong and cohesive multi-racial society. Some of us in our own generation may have seen or experienced part of that and can relate to the issues of concern to the leadership. However, when we look at our next generation, future leaders of our nation, we will invariably come away with a sense of anxiety and uncertainty. The younger generation was born and brought up in a relatively secure and prosperous period of our history. They have not seen the turbulence nor the struggle our nation has gone through.”