Ho Peng Kee
Singapore
“In this way, new appointees can also cultivate that important X-factor - a judicial temperament. Second, structured in-house seminars where latest developments and emerging areas of the law can be fully ventilated and experience shared. NUS law staff can be enlisted for this purpose.”
“An increasing volume of recent legislation introduced in this House has been adapted not only from the UK but also from Australia and New Zealand. The GST Bill is a good example. Finally, Sir, the ad-hoc appointments of Judicial Commissioners is also a laudable move.”
“Sir, I am concluding my speech. My other point is this. It may surprise Members to know that despite our functions, which are all public oriented, CASE to-date has not yet been granted status of a charity under the Charities Act, despite our asking for it, writing in, and so forth, to the relevant departments.”
“Sir, there may be light all around but some people, nevertheless, still see no picture. When we talk about the big picture, we do not need details. When we talk about the small picture, we need details. The big picture, Sir, is very clear. GST is linked to the reformation of our tax structure. It helps us to bring down our corporate tax.”
“Correct, Sir. Sir, it is important under the Bill, as a matter of policy, that the matter of profiteering should be looked into. As I mentioned earlier, Sir, it has been mentioned many times by not one Minister, but many Ministers, on not one occasion but many occasions, that CASE has a role to play.”
“It also reviews and advocates for legislation on consumer-protection and operates the Good Retailers Scheme in conjunction with STPB and, like many other consumer groups worldwide, publishes its own flagship magazine, The Consumer. Sir, like the hon. Member before me, I see that there is a glimpse of impatience on your face.”
The complete record
Every one of 110 lines we hold for Ho Peng Kee, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 3.
“Mr Jeyaretnam is fully aware of the reasons why Singapore Immigration and Registration (SIR) has not issued Mr Ho Juan Thai a passport. Mr Jeyaretnam had been closely associated with Mr Ho, a member of the Workers' Party, and had acted as Mr Ho's counsel previously. SIR has not issued Mr Ho a Singapore passport for the following reasons: a) Mr Ho is required to respond to SIR's queries over the renewal endorsement in his expired Singapore passport. Mr Ho had publicly declared that he amended the expiry date of his passport, which expired in December 1976, to enter the UK in July 1977. If this is true, this may constitute an offence of forgery. b) Mr Ho has been an Exit Permit defaulter since August 1986. He is therefore required to answer for his Exit Permit offence upon his return to Singapore. c) Although no warrant of arrest has been issued against Mr Ho, the authorities would like to interview him over his racially inflammatory speeches at election rallies during the December 1976 General Election in which he ran as the Workers' Party election candidate in Bukit Panjang. Mr Jeyaretnam, acting as counsel for Mr Ho, was informed in 1986 why Mr Ho could not be issued a passport. Mr Ho himself was informed of the reasons in writing by the Singapore High Commissioner in London and MINDEF in 1992, when he applied for a new Singapore passport. The High Commissioner has also told Mr Ho that SIR is ready to issue him with a one-way Document of Identity to facilitate his return to Singapore if he so wishes.”
“I hope parents will make the extra effort to bring their children to visit not only their own community museum, but also those of the other races and the Singapore History Museum. Schools and community groups can do likewise. Here, Sir, I would urge MITA to monitor the racial profile of visitors to each of these museums when they are set up and take appropriate steps should there be an imbalance. Sir, Singapore's heritage is also captured by several buildings and structures dotting the island. Examples are the Ford Factory, St James Power Station and the Armenian Church. There are many other examples that I am sure Members know of. Each of them, Sir, has a story to tell. I would like to ask the Minister whether steps are being taken to ensure that these stories are told, again and again, to our children and their children. Finally, Sir, I think it is common experience that in many quizzes that are conducted in Singapore, participants seem to know more about world history and events than Singapore's history or events which impact on Singapore's major races. I hope this Bill will go some way to rectify this unfortunate situation.”
“Sir, I speak in support of the Bill. The integration of the National Museum, National Archives and Oral History Department is timely. Indeed, some will say it is overdue. It will provide greater coherence and synergy to Government's efforts in ensuring that Singaporeans, particularly younger ones, remember and cherish our roots. Sir, an important result of the Bill is that more Singaporeans and foreigners with relevant expertise, as the Minister has mentioned just now, will have a say in how our heritage, both as Singaporeans and as members of different races with global links, is preserved, interpreted and presented. Heritage is never a top-down exercise. To invoke passion and a sense of belonging, involvement and identification are vital. This the Bill seeks to achieve. I hope Singaporeans will indeed feel this sense of passion in being involved and being identified with the cause underlying the Bill. We have heard from the Minister that the setting up of community heritage centres or museums is part of this overall approach. Each community is given the opportunity to share its heritage and culture with fellow Singaporeans, and it is a good thing that they themselves have a say on how this is to be done. In this way, greater awareness and pride are created in one's roots and culture. However, may I add a word of caution here. I hope this awareness and pride will not stop there. Awareness must cross the physical boundaries of one's own community museum to encompass the other community museums or centres of the other races. And more importantly, pride must not rest solely on one's own roots, but rise to a higher and common level, based on the fact that we are all Singaporeans.”
“In this way, new appointees can also cultivate that important X-factor - a judicial temperament. Second, structured in-house seminars where latest developments and emerging areas of the law can be fully ventilated and experience shared. NUS law staff can be enlisted for this purpose. Third, workshops to develop better interpersonal and communication skills. Judicial officers are figures of authority. In dispensing justice, they must be able to inspire confidence in the lawyers and clients with whom they deal. Observers in the gallery also form opinions of our judicial system from what they see. It can be an unnerving experience for young and new judicial officers to handle lawyers who are senior in age, experience and wisdom. It is easy to overlook this area which I feel is important. Sir, I believe that a loose version of these improvement schemes has been introduced in the Subordinate Courts. They should be better structured and formalised. Some countries like Japan take the training of judges very seriously. And why not!”
“Sir, I speak in support of the Bill. The reorganisation of the Subordinate Courts flows from the restructuring of the Supreme Court. Now that the Judges and Magistrates of the Subordinate Courts have enlarged civil jurisdiction, it is imperative that more attention be focused on their training and development. This should be done in relation to both legal as well as other related skills and knowledge. Sir, two points should be considered. First, is there a need to raise the qualifying criterion before a person can be appointed as a judicial officer of the Subordinate Courts, especially in the case of Magistrates and Deputy Registrars? Currently, no qualifying period exists before which a person can be appointed as Deputy Registrar. In the case of a Magistrate, a lawyer of more than a year's standing may be appointed -just one year. Some Singaporeans are surprised that some of our Deputy Registrars and Magistrates are relatively young. In these young hands lie the power to decide the commercial and personal fate of fellow Singaporeans. Dispensation of justice and application of the law do not take place in a vacuum but in the context of Singapore's social milieu. Not only is legal knowledge important but also wisdom that comes with experience in dealing with matters of the world. Second, is there a need to ensure that our Magistrates and Judges in the Subordinate Courts are better prepared to undertake their important tasks? Sir, may I offer three suggestions. First, a mentoring scheme - where new Judges and Magistrates are attached to more experienced ones to, in the first instance, understudy and observe and, on a continuing basis, to consult and discuss difficult points of law.”
“An increasing volume of recent legislation introduced in this House has been adapted not only from the UK but also from Australia and New Zealand. The GST Bill is a good example. Finally, Sir, the ad-hoc appointments of Judicial Commissioners is also a laudable move. It will enable the best talents from the Bar to contribute directly to dispensing justice and developing Singapore's legal jurisprudence. There are outstanding lawyers who, for one reason or another, may decline appointments to the Bench. Now, their expertise can be tapped. For such ad-hoc appointments, it is imperative that only men and women of outstanding legal expertise and integrity be appointed. The proximity within which Singapore lawyers practise their profession may result in some consternation should men and women of less than proven legal expertise or integrity be appointed.”
“Sir, I speak in support of the Bill. Sir, the restructuring of the courts system is timely. It is a natural progression from the other reforms that have been introduced in our legal system. Our judicial system, since the appointment of the current Chief Justice, has been spruced up. It is now more efficient and effective. These are qualities to add to those which Singapore's judicial system already possesses - competence and integrity. All who feel that they have justified legal claims should have no fear in addressing their grievances in our courts. There is no need for anyone to take things into his own hands - by engaging thugs to pressurise or beat up an opponent or go on a hunger strike. These approaches are out of sync with Singapore's social circumstances. Sir, I am sure the legal profession welcomes the creation of our very own permanent Court of Appeal. It is yet another building block in the strengthening of our legal system and, as the Minister has pointed out, should lead us closer to the day when we can finally cut ourselves off from the remaining apron strings of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council. Such a move is positive also in two other ways. First, within the Supreme Court, newer Judicial Commissioners (JCs) and Judges can look forward to some form of career development. Recognition of the quality of their judgements and contribution to the development of Singapore's very own legal jurisprudence can come in the form of appointment as a Judge of Appeal. Secondly, it will speed up the development of Singapore's very own legal jurisprudence. This has become increasingly critical as the corpus of UK laws assume a stronger European flavour. Social and even business conditions in Singapore increasingly differ from those in the UK.”
“Sir, I rise to support the Bill. Sir, in Singapore, Government takes elections seriously. Voting is compulsory. Steps are taken to ensure that voting is fair. The vote is secret. Decentralised counting of votes in a national election is a logical move. It is certainly more practical than the present system. As a matter of procedure and with the safeguards, no one should have any quibbles with it. What is important is that the substance remains unchanged, that is, the integrity of the system is not jeopardised. Elections continue to be taken seriously by Government. Voting remains compulsory and fair. Our vote remains a secret. In fact, the new system reduces the danger of any natural mishap to the ballot boxes in the course of transportation. Hopefully, it will stop once and for all any casting of aspersions or unjustified allegations as to what may happen to the ballot boxes in the course of transportation. Sir, it stands to reason that as the number of constituencies has increased, decentralised counting of votes is the way to go. In fact, I will go one step further and ask the Government to adopt a decentralised system of counting for our general elections as well. I also support the second modification proposed by the Bill. Why have a situation where the PEC may be put under pressure and time constraint in deciding on the eligibility of an application of a candidate and that can be avoided without compromising the integrity of the system? The more time the Committee has, the closer the scrutiny, the more detailed the checks, the more careful the deliberations and the more credible the list of candidates. Justice is served, fairness is secured.”
“Sir, there may be light all around but some people, nevertheless, still see no picture. When we talk about the big picture, we do not need details. When we talk about the small picture, we need details. The big picture, Sir, is very clear. GST is linked to the reformation of our tax structure. It helps us to bring down our corporate tax. It brings in more people to invest in Singapore. It creates jobs - one, two, three, four. I hope Mr Ling is quite clear in his mind now, how the link is made. Mr Ling How Doong: Cite one example. What sort of job it creates? 4.16 pm”
“Sir, I am concluding my speech. My other point is this. It may surprise Members to know that despite our functions, which are all public oriented, CASE to-date has not yet been granted status of a charity under the Charities Act, despite our asking for it, writing in, and so forth, to the relevant departments. Sir, to sum up, in the light of GST, the need for responsible retailer and wise consumer behaviour has emerged in a poignant manner. As in the past, CASE will, despite constraints, continue to do its part. We urge all consumers to do likewise. With this, Sir, I support the Bill, and I rest my case.”
“Correct, Sir. Sir, it is important under the Bill, as a matter of policy, that the matter of profiteering should be looked into. As I mentioned earlier, Sir, it has been mentioned many times by not one Minister, but many Ministers, on not one occasion but many occasions, that CASE has a role to play. Therefore, Sir, I am addressing this problem of profiteering and how CASE intends to help Singaporeans as consumers to play this role.”
“It also reviews and advocates for legislation on consumer-protection and operates the Good Retailers Scheme in conjunction with STPB and, like many other consumer groups worldwide, publishes its own flagship magazine, The Consumer. Sir, like the hon. Member before me, I see that there is a glimpse of impatience on your face.”
“However, unlike other consumer groups, financial support from our Government is, if I may use the word, miniscule, pegged at five cents per head of population, a formula worked out in 1981. It is to CASE's credit that, despite being a non-Government body, we are well regarded by businesses and retailers. Sir, you may ask, why should not CASE, as with other organisations, raise its own funds? The simple answer is this: unlike other organisations, it is critical that CASE is not seen to be beholden to businesses from which these funds would be raised. In fact, we do not even carry advertisements in our magazine. Notwithstanding its tight financial position, CASE has fulfilled its mission of advancing the cause of good consumerism in Singapore, essentially through its consumer education and information programmes and assistance in settling consumer complaints. I have issued a handout, which I believe is in Members' hands, which sets out the various programmes that CASE has undertaken all these years. Headed by a Central Committee comprising volunteers, CASE, through the media, highlights and enriches debate on topical consumer issues, presenting the consumer viewpoint. In 1992 alone, CASE was featured in 259 press reports in our various language newspapers. CASE organises seminars on hot topics of the day; the last one being on health care costs. It also produces pamphlets and guidebooks on consumer topics; conducts price surveys on a host of items, including major household commodities. It assists members in their disputes with businesses. It represents consumer interests in a host of technical committees and advisory boards. It oversees three Advisory Councils on renovation and decoration, on advertising and milk for children.”
“Therefore, in this light, the re-activation of the Committee is a good first step. Sir, CASE welcomes the Finance Minister's statement that Government is prepared to provide CASE with more funds. I also thank the Minister for Trade and Industry this morning in his call to consumers to give greater support to CASE. On its part, CASE will certainly take on a higher profile, as has been urged on it by many Ministers and others, to monitor and disseminate price movements. We will work with grassroots organisations such as CCCs and RCs to do this more effectively. The media will be asked to provide greater publicity to our findings. CASE is currently exploring the possibility of establishing a computer network with CCCs so that information on price movements can flow more swiftly both ways, from the ground to CASE and from CASE to the ground. In other words, there will be close coordination between our ears and eyes on the ground and the central headquarters. We are discussing with the relevant authorities on how best this can be done. Sir, may I take this opportunity, with the indulgence of Members, to apprise Members and Singaporeans of the status of CASE. I am afraid that many people still do not fully understand the status of CASE. CASE is an independent, members-based organisation registered as a society under the Societies Act. It was founded through the initiative of NTUC in 1971 to counter profiteering. NTUC has remained stalwart supporters since then with many of its affiliated unions registered as institutional members. In short, Sir, CASE, like other consumer groups worldwide, is not a Government body, neither is it a statutory board.”
“Sir, Mr Ling asks what has GST got to do with jobs. All of us who have thought through this matter of GST and who have discussed it, would know that GST has both a big picture and a small picture. As we hear debates in this House, I think this point comes across very clearly. Some Singaporeans see the big picture better. Other Singaporeans, like housewives, may see the smaller picture better. But I think all of us here are expected to know both the big and the small picture. But I think Mr Ling's questions show that this is a wrong assumption, and some people know neither the big picture nor the small picture. Mr Cheo has mentioned a few negative points for GST. All of us here, PAP MPs, even NMPs, I think, are objective. We bring up both good points and bad points about GST. But Mr Cheo only mentioned the bad points. Perhaps on another occasion he may also want to list out the good points about GST. Sir, I would like to inject a new viewpoint to today's discussion. This may seem like a parochial viewpoint but it is not. I declare once again my interest as Vice-President of the Consumers Association of Singapore (CASE). Sir, I welcome Government's decision to re-activate the Committee on Profiteering. CASE is ready to play its part in the Committee. In the Budget debate, I joined several MPs, amongst whom are, I think, Dr Vasoo and Mr Chew Heng Ching, in urging Government to adopt a more pro-active approach to countering possible profiteering and run-away inflation. We felt that even though Government has been most reassuring in stating that such phenomena will not be tolerated, actions, however, do speak louder than words. The free market, notwithstanding, Government should be seen to be doing something.”
“He shared in the New Paper his main reason for doing this, and I quote him: "The meeting lasted more than an hour. I was impressed with his concern for Singapore football. He told me: `Forget the past. Look towards the future.' Surely I must trust the Minister's words. That was the clincher. I was convinced." I think those of us who are footballs fans will know that the Minister that Fandi Ahmad was referring to was, of course, Mr Mah Bow Tan, advisor to FAS, who is not in the House today. So the moral of the story is: the personal concern and prestige of a Minister can go a long way. Sir, I urge Government to give sports higher priority on its agenda.”
“Focusing priorities, setting targets, channelling limited resources, nurturing champions, lining up sponsors and keeping them happy, coordinating the National Sports Associations, arbitrating on disputes, guiding Singapore sports into the era of professionalism and, of course, continuing with the important task of ensuring healthy lifestyles for all Singaporeans - these require the attention of more than a Minister in charge of a large Ministry (MCD), hardworking though he is, who is, concurrently, also the Minister for Health. Sportsmen, like performing artistes, have a certain emotional mould that requires sensitive handling. Just as MITA has done a good job resuscitating the arts scene in Singapore, I am sure a Ministry of Sports will bring the same uplifting effect to sports. Sir, even if Government considers the setting up of another Ministry not necessary, I would suggest that perhaps it should put forward a Minister who can be the Sports Supremo in Singapore, much as Minister George Yeo and Professor Tommy Koh are heroes in the arts scene. Sir, we know, of late, the Minister, Dr Yeo Ning Hong, who heads the SNOC, has been in the limelight, but essentially that is because the SEA Games are coming along. Sir, I say this with seriousness and with due respect to Mr Yeo Cheow Tong, Dr Yeo Ning Hong, and other Ministers and MPs who sit as advisors and presidents of sports associations. In the eyes of Singaporeans, there is as yet no Minister who, in the mould of Minister George Yeo or Professor Tommy Koh, has come out as the champion of sports in Singapore. In my humble view, I think there is such a need. Football fans rejoice that Fandi Ahmad is playing finally for Singapore.”
“Sir, on 18th January 1993, a suggestion was raised in this House by the hon. Member who just spoke, that Government should form a Ministry of Sports and Youth. The Prime Minister replied that there was no need to form such a Ministry. His reply dealt at length and, convincingly, in my view, why a separate Ministry was not required to look after the needs of youth. However, the Prime Minister did not fully deal with the need for a Ministry of Sports. Sir, just as we have a Ministry to look after the Arts, Government should seriously consider tasking, if not setting up separately, a Ministry to look after sports. Unlike youths, sports - like the Arts - permeates national life and is not a sectoral concern. I am aware that sports comes under the portfolio of the Minister for Community Development. But, considering the wide coverage of MCD, I wonder whether the Minister, try as he might, can really devote much energy or time to the cause of sports. Sir, again, there are other agencies doing the job. The Singapore Sports Council (SSC) is doing a good job. But its brief is targeted at the masses - the bringing of sports to all Singaporeans, even though I understand that, of late, it is also targeting sports excellence as an objective. Achieving sports excellence is a complex matter requiring total commitment.”
“Use computers, use this, use that, but bring in the children, because they are the next generation. In all this, I share many of the sentiments expressed earlier that we must promote the reading habit, we must promote widely and we must bring in the next generation. And it is for this reason that we are also conducting an experiment with neighbourhood children's libraries. For secondary school students, it is not a problem because they can always take a bus or MRT to go to the branch library. But for children, we did a survey and we found that children tend to use libraries which are close to them. If the libraries are too far away, they do not use the library. And it happened at the same time that the PAP Community Foundation was interested in setting up children's libraries. So we got together and we have agreed to try out four prototypes at various places, Bukit Batok, Bukit Panjang, Mountbatten and one other location.”
“One of the ideas being developed for Library 2000 is to make our libraries different, so that each branch library will have a constellation of neighbourhood libraries which are all organically connected to the local community so that you can have a board, you can bring in community leaders, you can bring in school principals, you can bring in other people who are interested, so that each library will then develop a local character, with activities and with a range of books suited to the unique characteristics of that commmunity. Of course, there will be a core collection of books, encyclopedias, reference texts and so on. But the different towns have got different characters, different demographic profiles, different racial compositions, and I think the mix of books should reflect these differences. Our newest library, not yet completed, is in Tampines. And MITA's intention is to make Tampines Branch Library an experimental test bed. We are going to try out all kinds of new ideas in that library, including the idea that if you want a library book, you call up. Your order is taken down. We send it to you. You pay. so you do not have to come down to the library. Maybe you can return it by post and we have a special envelope for this purpose. It will also include the idea of a more interesting system of book display. Why must books in a library be arranged in stacks? Why can they not be like the books in MPH or Times bookshop? In other words, a complete change in the orientation, that you are not there waiting for people to come to use your facilities. You are there to market your books to the browser. So arrange books like the way books are arranged in a bookshop and see how it goes and bring in the children.”
“And why is it that the library must issue a separate library card and make you pay a deposit when our new IC has a bar code? So all these things the Committee should review and is reviewing. For instance, they are going to introduce a system whereby all you need is to use your IC when you go to the library. There is no need for a separate library card. But we need much more use of information technology. We need to review the hierarchical structure and we need to look at the possiblity of specialist libraries, say, for the arts community, for the business community and, as Mr Ho Peng Kee suggests, maybe even for the sports community. But for each specialist library, there must be a champion. For the arts library, the National Arts Council is the champion and the proposal is to site it at the Singapore Performing Arts Centre at Marina Bay. That is like the arrangement at the Lincoln Centre and at the Barbican in London. I think it is a good idea, not too big, but an arts library where all the expensive books are kept, where all the musical scores are available, all the opera scripts, librettos, are available. I think that we can have. For a business library, Mr Peter Sung has raised it last year and this year. The EDB and TDB appear to be interested. If they champion it, then we go for it. Of course, they will have to help finance it. Equally with sports, if the Sports Council is interested, I think we should encourage the Library 2000 Review Committee to speak to the Sports Council. But is cannot be that MITA is more interested in a sports library than the Sports Council. Then there is something seriously wrong.”
“BG George Yong-Boon Yeo: Sir, early last year, there was a proposal to fund additional branch libraries in Singapore on the old model. The agreement which the Ministry had worked out with the Finance Ministry in the past was that every time a housing estate reaches a population of 200,000, it triggers off the procedures to build a new library with more or less the same set of books and with more or less the same kind of facilities. We already have eight branch libraries and I feel that maybe now is the time to take a step back and have a complete review of where we want to go in the next century. I have some doubts about this idea of having big branch libraries. Some of the facilities in these libraries are not very well utilised. And they all stand alone, which means that if the weather is bad, it is not convenient to go there. Actually, libraries should be a haven when there is bad weather. Why not make libraries a part of a shopping centre, so that it becomes a part of the activities of the family? Some can go to the Library, others can go shopping, others can go for a haircut. And why must we be so rigid about the idea of 200,000 people? We have a National Library headquarters, then we have eight branch libraries and we have nothing else. So I formed a committee called the Library 2000 Review Committee which is chaired by Mr Tan Chin Nam of the EDB and Mr Koh Kheng Hwa of the National Computer Board. I asked them to take a completely fresh perspective, from the viewpoint of how to plug Singapore into the libraries of the world. With information technology, you can have a virtual library where all you need is a computer terminal linked up to all the major libraries in the world and anything that you want can be delivered.”
“Sir, my topic is not so exciting as Mr Chiam's, but no less important. Sir, I would like to strongly argue that there is a need to review the need for a sports library in Singapore and this can be done in conjunction with the review undertaken by the Library 2000 Review Committee. Currently, we have sports libraries at the Singapore Sports Council (SSC) and at the National Institute of Education (NIE). But I feel that since the Committee is looking into all matters such as technology, the arts, Asian collection, business information and children's collections, I think we should not forget the sportsmen in Singapore. Such a review and such a sports library will indeed give a boost to the cause of sports in Singapore. Modern technology can be fully exploited to incorporate computerised and audio-visual features. These features can be maximised for coaching purposes. Magic moments in Singapore's sports can be captured on celluloid and computer discs. A Hall of Fame of Singapore's sports heroes can be incorporated in the overall design. Encouraging words from past sportsmen can be compiled and even displayed in parts of the library. Link-ups can be effected with other sports libraries. I think the possibilities are infinite. Sir, I think it will be a pity if, just as many of us today have forgotten the exploits of our sportswomen like Mary Klasse in the 50s, 30 or 40 years hence, Singaporeans of the future will not remember the exploits of Ang Peng Siong, C. Kunalan and Tan Howe Liang. Sir, my point is very simple. It is not a matter of where a library should be located or other details. But since the purview of the Library 2000 Review Committee is rather broad, I hope that the Minister will consider tasking the Committee to include a sports library.”
“Sir, I wish to ask the Minister whether the reinforcing of courtesy and graciousness in Singaporeans can take on a higher profile. Sir, I have just one more amendment and that is on censorship. We have heard already the Minister's comprehensive reply on the matter of censorship, in particular, as regards TV and film censorship. Sir, may I just submit that vigilance is perhaps needed in two other areas - not quite strict censorship, but monitoring and vigilance. The first is on plays. Sir, there has been some controversy recently on specific acts done on the stage by actors, such as the drinking of urine and the dressing up of some Muslim actresses in Catholic garb. I appreciate that in the realm of plays, we should not have an overly strict censorship regime. Experimentation is healthy and, indeed, necessary. But may I submit that this is one area where Government may want to monitor. The other is on the easy availability and popularity of computer games such as Street-fighter, Terminator, Art of Fighting which are all about delivering kicks, punches, blows, shooting, etc. The question is: What is the effect of these games on our young? Is it healthy that aggression in our young is cultivated in such a manner under the guise of amusement? Here, again, I would submit that some monitoring and vigilance is required.”
“Thank you, Sir. Sir, inculcating courtesy in Singaporeans is not a frill. It is a necessity. As Singapore becomes a highly urbanised, compact and competitive society where life is hectic and to some, stressful, there is need to seek a balance with the finer things in life. This MITA is doing. But my question is: Are attitudes being transformed? Are Singaporeans becoming more gracious, appreciative, thoughtful and courteous? Or, are many Singaporeans still impatient, inconsiderate and self-centred? Sir, episodes such as the outcry against the proposed setting up of a hospice at Dover Road and a hospital at Bukit Batok indicate that this is so. Likewise, phenomena such as road bullies, shop bullies, granny bashers, etc. The present approach of holding an annual courtesy campaign, in my view, Sir, is not totally satisfactory. Last year, I said in this House that this approach had only attained "uneven success". Even though more Singaporeans had indeed become more courteous, I felt that much more could be done. I also said that courtesy was more a mindset that had to be continually cultivated. An annual campaign that focused on outward actions left much to be desired. I hope much more can be done in this area and would urge MITA to do so. Sir, two specific areas for consideration, in my view, are: First, to work with MCD on its Punctuality Campaign. I think this is a very useful campaign, an important campaign, and perhaps we can even adopt the slogan: "to be courteous is to be punctual". The second area which many Singaporeans have also talked about is this need for us to cast aside Singaporeans' propensity for complaints. In terms of courtesy, there is also need for Government to continually encourage Singaporeans to be more appreciative or more affirming.”
“I would also suggest that half-way houses be considered as institutions to be factored into Singapore's long-term land use. Finally, can more be done to encourage better patronage by Government departments of the varied and, I hear, good quality services offered by many of these houses, including house and office removal, painting of premises, upholstery of furniture, carpentry, catering, general cleaning and frame-making?”
“Sir, helping ex-drug addicts to kick the habit, re-join the work force and live meaningful lives thereafter is no easy task. It requires the concerted efforts of Government, volunteer organisations, community groups and individual Singaporeans. Thankfully, the drug situation in Singapore is well under control. There are, however, areas for improvement. One area is in the recruitment of Volunteer Aftercare Officers (VAOs). SANA ideally needs 4,000 officers. There are currently only 1,000. May I ask the Minister what steps have been taken to attract more volunteers to help out in the drug rehabilitation program-me. 3.30 pm In my view, Sir, an important strategy of drug rehabilitation is to provide for more half-way houses. Having sat on a management committee of one many years ago, and having visited one recently, I am convinced that it is extremely useful for ex-drug addicts who find difficulties in re-integrating with their families and the community to live for a spell in half-way houses. Currently, I understand that SCORE offers start-up grants to new half-way houses that are being formed. I would like to know whether the Ministry is prepared to give more support for the setting up and running of these half-way houses. In particular, would the Ministry consider providing operating grants to such houses, perhaps, on a per resident basis or matching-of-funds-raised basis? Another point, Sir, is this. Many half-way houses today are on Government premises and occupy old Government buildings. The problem is that the leases for such premises are usually rather short. I would suggest that the Government takes a longer-term view and see how half-way houses can be provided on premises with longer-term leases.”
“The backbone, of course, is the Volunteer Special Constabulary (VSC). I note and welcome the Minister's statement recently on plans to put NS men to more effective use. I wish to ask him, in general, what can be expected in such a review and whether it will also include reservists. I would also like to know whether parallel efforts are being taken to induce more volunteers to join the efforts of the Police.”
“Sir, the Singapore Police Force (SPF) plays an important role in ensuring that Singapore continues to be one of the safest cities in the world. Our police officers are effective in law enforcement and criminals know that there is no escape from the long arm of the law. At the same time, the Police maintains its close rapport with the people through community policing. In this regard, the National Police Cadet Corps, or NPCC, with its 20,000 members, plays a useful role. I take pride in our Police as being one which is forward-looking and vigilant for new crime trends in order to be steps ahead of the criminals. The professionalism of our police officers is internationally recognised when they are called upon to serve in peacekeeping forces overseas. The SPF is a tough and effective force, yet one with a human face. I hope all Singaporeans appreciate the vital contribution of the Police in maintaining law and order, an important consideration for investors when they decide where to commit their funds. I feel that the Police is under-appreciated by the public. Such outstanding performance can only be sustained if the Force can recruit good people into its ranks. School-leavers must regard a career in the Police as attractive so that more will be prepared to join the Force. I would like to ask the Minister what measures are taken to ensure that the Police continues to have its fair share of good people coming into its ranks. Apart from regular police officers, the Police Force also has NS men, reservists and volunteers. A key to success in community policing is the participation of volunteers. In schools, NPCC teacher-officers and cadets do their bit. The National Crime Prevention Council also plays a role.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head L of the Main Estimates be reduced by $10 in respect of Code LG 2500. (In Mandarin) Sir, Singapore is a small place. Like it or not, Singaporeans must learn to live peaceably in close proximity. In fact, we have encouraged people to work overseas. As we build Singapore Inc, we nurture a sense of adventure and teamwork in our young, the experience of communal-living in a school boarding facility or university hall of residence makes an important difference. I commend Government for encouraging communal living by supporting the building of boarding schools in ACS and RI and halls of residence in NUS and NTU. Life in a boarding school and hall of residence instils leadership skills, discipline, teamwork, mutual tolerance, esprit-de-corps and sense of identity in its members. These are important attributes we seek to instil in all Singaporeans. Living in a hall is a useful part of university experience. May I ask the Minister whether his Ministry has plans to provide stronger support to boarding schools and university halls of residence and secondly, whether there are plans to build halls of residence in the polytechnics? Lastly, let me declare my interest that I am Master of a hall of residence in NUS. I have been living in the hall for more than 10 years and my earlier observations are based on my personal experience and conviction.”
“After all, this is a key element of Singapore Inc's corporate culture as embodied in the "Many Helping Hands" concept, where the able gives a helping hand to the less able. I urge the Minister to ensure that moral and civic responsibility to society and teamwork be emphasised in the GEP. My second concern, Sir, focuses on the ability of some parents to handle their gifted children. To many parents, their child's selection for the programme is akin to discovering a pot of gold, and why not? This is understandable. After all, they themselves never had such a golden opportunity. But it is important, especially for GEP students, that the basic elements of respect for and obedience to parents be maintained. Parents must remain in control in handling their bright children. Otherwise, we are collectively cultivating a generation of top students who are arrogant, individualistic and self-centred. In addition, some parents fear loss of face should their children be asked to leave the gifted programme. They therefore push their children hard, sometimes overly hard. Ultimately, I think all of us will agree that it is the parents who bear the responsibility for the upbringing of their children. However, at the macro level, parental handling of children in general and parental handling of bright children, in particular, is a national concern which deserves some attention from Government. Why? Because there are social implications. Brattish children may grow into difficult self-centred adults. This issue was recently highlighted in the press in the case of a school dropout with a high IQ. I would appreciate the Minister's comments.”
“I know many of them feel that they are carrying a heavier load than their colleagues who are undertaking other ECAs. Sir, my second cut is on the Gifted Education Programme. The Gifted Education Programme (GEP) is 10 years old. Some parents and principals are still uncomfortable with certain aspects of the programme. I would like to ask the Minister for his evaluation of the GEP. For example, are there statistics to show how well GEP students have generally fared at 'O' or 'A' level examinations? Do we have GEP students who have done well in science, writing, poetry and drama competitions requiring creativity and flair? I support the programme as its underlying philosophy is to bring out the best in every child, something we cannot argue with. In any case, parents have a choice. However, implementation is also important. I am happy to note that much thought and effort are expended to ensure that all parties concerned - principals, teachers, students and parents - are tuned into the goals of the GEP. My assessment is that the programme is well run. However, I have two concerns. The first concern is that whilst the programme stretches the academic abilities of each child - and that is good - it may unwittingly develop an unhealthy individualistic streak in the child. Individual excellence and achievement may be emphasised to the detriment of cultivating a caring outlook. In an ordinary class setting, there are weaker students to help. In a GEP class, there is danger of "every student for himself or herself" mentality developing. In my view, it is critical that we develop in these top students a spirit of care and concern.”
“Sir, I am a supporter of uniform youth organisations (UYOs). In my view, they can play a special role today as Singapore seeks to build up a sense of adventure and entrepreneurship in all Singaporeans, particularly our young. Just as UYOs played a special role in the 50s and 60s to instil nationhood and promotion of national service, today, they can likewise play a special role. Currently, there are eight UYOs in secondary schools with a total enrolment of about 50,000 students. This amounts to about 33% of the total student enrolment, quite a big figure. It is likely that many Members in this House have benefited from being in a UYO. As the Government seeks to develop a derring-do mindset in Singaporeans, I hope more can be done for the UYOs. I have chaired the Council of the National Police Cadet Corps (NPCC) for the past five years, and can testify to the benefits of NPCC training on our young. Rugged outdoor camps, local and overseas adventurous hikes, mountain climbing and canoeing expeditions, revolver and rifle training, these toughen young bodies and sharpen young minds. I know of some schools where supportive principals actively encourage their secondary 1 students to join a UYO. The UYOs are then organised to achieve other school objectives such as enforcing discipline, instilling school identity and sense of belonging, and transmitting moral values. I wish to ask the Minister whether the MOE sees UYOs as playing a special role in our current national effort to create a stronger adventurous and entrepreneurial spirit amongst Singaporeans, and if so, what can be done to give greater support. In particular, can the contribution of teachers involved in UYOs as a school ECA be better recognised?”
“Basically, this is the mentality of the oriental. This involves dignity and self-respect. They really care about their face. I can understand their feelings. If you say: "Do not do to others what you do not want done on to you" then you should look at the matter from another perspective. First, if you do not want to see others littering indiscriminately and dirtying our country, then we must punish those people who do it. So we have this CWO because people have dirtied our country first and then we have to give them this kind of punishment. Therefore, I feel that he must look at the CWO and the lesson we have learnt from this event in two different perspectives. I hope that the Minister for the Environment will give us his views on this event and whether he has any long-term plans to make Singapore clean and hygienic in order to help our Town Councils.”
“She wrote, "In fact, nobody would question the intent of CWO. Neither would I. We all know the intent of this law and that is to maintain public hygiene and cleanliness in our environment in a most comprehensive and effective way. Despite the three to four decades of public education and year after year of "Keep Singapore Clean Campaign", the problem of littering in public places does not seem to have improved." I think this is the key issue. I absolutely believe that the vast majority of Singaporeans like to have a clean, healthy and hygienic environment. They all appreciate the importance of a clean and hygienic environment. Only a small minority ignore the need for a clean and hygienic environment. So, in principle, I would agree with the CWO because I feel that basically CWO will have some kind of deterrent effect. But from the various reactions and feedback on the recent incident, I believe that Singaporean litterbugs, people who like to throw things around, will pay more attention to the consequences of littering. They will be more careful and will not litter. In the long run, this Act will achieve a very good deterrent effect. I personally find it very strange that more than 20 journalists from Singapore and the international media would come to the very place to cover the event. I believe, perhaps, as pointed out by Mdm Low, that this form of public punishment under the CWO is unprecedented, and hence has a lot of news value in it. I believe nobody has ever expected such extensive news coverage, and this coverage could generate so much response from the public and such extra effect. I look at the caption: "Rebuild a Heart? Humiliate a Heart?" Put me in the shoes of these litterbugs, then I will certainly feel very humiliated and embarrassed.”
“Should a person who leaves behind paper bags or plastic boxes after a picnic at the beach be impeached? Would it make a difference if he says that he had no intention to litter, but had out of forgetfulness or carelessness left the litter behind? I know that this is a difficult situation. If we take a lenient view, and say that "forgetfulness" or "carelessness" is an exculpatory factor, then everyone will plead that in defence. The beach will still be littered, inconvenience and discomfort will still be caused to other users and much effort and money will still be expended to clean up the litter. It is therefore little comfort to say that he did not intend to litter. The message is very clear to all Singaporeans. We must be vigilant when we have litter with us, be they paper bags, plastic cups, pieces of loose papers or coupon tabs. As Government is resolved to overcome this negative social phenomenon, society as a whole must also take heed. The media too should be more sensitive, and not jeopardise the development of what, in my view, is a new punishment which has great potential in Singapore. Sir, I would appreciate the Minister's views. Mr Choo Wee Khiang (Jalan Besar GRC)( In Mandarin): Sir, February was a very interesting and newsworthy month because in that month, litterbugs in Singapore were ordered to do corrective work. On March 6, a journalist from Lianhe Zaobao, Mdm Low Pooi Fong wrote an article on litterbugs entitled: "Rebuild a Heart? Humiliate a Heart?" After reading the article, I was deeply touched. I can understand the feelings and sentiments of Mdm Low. I also sympathise with those litterbugs who were given undue publicity and humiliated in public. In the article, she mentioned a fundamental but crucial issue.”
“Thirdly, we expose him to public view and the media so that it will deter him and other like-minded litterbugs from committing similar offences (deterrence). In short, all three effects are intended. But what is the main effect intended? Is it to punish, rehabilitate or deter? I think this is not a moot point but an important one. As previous speakers have shown, there is some uncertainty here. Why is it important? It is important because our reaction to how the first batch of CWO subjects were treated depends, to a large extent, on our understanding of what the CWO seeks to do. If it is primarily to achieve a deterrent effect, the focus shifts away from the feelings of the offenders. A close reading of the Minister's speech indicates that the main thrust of our CWO is deterrence. Can the Minister confirm this? If it is so, then, indeed, due publicity should be given to the punishment. Some Members in this House and other Singaporeans are unhappy with the treatment received by the first batch of CWO subjects. But we must not blow this unhappiness out of proportion. Their unhappiness is really directed at the manner in which the media covered the event - the lack of sensitivity; the bend towards sensationalism - in short, the creation of a public spectacle. The real culprit, therefore, is not the CWO, nor is it the Ministry of the Environment, but the media. I would therefore urge the media to cover subsequent clean-ups more tastefully and in a less sensational manner. With such an approach, the three-fold effects of a CWO would still be achieved. Briefly, on another point. Another point of unhappiness, as brought up by previous speakers, is the nature of some of the offences on which the CWO was based.”
“Sir, the CWO is a welcomed addition to the range of punishments available to the courts. But I feel that it is necessary to determine its basic underlying philosophy. Is it retribution - to exact a price for a wrong? Or, is it deterrence - to deter the offender and other like-minded offenders from committing the offence? Or, is it rehabilitation - to help the offender overcome his anti-social behaviour? Or, is it a mix of all three, and if so, in what proportions? In most countries, the main thrust of a CWO is to rehabilitate the offender. The Minister's response to MPs' comments on the Bill at the Second Reading stage provides a clue, and I quote him: "Dr John Chen mentioned that the Bill is designed to shame the offender, and he is right in that. Sir, the aim of the CWO is to reform or rehabilitate the offender so that, hopefully, he will not in future litter again, which otherwise would cause problems to the environment and environmental public health. The form of punishment prescribed in the Bill will serve as a deterrent against littering." [Hansard, 14 September 1992, col. 212]. What do the Minister's words suggest? First, as it is a serious offence, we want to punish him accordingly. Imposing a fine or counselling, suitable only for minor offences, is inadequate. They do not fit the crime. A heavier penalty should be meted out. Recalcitrant litterbugs and those who commit serious littering offences should therefore be publicly shamed (retribution). Secondly, we make him pick up litter, so that he will realise the consequences of his anti-social act - that it costs effort, inconvenience and money to clean up after him. Hopefully, he will feel remorseful and turn over a new leaf (rehabilitation).”
“In this respect, price stability following the implementation is crucial. If price variations are within control, people will have the chance to familiarise themselves with the system and to make the necessary adjustments. GST will be better accepted in a situation of stable prices. Everyone, whether he is a shopkeeper or the man-in-the-street, must realise that only through successful implementation of the new system of tax on consumption will we be able to enjoy lower personal income and corporate tax rates. At the same time, those who have not been paying income tax and yet are enjoying all the public services provided by the Government with the taxes paid by others will now be able to make their own contributions through the GST.”
“These are among the questions in the minds of Singaporeans. I find that many Singaporeans are convinced that businessmen will take advantage of the GST. Many fear that they will have to pay far more than 3% from 1st April next year. They are concerned that businessmen will erode all the benefits and gains they ought to obtain through the concessions and rebates announced by the Minister for Finance the other day. That is the actual worry among Singaporeans, not the 3% rate. I would like to suggest that the Government consider strengthening its enforcement unit to monitor and study price trends following the introduction of GST. Should there be undue increases, appropriate measures should be taken. Large organisations like NTUC Fairprice and its retail affiliates can play a part in stabilising prices. Other retail cooperatives should also be encouraged to play a similar role. I also hope that companies generally will try to absorb the GST or part of it. This can be done because they enjoy a number of concessions too, including the reduction in corporate tax. More importantly, the public should be firm. They should boycott those shops that take advantage of the GST and patronise other shops. The number of stalls and shops in Singapore is large enough. Retailers who are moderate and do not cheat should be supported. This will create pressure on those retailers who seek to fish in troubled waters. The real challenge for us here is how to dispel the people's fears concerning the GST and help them understand and then accept the system. If, as the Government expects, the majority are indeed not worse off after the implementation of GST, because of the concessions and tax rebates, I believe GST will become a way of life here without much problems.”
“All our wealth is the result of the toil of Singaporeans, who know that nothing can be gained without hard work. I think that principle still stands true. The $200 top-up scheme should not be seen as the start of more such topping-ups. We should not have such unrealistic expectations, or we will end up disappointed. Instead, the move should be seen as a gesture of appreciation from the Government for the hard work the people have put in to bring progress for Singapore. It is also intended to help more people enjoy the fruits of our success. More importantly, it also goes to encourage the habit of saving and investing. I hope those who do not have CPF accounts, including housewives, retirees and the self-employed, will be encouraged to open accounts. Children should help their parents by opening accounts for them so that they will not be left out. Our parents are the people who had put in the early efforts that have now brought us prosperity. We should help them enjoy the fruits of their labour in their old age. The third point concerns the GST. Singaporeans on the whole welcome the GST announcement with mixed feelings. There is anxiety and there is happiness - anxiety over its effect on price levels, and happiness over the many concessions granted to offset it. Based on feedback I receive, it is clear that the people's worry about the GST has nothing to do with the 3% rate. They know that it is low, that it is in fact the lowest GST rate in the world. Their worry actually centres on certain questions they cannot answer: whether businessmen, hawkers, shopkeepers, etc, will be honest enough in implementing the GST, whether prices will not rise more than 3%, or whether there will be businessmen who are prepared to absorb the GST and not raise prices.”
“They are enough to spur our entrepreneurs to explore regional opportunities without making Singapore unattractive. This balance is important in order that our domestic economy can remain strong. If the incentives to go abroad are far more attractive, the excessive cash outflow that results will affect domestic investments and this will in turn be detrimental to domestic economic development and job opportunities. The Government should always be mindful of this balance. There is no point developing a second wing overseas if this only weakens us domestically. The second wing must act as a stabiliser for a strong domestic economy. On the CPF Top-up Scheme to buy shares, I also welcome the Finance Minister's announcement of a scheme to enable Singaporeans with CPF accounts to buy shares at a discount. This is a very good way for us to increase the number of Singaporeans investing in the share market. More importantly, it enables Singaporeans to become owners of large, privatised Government companies, such as Singapore Telecom. I hope when more Government-owned companies are privatised, they will be made available to Singaporeans through similar schemes. It is hoped that a large proportion of our people will be motivated to set aside their funds and to invest. Eventually, more families, in fact, every Singaporean adult, will become joint-owners of these large, profitable companies. I understand that many Singaporeans are actually surprised that the Government would grant as much as $200 to top up every CPF account that has at least $500. Mr Deputy Speaker, many regard this an unusual move, indeed, uncharacteristic of Singapore. This is understandable. Singapore does not possess rich natural resources that can be distributed among ourselves.”
“More recognition and Government support should be given to clubs, such as the Singapore Adventurers' Club. Greater support should be extended to school uniformed youth groups, such as the NPCC and the NCC. More companies should be encouraged to organise outward-bound type camps for their employees. The outward-bound facilities on Pulau Ubin should be exploited not just by companies but by schools, RCs and clubs. I want to end by making this observation. A well-known local entrepreneur, Mr Ho Kwon Ping, in an address to the Foreign Correspondents Club reported in the Straits Times on 4th March 1993, had this to say, and I quote, "... many American CEOs are proud of their collegiate sports achievements because they felt these experiences shaped their leadership and teamwork skills, and taught important lessons on winning, losing and competition - lessons which served them well in the game of life." I say, "Mr Ho, well said, I support these words." Sir, I support the motion. Encik Mohamad Maidin B P M (Aljunied GRC)( In Malay): Mr Deputy Speaker, the 1993 Budget is among the most comprehensive ever tabled in this House. I wish to touch on a few aspects. First, on developing a second wing for the Singapore economy in the rapidly-developing Asia-Pacific region. Local companies should ensure that they have a place in the growing prosperity now spreading across this region. Being a small nation does not mean we cannot play a major role that will bring positive results to this development. In fact, from the point of view of capital and efficiency, the capacity of local entrepreneurs should not be underestimated. In this respect, I welcome the various tax incentives announced. These incentives are adequate and not excessive.”
“Employers on their part can do their bit by providing better working conditions for employees who are willing to venture overseas. In addition, they can help the re-entry adjustment process into Singapore of returning employees. Younger employees can be sent overseas to expose them, as is happening now with many recent graduates. In my recent trip with Mr Chen to Vietnam and Laos, with a group of ASEAN parliamentarians, we went out of our way to meet some Singaporeans working in Hanoi and Vientienne. They seemed to be adjusting quite well and were enjoying their stint abroad. I feel that there is a need to publicise these Singaporeans in the media regularly as The Straits Times did recently - a Singaporean hairdresser working in Hanoi, running the only up-market salon in Hanoi. He was no big-time executive, well-heeled. He was an entrepreneur in his own right, somebody who is doing something very unique. And I think we should do this more regularly with the help of the media. They are just ordinary Singaporeans who have taken the steps to go overseas. Like Mr Chandra Das, I am of the view that there are entrepreneurs around and now that it is fashionable to be an entrepreneur or to be known as an entrepreneur, I urge more of them to come forward. At home, I think it is important to cultivate the necessary mindset. For a start, I would say, let us encourage Singaporeans to be more physically active. I feel that sports and rugged activities play a part in our national effort to encourage more entrepreneurial spirit and skills. More media publicity should be given to events, such as triathlons, Marathon Man contests, adventurous exploits by Singaporeans overseas, etc.”
“But I think this proposal by Dr Vasoo to come together to put forward something more concrete is something consumers will appreciate and, in fact, Mr Chew Heng Ching has suggested one specific way, which is, to re-activate the Committee on Profiteering. Let me now just ask the Minister three questions. First, will steps be taken to increase the circulation and acceptance of one-cent coins? This will not solve the problem but this may help to counter the phenomenon of rounding off. Will Government take steps to encourage the acceptance of these coins by retailers? Secondly, will steps be taken to require shops that are exempt from collecting GST and which have not registered, to be identified perhaps by a notice or an emblem, so that consumers will know the status of retailers with whom they are dealing? And thirdly, is Government taking the opportunity to encourage more Singaporeans to go cashless? If so, how? As we have heard in this House today, not every Singaporean may be convinced that offsets and rebates will result in a better financial position for him or her after GST. Government has asked consumers to do their sums. Many may need help to get their sums right. And this is where I think grassroots leaders can play a useful role. In any case, I urge Government to closely monitor the effects of GST and make adjustments when necessary? Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, just to make it clear, despite these concerns, I am for GST. Entrepreneurship - just a few words on entrepreneurship. Much has been said of the need to cultivate greater entrepreneurship in Singaporeans. Fiscal incentives are important but, in themselves, they are not enough. Government measures such as the building of Singapore schools overseas or setting up of Singapore clubs will help.”
“It should be noted, however, that whilst it may be possible to identify and single out blatant profiteers, it will be more difficult to identify excessive profit-makers or arrest an overall rise in prices exceeding 3%. Of course one may use 3% as a guideline, but it may not be so easy in practice. Some businesses, we read in the press, are already increasing their prices. When asked, they claim that these increases are not due to impending GST. They gave a string of other reasons - rent increases, increases in suppliers' prices, etc. Some may be genuine reasons, others more suspect. Nearer implementation date, it is not unlikely that more businesses will increase their prices to take advantage of a likely increase in sales as consumers buy to beat the GST deadline. They will attribute such increases to reasons other than GST. How would Government deal with this phenomenon? In any case, what is the baseline for calculating the 3% - February 1993 when GST was announced or March 1994, just before GST comes into effect? Of course you will say, rightfully so, commonsense, it should be March 1994. But, in reality, if prices rise significantly between February 1993 and March 1994, consumers will feel that GST-led price increases would have exceeded 3%. I support Dr Vasoo's proposal that Government take the lead to bring the various groups together to discuss an action plan on how to counter excessive profit makers and profiteers. I recognise the fact that Government has already gone the extra mile to assure consumers that there will be no profiteering.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, this Budget opens a new chapter in Singapore's economic history. Just as the 1986 "Beat the Recession" budget was instrumental in steering Singapore out of recession, this Budget puts Singapore on a firm footing to compete in the super league, in building an external economy and reforming our tax restructure. It does not provide all the answers but a framework on which further incentives and reforms can hang. Sir, concerns arising from the Budget can be divided into business concerns and consumer and worker concerns. Colleagues have raised in this House many business concerns. Let me just focus on consumer concerns which I am in close touch with as Vice-President of the Consumers Association of Singapore (CASE). Some parliamentary colleagues have mentioned that the main concern of consumers is the spectre of price increases and profiteering by retailers, both before and after the implementation of GST. Recognising these concerns, Government has rightly reassured consumers that profiteering will not get out of hand. To ensure this, calls have been made to various bodies to play their part, besides the Government, NTUC, CASE, grassroots organisations (which I think play a very important role) such as the CCCs, the RCs, the merchant associations and, above all, individual consumers. Each group has a unique role. If each group does not do its part, it is no use to point fingers if things go wrong. On the part of CASE, already we are gearing up for GST. We are prepared to conduct more regular price surveys, which we are already doing, and seek the cooperation of the media to publish these so that there is wider circulation. And we are also prepared to work with grassroots organisations to monitor price increases.”
“Given this constraint, would the Minister therefore consider other situations, such as is available in New Zealand, property damage to vehicles in accident cases which do not involve injury to persons or complex issues of law. The other quick point is, as Dr Beng has mentioned, one of the key benefits of the Bill is that there is no legal representation. We know sometimes when lawyers get into the picture, there is a possibility that simplicity may be lost or economy or speed may be lost. However, I would ask the Minister whether he would consider, not legal representation, but lay representation, and not as of right but as a matter of discretion by the Registrar. For example, if a 60-year old lady enters into a contract for the sale of a fridge - she is the party to the contract - and the fridge proves to be defective, then under section 21 of the Act she herself has to press the claim in a Small Claims Tribunal. Only when the party is a corporate party then you can have a representation. But in a case like this, which I would submit is an appropriate case, would not it be fairer if such an old lady can ask somebody else, eg, a younger nephew, to bring her case before the tribunal? I do not think this is opening the floodgates, but this is giving a proper discretion to the Registrar of the tribunal to ensure that there is some parity between the parties in the contest. Sir, I support the Bill.”
“Or you could actually make corporate parties or any other parties for that matter who file beyond a certain number of claims within a certain period of time to pay more. This will not deter them as such, but this will reflect the fact that they use the facilities more and, therefore, they should bear in greater proportion the costs of these facilities. There are two other quick points I wish to make. The Minister in his Second Reading speech of the Small Claims Tribunals Bill in 1984 did say that after the system had been tried out and found to be successful, consideration may be given to extending the jurisdiction of the tribunal to cover other types of actions. I note that this point has not been considered in these present amendments. But I would like to ask the Minister whether, after eight years of its successful implementation, he would consider extending the jurisdiction of small claims tribunals. Again, there are two ways to do it. You can extend it by way of lifting or raising the quantum of monetary limit (right now it is $2,000) or you could extend the types of claims that can be brought before the court. Here again, I think we can take a leaf from other jurisdictions. I believe in New Zealand, for example, other claims, besides contracts for sale of goods or provision of services, can be brought before the tribunal. I do know that an important point of this tribunal is that you do not want to put before the tribunal complex issues of law. Therefore, the supposition is that in a contract for sale of goods under $2,000, or provision of services under $2,000, this problem would not arise.”
“Sir, I rise to speak in support of the Bill. Sir, indeed, as the Minister has said, this Bill and the amendments thereof will certainly facilitate the small claims process in Singapore. As Dr Beng has mentioned, the key benefits of the process are simplicity, economy, and also the fact that consumers will feel comfortable with the process since no lawyers are present and the costs are low. And that is why, Sir, it is for very very reason that even though I support the Bill, I think some concern should be registered in that, like the other small claims processes in the world, the small claims process in Singapore has mainly benefited not so much the consumers but companies, government agencies, statutory boards who have got many claims of a simple nature to press. And, therefore, I find that with the present amendment, the Town Councils will find it easier to file claims in court. However, it also adds on to this problem: that where consumers, even though they were to be important beneficiaries of the small claims process, will find themselves now being put before the Small Claims Tribunal by an additional agency. It is not something peculiar to Singapore. It is a problem that all small claims processes grapple with, and other jurisdictions have tinkered with various ways to control the problem but without much success. For example, you can think of limiting the status of claimants, although I think this is too extreme, or you can limit each claimant to a certain number of claims that can be filed within a time period of a month or so, although that may be said to be denying justice to a legitimate party, the corporate party.”