Ho See Beng
Singapore
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to ask the Minister of State whether he is aware that each time re- settlement takes place, the business houses or firms suffer a terrible loss. Although the HDB could provide them with alternative shop premises, they have to rent them from the HDB.”
“Sir, I want to ask a supplementary question with vested interest. This concerns a teacher who upgraded himself or herself and got admitted into the University, but the teacher has got to forgo his or her salary. In the case of an SAF officer, if he is sent to the University, he does not have to sacrifice his salary.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, may I ask whether the Minister will consider giving incentives to consumers who read their own meters?. I ask this question because it will save PUB a substantial amount of money by way of salaries for meter readers, if the PUB succeeds in teaching consumers how to read their own meters.”
“But before I could explain the relevancy, I was interrupted by the Member for Anson, who stood up and denied that he had ever said anything about supplying me with such a list.”
“Sir, as I have said, I intend to appeal to the Minister for National Development whether he will consider giving priority allocation of flats to the Blair Plain residents who will be resettled by PSA soon.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, when the House adjourned at 8.00 pm last night, I was reminding the Member for Anson that I have yet to receive his list of Blair Plain residents whom he claimed to have attended his meeting and approached him for assistance on the matter pertaining to resettlement.”
The complete record
Every one of 839 lines we hold for Ho See Beng, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 8 of 17.
“Sir, Confucius said, "Saying without thought is labour lost." I am quite satisfied with the reply of the Minister of State, and I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn, Mr Teong Eng Siong(In Mandarin): Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 0 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead DAA 1107*. (* The same amendment also stood in the names of Messrs Lee Yiok Seng, Ng Kah Ting and Ho Kah Leong.) Sir, I would like to touch on the fall in prices of chickens and eggs. The Primary Production Department has contributed much to the promotion of agriculture and animal husbandry. In view of our limited land area, its contribution is even more meritorious. Very soon, there will be many people moving into the Punggol area. Our agricultural sector is able to provide poultry, pork and fish for almost the whole population of Singapore. However, there is a phenomenon that the production of eggs is in excess of demand. So a situation has been created where the farmers engaged in poultry keeping have suffered some losses, In my constituency, there are also a number of farmers who keep poultry. They complain to me that based on the retail price of eggs they are now getting 5 cents per egg less than before. In view of this, they feel that the heavy production of eggs is glutting the market. I would like the Minister to pay attention to this. I would request him to take some practical measures to help promote the sale of eggs and find markets for such eggs so that the poultry farmers need not incur an unnecessary loss. I mean, he should try to get markets abroad so that the eggs could fetch a better price, thus helping the poultry farmers to live better and to be able to carry on with poultry keeping. 6.49 p.m. [Mr Deputy Speaker in the Chair]”
“seem that on the one hand while the Urban Renewal Authority is driving the associations out of their premises in the name of urban renewal, the Building Control Division on the other hand puts obstruction in their removal to new premises. The associations are therefore in a dilemma, and I would therefore urge the Building Control Division to exercise some degree of flexibility and also to examine the rationale behind some of their regulations. 6.15 p.m.”
“I accept your ruling, Sir. I would like to draw the attention of the House to the extreme difficulty experienced nowadays by individuals and associations in seeking approval from the Building Control Division for a change in the utilisation of building premises. The Building Control Division appears to be absolutely inflexible, fussing over minor technicalities which are often irrelevant and stultify attempts to use premises for any other purpose. This creates frustration and indignation among the public. Let me give you a few examples. In my constituency, as a result of urban renewal, about half a dozen associations have been asked to quit their premises. These associations experienced great difficulty in obtaining suitable alternative locations and have thus been unable to move within the time specified by the Urban Renewal Authority. However, even when they found a suitable location their application to use the premises has been rejected by the Building Control Division on the ground that the association should not be sited in that locality. No real reason was given as to why the-location was unsuitable and consequently the impression is created that the decision has been made at the whims and fancies of somebody in the Building Control Division. Sometimes when a locality is approved by the Building Control Division, they will nevertheless insist that the third floor should be used instead of the second floor which is preferred by the association. If the third floor can be used, why not the second floor? What is the rationale behind such a thinking? It would, therefore.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 0 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead BDA 1107*. (* The same amendment also stood in the name of Mr Ng Kah Ting.) I wish to say something about the proceedings of this Parliament. I would like to lay a complaint before you that in future -”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the ideal foreign relation situation for Singapore is to be a friend of all and enemy of none. I am referring to our foreign relation situation towards the super powers. It has been acknowledged that the best way of maintaining good relations with these super powers is to hold them at an equal distance. We all know that our Foreign Minister is an able diplomat. Could he tell us the position of our relationship with these super powers, and whether it has been maintained at an equal distance?”
“Sir, my supplementary question is this. Is the Minister aware that the complaint about rejection of applications for identity cards is due to the mis-spelling of the applicant's name in the birth certificate?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, is the Minister aware that some people have lost their eligibility for identity cards because of the fact that their names in their birth certificates were mis-spelt? As a result of this error, when the holder of the old paper identity card applied for the new laminated identity card -”
“Sir, the fact is that the car parks are still under-utilised. So may I suggest that these car parks be used as pasar ma/am sites?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, since the Minister of State has refused to allow free parking in these fringe car parks as I have suggested. I presume the Ministry has plans for better utilisation of these car parks. May I know what is the plan?”
“Sir, how could the Minister allow donations to recognised charitable institutions to be deductible from income tax on the one hand, but on the other hand he refuses to exempt the same charitable institutions from double road tax?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, can I ask a supplementary question, as the Minister who is now answering the question is not the Minister for Finance?”
“(6) That the sum to be allocated for Head W be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead CDA 1201. (7) That the sum to be allocated for Head W be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead CEA 1109.”
“Sir, in view of the answer, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.”
“Sir, I said just now that the person concerned has applied for a new identity card. When he went to the Commissioner for Registration he was told to go and see the Controller of Immigration. The Con- troller of Immigration told him that he must go and see the Commissioner for Registration. There is no way of knowing who should move first. Nobody knows.”
“Sir, I would like to ask the Minister for Health and Home Affairs whether he has any policy governing residents of Singapore who are without identity cards. Will he consider issuing at least blue identity cards to such people if he is satisfied that they are former residents of Singapore? Some of these people have been employed abroad at one time and were holders of the old Singapore paper identity cards. But now upon returning to Singapore they found that the old Singapore paper identity card has been changed to the present laminated card. So they applied to the Commissioner of National Registration for new identity cards but were told to apply to the Immigration Department for permanent stay before applying for the new identity cards. At the office of the Controller of Immigration they were told to obtain an identity card first before applying for permanent stay. Thus they were pushed from pillar to post due to the lack of decision of these two departments. These people are in a dilemma as no one will employ them as they have no identity cards. Moreover, employers are not able to pay the Central Provident Fund contributions for those who do not have identity cards. In view of the plight of these people without identity cards, I wonder whether the Minister concerned could do something to alleviate their hardship.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head U be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead DAA 1l09*. (*The same amendment also stood in the names of Messrs P. Govindaswamy and Ong Teng Cheong). Sir, may I have your permission to range over my next amendment+ on subhead GAA 1111, as the topic I want to raise under these subheads is interrelated? +The amendment reads as follows:- (7)That the sum to be allocated for Head U be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead GAA 1111.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, in the normal course of events, an offender is offered composition for a first minor traffic offence. But in the case mentioned by the Member for River Valley, why is it that the motorist who committed a minor offence for the first time was not offered a composition?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, under this subhead several complaints have been made by various Members, but in so far as the issues I have brought up are concerned, the door is not slammed in my face. Therefore, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn viz.”
“Sir, it seems we have got to settle this matter outside the Chamber once again.”
“They are citizens of Singapore, and how can we see them roaming about in the streets without a roof over their heads? In view of this, Sir, I appeal to the Minister concerned to make a ruling on this matter in favour of these unfortunate single persons, the victims of circumstances, who have lost their dwelling places through no fault of their own.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head S be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead CAA 8201*. (*The same amendment also stood in the names of Messrs Ng Kah Ting, Lee Yiok Seng, L. P. Rodrigo and Ong Teng Cheong). Sir, this is a matter in connection with the Resettlement Department under the Housing and Development Board. As a result of urban renewal in my constituency, many single persons who are affected by it have been unable to obtain priority for allocation of Housing and Development Board flats. The Resettlement Department refused to resettle them on the ground that these subtenants have never lived there at the time when a census was taken and therefore their names did not appear in its register. Sir, if the this ground unfortunate. Department's official held against them, it is most They are unlike those people who, knowing that the property has been acquired, moved in and stayed after the cut-off date, in the hope of obtaining priority for allocation of HDB flats when eviction takes place. Sir, the subtenants I am referring to are bona fide residents, whose authenticity can be proved beyond doubt as their identity cards bear their names, addresses and date of original issue long before the acquisition took place. But, Mr Speaker, Sir, the reason why their names have not been recorded in the census at the time of acquisition is that they have "missed the boat" while working on board the ship, if I may use this analogy to describe their position. Hence, when the Resettlement Officers visited their place of abode to take census, their names were not recorded. Sir, it has been said that clothing, food, accommodation and conduct are the four important factors in a man's life. If so, how can they live without accommodation?”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, if the complainant refunds the sum of $10,000, then the position is that the house is not acquired with vacant possession. It would be acquisition with an encumbrance. That being the case, then the tenants and the sub-tenants must be offered alternative accommodation, because the land is encumbered. In this case, the tenants have not been offered alternative accommodation. So they arc waiting to find out whether upon the refund of $10,00() the HDB will be willing to offer them alternative accommodation.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, in view of the glaring anomaly, I respectfully request the Minister concerned to look into this matter and see that justice is not only done but must be seen to be done to the aggrieved party. 5.39 p.m. [Mr Deputy Speaker in the Chair]”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head S be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead BBA 1108. Sir, I would like to draw the attention of the Minister for Law and National Development to the unfair award in respect of land acquisition by the Commissioner of Lands. Sir, arising from urban renewal, the Commissioner of Lands has acquired three shophouses, all of which were owned by the same person in my constituency. These three shophouses have a total area of 1,985 sq, ft. They were acquired by Government for an award of $28,750 which amount, if divided by three, is equal to $9,583.33 for each shophouse. Sir, one of the acquired shophouses was occupied by the owner himself who runs a grocery, while the other two were let out: one a bookshop and the other a clan association. What is unfair is that, while the property was being acquired, the tenants of the bookshop, as well as the clan association, were offered a compensation of $15,000 for each premises or an alternative shophouse, whichever is preferred. But the tenant of the grocery, who happened to be the owner-occupier, was unfortunate as he received only $9,583.33 for his grocery shop, which was acquired with vacant possession. It is a common practice in Singapore that if you sell your house with vacant possession, the value of the property is always higher than if it is encumbered, everything being equal. But in this case the reverse is true. I can vouch that everything is equal in this particular case that I have mentioned, whether in terms of land area or condition of the buildings. But unfortunately in terms of compensation, the owner is worse off than the tenants by about $6,000.”
“In view of the lengthy reply, although it is not very satisfactory, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.”
“Sir, there may be justification for doing that to an unlicensed hawker. But what I am talking about is that of a licensed hawker. He cannot run away. He can be summoned for whatever offence he has committed; but why should the Government confiscate his goods? This is my point.”
“Sir, what I am concerned about is a matter of policy. I would like to ask the Minister whether it is the policy of the Government to confiscate the goods of licensed hawkers if they commit a certain offence. Is it really necessary to take such a drastic step as confiscation of his goods? This is my point.”
“Thus, his capital was gone. This kind of incident is not really serious. It is a minor incident and we should give humane consideration to such minor cases, otherwise they might damage the good reputation of our Government. I would urge the Minister to pay particular attention to such incidents in order to prevent them from happening again.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head P be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead BGA 1111. Sir, since the Ministry of the Environment came under the charge of the present Minister, it has achieved progress at "a thousand miles a day", so to speak. This is an undeniable fact. Therefore, we should praise his Ministry for its work. When praise is due we should give praise, and similarly when criticism is deserved we should duly criticise. However, there have been complaints against hawker inspectors about their conflict or misunderstanding with hawkers. Just now the Minister said that the Ministry of the Environment is conducting educational courses, including a course on human relations. This is very good. I hope there is no training course on Tae-kwon-Do, because that is not proper. These hawker inspectors can work very well but they lack experience. They lack tolerance as well as good and patient manners needed to carry out their work. Sometimes in dealing with hawkers they behave like detectives trying to catch criminals. I have personally seen this behaviour on many occasions. What I would like to raise here is about the licensed hawkers who sometimes commit certain minor offences. I would like to ask whether the hawker inspectors are empowered to confiscate their goods, when they can get the court to issue summons to the offending hawkers. One such incident occurred to a fish hawker in my constituency. Having tendered for some fish at about 7.00 a.m, or 8.00 am, at the Jurong Central Fish Market one day, he returned to put up his stall. In doing so he had to put the fish on the five-foot way. Unaware to him, a hawker inspector came up and said that his fish were causing an obstruction to the pedestrian walk. He then confiscated all his fish.”
“Sir, in view of the satisfactory reply, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The following amendment stood in the name of Mr P. Govindaswamy - (6) That the sum to be allocated for Head N be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead AFA 1111.”
“Sir, I would like to seek clarification from the Minister concerned. I noticed from the Main Estimates that in the head of expenditure Labour Ministry there are two sections, namely, Industrial Relations Section and the Seamen's Industrial Relations Section. As far as I am aware, all industrial disputes between management and labour are referred to the Ministry of Labour for conciliation if both parties are unable to reach agreement. Therefore, I would like to know whether these two industrial relations sections are performing identical functions, or are they performing different functions? If they are doing different functions why are the names the same?”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head N be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead AEA 1201. Sir, may I have your permission to range over amendment (7)*, because the matter I would like to touch oil under these two subheads is inter-related. * The amendment standing in the names of Messrs Ho See Beng, Chin Harn Tong, N. Govindasamy and Cheong Yuen Chee reads as follows: (7) That the sum to be allocated for Head N be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead AGA 1111.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I have not filed an amendment on this subhead. But having listened to my colleague, the Member for Sembawang, asking for a relaxation on the issue of work permits for barbers, I must say that similar complaints have been brought to my attention. I feel that although some barber shops are able to employ male barbers, somehow they prefer to employ female barbers. So there is something going on in the barber business! I would like to ask the Minister to pay special attention to this matter. If at all relaxation is to be considered, then it should be in favour of male barbers rather than female barbers. This matter should he carefully considered.”
“I say this, Mr Speaker, Sir, in the full knowledge that the Government has set up an Economic Activation Committee to speed up the implementation of any anti-recessionary measures, because over-enthusiasm on any front cannot but have ill effects and negate our main objectives. Mr Speaker: Order. It is convenient to take a break now. I suspend this sitting and will take the Chair again at 5.30 p.m. Sitting accordingly suspended at 5.00 p.m. until 5.30 p.m. Sitting resumed at 5.30 p.m. [Mr Speaker in the Chair] Debate resumed.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, may I suggest that the Minister for Finance give this proposition serious thought as this will help keep down the cost of living and ensure a continued supply of essential commodities. Finally, Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to congratulate the Minister for Finance for his industrial development policy which has given adequate attention to investment needs in times of recession. It is this type of forward planning which has seen our young Republic through the many crises which we have faced and survived since 1959. The measures taken under the export promotion policy are also a fine example of looking ahead so that we would be well equipped to grapple with problems before they arise. The proposed establishment of an export credit insurance guarantee scheme in conjunction with the banking and insurance companies is most certainly welcome and, in fact, I would say even overdue. I note this year the Government will be releasing large sums of money for development purposes and that this is also meant to be a step to counter recession. I was glad to observe in this context that he has pointed out that our anti-recessionary measures will probably have inflationary effects. I would, therefore, urge that a very tight watch he kept on these two interacting factors; further inflation will only bring greater hardship to a large number of our citizens who at present are only just able to cope with the increased prices of foodstuffs and other basic commodities brought about by imported inflation last year.”
“Until Government intervened and made direct purchases and rice was sold through cooperative societies and consumer clubs, the price was unduly high and the profits went to a few merchants who, in total disregard of our people's want, were bent only on making massive profits for themselves. This was a totally unfair and unjust case of events. As I said earlier, some businessmen might say that if the Government also enters the trading arena, it would cripple business activity. I cannot agree to that argument. Singapore is a fine example of a socialist-capitalist mix, and Government participation in private enterprise will only be on a limited scale to ensure that, at any point of time, there will still be a flow of essential commodities at minimum prices to the public. This will prevent price manipulation and hoarding by big businesses. We all have to accept that for big business the sole object is profit-making, and if our people are left to the tender mercies of big business, the latter will extract the maximum price they can, thus creating undue hardship as has already been proved. Therefore, if the Government also moves into these areas which are the life-lines of the community, we can ensure that at any given point of time the public will not be held to ransom. The NTUC supermarkets and our consumer clubs have shown how much cheaper prices can be, and the few dollars that the working class can save in their purchases from these places are a great boon to them. How much greater a boon will it be if there are similar state-owned, government-sponsored organisations providing supplies of basic commodities at minimum prices. On top of all this, the added advantage will be that the profit will go to Government, as I mentioned earlier.”
“In more recent times, our Government, recognising the need for the State to own some of these utilities, has taken over trading corporations which provide the telephone services and the external telegraph services. Hence, we now have the Telecommunication Authority, which has absorbed the former Singapore Cable and Wireless, the Singapore Telephone Board and so forth. These are essential services for the community and it is generally accepted that Government should run these organisations and provide the services. And all these utilities, if I may use the word, are profit-making and thus Government earns revenue in an indirect way. Sir, I feel that with the rising cost of living, inflation and so forth, the Government should branch out even more into what has, in the past, been regarded as private sector areas, even though critics may say that if Government goes into business in a big way, there will be unfair competition. But I say unfair competition against whom? Not against the citizens, certainly, but against the firms which are making massive profits. Government participation in these areas will help keep down the cost of living and the profit will go back to Government, and this can be ploughed back into social and economic development. There appears to be a good case for Government to move into business and commerce in a bigger way, to ensure that the basic needs of life for our people are not dependent upon the whims and fancies of businessmen who can jack up prices at will. The recent rise in the price of rice is a fine example.”
“I need mention only a few, such as the Telecommunication Authority of Singapore, Commercial and Industrial Security corporation, and Jurong and Sembawang Shipyards, as examples of this project. All these undertakings have proved to be highly successful. But I would like to suggest that having regard to Singapore's small size and her vulnerable position in international trade and commerce, which make us susceptible to external factors and international cartels, including the growing influence of multi-national corporations, more should be done in this area. Businessmen, whether local or foreign, are profit-oriented and trade is determined by the dictates of economics. Supplies and commodities are always made available to the highest bidder to the detriment of those who cannot pay. These harsh facts were brought home to all of us very clearly during the last few years. The price of rice, for example, our staple food, went up sky-high until Government intervention brought prices down to a more reasonable level. I would therefore like to suggest that Government explore the possibility of venturing into new areas - those dealing in essential commodities - because these are areas which are basic to our survival and could be regarded as "public utilities" in the broadest sense of the word. Mr Speaker, Sir, the very concept of public utilities is that certain requirements of the public have to be state-managed so that they will not be run entirely on a commercial basis and on the dictates of profit-making. It is generally accepted that public utilities should not be run by the private sector; hence we have the Public Utilities Board providing water, electricity and gas.”
“Our taxation rate is already high and any increase in income tax rates will serve merely to act as a disincentive to businessmen and investors. On the other hand, it is inevitable that Government expenditure should rise disproportionately with economic growth for a number of reasons. I would like to suggest to the Hon. Minister for Finance that there is one area which has not as yet been fully exploited, which can not only yield revenue, but also be a social service to the community. I refer to Government being an entrepreneur and participating in certain areas in the private sector which would provide use- ful services to the public and at the same time safeguard the national interest. Economically there are firm grounds for the Government to play the role of entrepreneur. Government and government-sponsored enterprises can ensure that prices be kept to the minimum and that profits do not flow out of the country but are re-invested or distributed locally. This participation could also assist the Government in its efforts to re-structure our economy from that of an entrepot centre to an industrial economy, that derives its well-being from services and other fields. In addition, local and foreign capital can also be tied up with commercial and entrepot trade activities and can thus be geared to a greater extent to new projects formerly rejected by entrepreneurs because of the risks and capital involved. Developments in the economy can thus be in line with the objectives of the national plan. It is appreciated that Government has already ventured into wholly-owned trading companies or joint venture' with foreign and local investors and the Government bodies also run along commercial lines.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, if this philosophy was implemented in other Government departments, and criminals who are difficult to catch are allowed to go their own way whereas the amateur crook, who does not know his way around, is caught and penalised, then Singapore will be in a sorry state of affairs. Mr Speaker, Sir, total Government revenue seems quite adequate for the administration of the State and there appears to be every reason why some relief should be given to income taxpayers at the lowest levels. It is true that such concessions may mean the loss of a few million dollars to the Income Tax Department, but surely that is a sacrifice that the Government can afford, since there are other ready and available sources of revenue. But it is observed that the Minister for Finance has decided against introducing any new taxes for the time being. It is not clear why taxes cannot be imposed on luxury goods, so as to avoid taxing citizens at subsistence level. In conclusion, I would therefore most humbly and respectfully urge that serious consideration be given to the question of income tax relief, for indeed there is need for such relief and such relief is even better late than never. Mr Speaker, Sir, may I now turn to the subject of the total estimated revenue which is given as $2,647.5 million, representing a mere 5% increase over the revised estimate for 1974. The Minister for Finance has drawn our attention to the appreciable slowdown in the rate of growth of revenue as compared with previous years. It is inevitable that the slowdown in economic growth should be reflected in Government revenue, unless the Government takes drastic measures and imposes new taxes to increase revenue. This, of course, is undesirable at the present time.”
“Broadening the base of taxpayers would be one way to offset the loss of revenue even though it may not be a hundred per cent successful, because it is the responsibility, as I mentioned earlier, of every resident to pay his tax. I was, therefore, a bit surprised to read the views of the Income Tax Department, and I quote: `that thus while it is a truism that everyone should bear his dutiful burden, it is also important, in the revenue field, to keep also in sight, costs and yields.' This statement, Mr Speaker, Sir, was made in reference to the problem of collection of taxes from hawkers. The Income Tax Department had earlier mentioned that, and I quote again: `cost of collection from hawkers, if compliance was to be as full as possible, was estimated at more than a hundred per cent.' This, Mr Speaker, Sir, is tantamount to saying that all of us are not equal before the law, and cannot be given the same treatment. In other words, because it is going to be difficult to collect tax from hawkers and others who are able to avoid, they are being allowed the concession of not paying their share of income tax. But the poor wage earner, the employee, whose salary is on the payroll and cannot escape has, on the other hand, to pay tax because it is easy to collect tax from him. This, Mr Speaker, Sir, is most inequitable and a very unjust way of looking at the problem. In other words, those who are clever in getting away with it are allowed to do so, whereas those who perforce have to be law-abiding through circumstances beyond their control are penalised.”
“A government dedicated to socialist principles should not tax income at subsistence level. Otherwise, we will be taking away the bare necessities of life from our citizens. This matter, Mr Speaker, Sir, is becoming more and more urgent in the light of inflation, which is making the purchasing power of the dollar less and less. We have only to go to the shops today to see how little our dollar is worth. I would therefore urge the Minister for Finance to give serious and urgent consideration to increase the personal relief for taxpayers. Last year, in rejecting our call for a reduction in the income tax relief, the Minister for Finance stated that the international view was that Singapore's income tax relief was very generous and that Singapore could do well to broaden its tax base. International views are many and, like statistics, can be used to prove or obscure many a point even though it may not, in actual fact, have any relevance at all. As regards broadening the base, I am sure nobody can quarrel with that - everyone should pay his fair share, but the minimum income for tax exemption must be realistic and based on actual cost of living conditions in any particular country. However, with regard to broadening the base, may I refer to the recent correspondence in the press concerning the liability of hawkers to pay income tax. In answering a query from a member of the public, the Income Tax Department mentioned some very interesting facts. In the last five years, from 1969 to 1974, income tax collections were $251 million, $318 million, $404 million, $563 million and $845 million respectively. Adminis trative costs during the same period were 1.08%, 1.01%, 0.97%, 0.75% and 0.62% respectively.”
“This, Mr Speaker, Sir, left me flabbergasted. It suggested retaliation on bringing out the true facts in Parliament and seeking equitable remedy. He has dismissed most unconcernedly the hard fact that the personal relief on earned incomes had not been increased over the last 20 years, except by $1,000, despite the fact that the consumer price index had gone up several times and by his own admission, the consumer price index for the year 1973-74 had gone up by nearly 25%. Mr Speaker, Sir, it is noted that this year there has been no increase in tax relief for the wage earner, and I presume that it may be argued that any imaginary relief lies in the fact that the rate of personal income tax has not been reduced! Mr Speaker, Sir, in this context may I draw the attention of the House to a report by an advisor of the NTUC that an income of $250 a month is needed for a Singapore family to maintain a minimum living standard. The NTUC arrived at this figure from a study by the Defence Minister, Dr Goh Keng Swee, on household incomes in the fifties when he was Assistant Director of Social Welfare (Social Research) in the Social Welfare Department. The minimum income then, according to Dr Goh's study, was $109.95 to support a family of four. The NTUC, which updated this report for a minimum living wage index, estimated in March 1974 that the minimum earned was $250 and that the sum of $250 was only for bare necessities. Since then, Mr Speaker, Sir, during the last year we have been hit by inflation and a tremendous increase in the price of consumer goods including basic necessities. The fact that there has been no increase in tax concessions would suggest that the average taxpayer is now paying tax on incomes at subsistence level.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, with the indulgence of the House, I would like to refer to my representations to the House in March last year, when the Honourable Minister for Finance presented his previous budget. I pointed out that the personal relief on income was fixed more than 20 years ago and called for this to be increased to a more realistic and pragmatic level, in keeping with inflationary trends which had been mentioned by the Finance Minister. The Minister had indicated that consumer prices had risen to an average of 22.0% over the previous year alone, that is to say, 1973 to 1974. How much more then must consumer prices have risen over the last 20 years? And yet there had been practically no increase in personal relief except for the $1,000 allowed as earned income. I added that if the consumer price index had risen by an average of 25% during the last year, surely it must have gone up many times since the rate of $2,000 was fixed more than 20 years ago. The final result was that the poor were becoming poorer and were being weighed down, especially by the income tax burden. I also stressed that unless personal relief was increased, there would be little incentive for the tax-paying wage earner to work harder, because they would only be able to retain a fraction of the fruits of their labour - the bulk of their increased earning being siphoned away by income tax on the one hand and inflation on the other. Mr Speaker, Sir, I was dismayed to observe the reactions of the Honourable Minister for Finance. Despite all the facts and figures clearly indicating the inequity of the position, in his reply the Honourable Minister for Finance warned that the Government might consider reducing the rate of personal income tax relief next year, to make people pay more tax.”
“Otherwise we will only be crippling the members of the public who own motor cars without being able to provide them with a reasonable alternative method of getting around and coping with the problems of living and working in a busy, populated city such as ours is. The point really is: have we the right to increase the burden on the shoulders of the average working class Singaporean? His car may seem a symbol of undue affluence but it could in reality be merely his most prized and dearly bought possession. Mr Speaker, Sir, I strongly urge that this increase in road tax be seriously reconsidered, in the context of what I have noted. Mr Speaker, Sir, may I now turn to the income tax concession granted by the Finance Minister for old people capable of working beyond 55 years, the former retiring age, or even 60, the new retiring age. It is observed that this concession has been made because of our rapid economic development in the last few years, which has highlighted the need for our skilled and experienced people to go on working beyond the normal retirement age. It has apparently been recognised that such people will need to spend more money staying healthy and getting to work. This is indeed a step in the right direction and is a most welcome concession. I would like to suggest, however, that the care and concern made evident in this gesture be extended also to the younger, struggling members of our nation. We know that the consumer price index has risen sharply recently, but income tax relief in general remains pegged to the rate fixed more than 20 years ago. It is high time a thorough re-assessment was made and more tax relief accorded to lighten the burden of the beleaguered working classes.”
“This is because owners of cars have, by this gross increase in car tax, either to pay the increased tax and retain the car or sell the car to some other person who can afford the tax. We will therefore have exactly the same number of cars on the road! This will clearly defeat the Government's objective. In this context, Mr Speaker, Sir, let me refer to the park and ride scheme and the Central Business District entry restrictions. Should we not wait to see the effect of the new travel restrictions before imposing taxes on motor cars? It seems to me that this two-prong attack on motorists is tantamount to anticipating the failure of the Central Business District scheme. I would suggest therefore that the car tax increase be deferred until the Government is able to assess the effect of the park and ride and Central Business District schemes. Only if these prove unsuccessful in restricting the number of cars in the Central Business District to a level considered desirable by the Government, should other measures be considered. May I add also that the present scheme seems calculated to drive cars off the road even in areas where there is no traffic problem at all. Mr Speaker, Sir, I would urge the Government to seriously reconsider this car tax increase, especially because there is no adequate transport for commuters as yet. Our bus services are still inadequate for they are clearly unable to cope with the demand. Until the bus services are considerably improved and able to meet with the requirements of the public, there should be no further increase in car tax.”
“And now, Mr Speaker, Sir, a measure is being introduced to penalise those who, through hard work and diligence, have increased their income to the point where they are able to afford a car of their own. If the Government's objective is merely to reduce the number of new cars on the roads, it would not be too difficult to arrive at a solution. For example, the Ministry of Finance could increase the import duty so that existing car owners will not be unfairly penalised - it will be the potential car owners who have to decide on the possible alternatives. In other words, if they decide to have a motor car, they will have to sacrifice something else. In this way, the choice will be left to them -a motor car at the expense of some other luxury or necessity. The point of this approach is that the choice will quite fairly be left to the individual. No man need thus be penalised for events of the past which have created a situation over which he has no control. There is also another way to reduce effectively the number of new cars -by requiring all those who wish to purchase new cars to apply for permits. This is a procedure that is being quite successfully adopted in several other countries. This approach will also be more satisfactory because it should be fairly easy to ascertain whether an applicant for a new car merits consideration by the simple method of obtaining clearance from the Comptroller of Income Tax to determine whether or not he is paying income tax. If he is not, how then can he afford a new car? It would certainly prove a more equitable way of reducing the number of cars on the road. The present increase in road tax will not effectively reduce the number of cars on the road as envisaged by the Government.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I am sure that I am voicing the concern of the general public in making reference today to the startling increase in the existing road tax, a measure which is being introduced almost simultaneously with the restrictions on traffic entering the Central Business District. It would appear that the large increase in road tax is not meant to raise revenue or meet part of recurrent expenditure. If it was just a matter of increasing revenue, then surely there are other areas which could yield revenue without causing undue hardship. Its main objective would seem to be the drastic reduction of the number of cars on the road. This being the case, I would suggest that the massive increase in road tax is both a negative approach and inequitable: it will, among other things, only serve to increase the burden of the middle and lower income groups. It must be noted that the largest increase is for motor cars between 1000 cc and 2000 cc. Cars in this range are generally owned by the middle and lower income groups who, in the past, used to pay approximately 17 cents per cc. But now with the increased road tax, they have to pay 25 cents per cc this is almost 50% more. Mr Speaker, Sir, I must repeat my contention that the increase in road tax constitutes a wholly negative approach because our Government, founded on the principles of socialism, is dedicated to raising the living standards of the lower income group. From the time we came to power we have been concentrating on introducing measure after measure to narrow the gap between the "haves" and "have-nots". I submit that the growing affluence engendered by this process of social equalisation has made the motor car, as a form of transportation, more of a necessity than a luxury.”
“Without the Building Control Division and without proper laws governing the construction of private dwellings, both by individuals and developers, serious problems must arise. Nevertheless, I hope that the Building Control Division will divert more of their energies to the bigger issues and the bigger projects, rather than to small matters and minor issues. I understand that the Building Control Division appears to be spending a considerable amount of time and energy chasing after small house owners who, in their ignorance or need, have somehow committed minor infractions of the law, such as putting up awnings nearer the fence than permitted by law. I think we should ask ourselves whether certain sections of the regulations and laws which were enacted many many years ago, when land area was no problem, are still valid today. Some of the rules may have to be changed to meet present day circumstances. Two decades ago, bungalows were the order of the day and the rules were made for ample space around the houses, but today when we are cramped for space, should we really have the same yardstick? Clearly then, Mr Speaker, Sir, rethinking of a very vital kind is necessary regarding the issues I have touched upon. I would be grateful if time would be allocated for the House to give its attention to these matters. 3.38 p.m.”
“Circumstances have changed over the last 25 years. Social values have changed, social problems have changed, in fact the very form of Government has changed. And yet, we are attempting to govern on the basis of some of these archaic laws. I have no doubt that the Attorney-General's Chambers must have given this matter thought and have updated some of the laws, but I feel more could be done to bring the laws in line with present day requirements. Let us take, for example, the penalty for kidnapping or armed robbery. In certain countries, for instance, Taiwan or China, the penalty, on being found guilty, is death. They are shot. Although in recent times, penalties for some offences have been increased - fines have been raised and longer sentences imposed and whipping introduced in some cases - it is apparent from the crime rates that it is necessary to ensure that the penalty fits the crime. This may appear to be a hard approach but, as I mentioned earlier, society has changed and it is possible that some laws cater for situations which probably do not exist any more and even as we deem it necessary to modernise and update our industry, to meet new technological needs, so also should we update our laws to meet new social and economic needs. Mr Speaker, Sir, I think nobody can deny that Singapore is the foremost State in providing attractive housing schemes for its citizens. Today, the working man is able to purchase a flat of his own, even though he may be earning $300 a month or less. I feel we can be justifiably proud of the fact that Singapore has been able to provide this basic social amenity for its citizens and indeed it is an important one.”