Hwang Soo Jin
Singapore
“I remember that soon after the Blue Paper was published, a career woman came to see me at one of my Meet-the-people sessions. Speaking for some friends, she complained to me that after hearing the news concerning the Blue Paper, they could not sleep for several nights as they were apprehensive that they would not be able to maintain their…”
“To ask the Minister for National Development (a) whether he will direct the Housing and Development Board to look into the need to construct more public lavatories in that part of Ang Mo Kio New Town which falls within Jalan Kayu Constituency, especially in areas where senior citizens regularly meet: (b) what is the number of complaints o…”
“Sir, permit me to just make a short observation. Listening to hon. Members, it gives me the impression that maybe we should forget the whole MRT study and save all the millions of dollars and instead spend it on carrying out a study on the operational efficiency of SBS, Like the Member for Serangoon Gardens, I thought that the answer give…”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I think there is still too much of a delaying tactic here as far as I can see. Probably next year the same words will be said again. I just like to remind the Hon. Minister for the second time that the police post at Ang Mo Kio is the result of the closure of the police post in Yio Chu Kang in my constituency.”
“Sir, a rather more pertinent question to ask is whether the handcuffing procedure should not be looked into or reviewed so as to make sure that it is not applied indiscriminately and causing unnecessary embarrassment. I think this is the point of the Member for Radin Mas.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, whether you call it an impasse or foot-dragging or whatever, we have been hearing the same words for more than a year. Last year, the Minister said exactly the same thing. Last year he said that we gladdened his heart, and again this year he says we gladden his heart and we are on his side.”
The complete record
Every one of 521 lines we hold for Hwang Soo Jin, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 3 of 11.
“Mr Speaker, Sir, among its many different roles, the Jurong Town Corporation is also a port authority in that the administration of Jurong Port comes under the jurisdiction of JTC. One of the purposes of the Bill, as stated by the Hon. Senior Minister of State, is therefore, to exempt and to limit the liability of the Corporation for damage to and loss of cargo handled at the Corporation's wharves and godowns at Jurong Port. The relevant clause is clause 26, enacting sections 50 to 56 inclusive. Sir, during the drafting stage of the Bill, I am just wondering whether any attempt has been made to ensure that these relevant sections are in all respects identical to the corresponding sections under the Port of Singapore Authority Act or any bye-laws of PSA. From a purely practical point of view, I am sure the Senior Minister of State will agree that to avoid confusion to users of our port it would definitely be desirable that the laws, rules and procedures of the two authorities are standardised. In fact, is there any reason why we should not have just one single unified port authority? By having only one unified port authority, we would not only avoid unnecessary confusion among port users but also achieve greater efficiency and savings in costs through economy of scale. Would the Hon. Senior Minister of State care to give his views?”
“To ask the Minister for Finance whether a decision has now been taken on the formation of the proposed Trade Development Council and, if not, why not. 26.”
“Sir, I remember when taking our seats as Members of Parliament, among other undertakings, we swore to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution. It is therefore disturbing to note that the House is being asked to approve an amendment to the Constitution because of an apparently ultra vires act on the part of the Hon. Minister for Home Affairs and Education when he last moved the amendment to the Misuse of Drugs Act in this House on the 9th November, 1977. What we are now asked to do may be likened to closing the stable gate after the horse has bolted. A rather more serious implication, Sir, to my mind, is that, as law makers, we would appear to have shown no respect for the law and in this particular case, the most sacred of all, our Constitution. Whatever the justification, the action on the part of the Hon. Minister is inexcusable. I do hope that this is the first and last time that such a thoughtless act is allowed to be committed. As for the Hon. Minister for Law, I would like his assurance that all future Bills, prior to submitting to Parliament, will be thoroughly vetted to ensure that they are not inconsistent with or in contravention of any existing provisions under either the Constitution or any other statutes.”
“To ask the Minister for Finance whether a decision has now been taken on the formation of the proposed Trade Development Council and, if not, why not. 43.”
“Sir, I think it is a case of buck-passing. Would the two Ministers please get together quickly?”
“Sir, in May 1977 when the Senior Minister of State for National Development informed the House of the development of pig farms, I believe he did indicate that there would be provision of buffer zones in order to reduce pollution. Would the Hon. Minister please inform the House what steps have been taken to develop such buffer zones?”
“A supplementary question, Sir. In order that the size of the problem can be better appreciated by the House, can the Hon. Minister please indicate the number of farms, pigs and cesspits involved?”
“Sir, the Senior Minister of State mentioned about priority being given to resettlement cases. Would he please clarify?”
“Sir, there were only two resettlement cases. Only two shops were resettled.”
“I believe you will agree with me when I say that the Housing Board is motivated by the urge to make money when they carry out its projects of building shop premises. There is no consideration for the livelihood of the shopkeepers and others. Where there are so many shop premises, yet the HDB would build more shop premises, "It is up to you whether you want to bid for $5,000 or $6,000 a month for rental. Whether or not you go bankrupt that is your business." This is not right. I understand that in Ang Mo Kio the tendered rental has gone up to as high as $6,000 a month for one shop premises. Therefore, this question merits consideration because this will eventually affect the living standard of all of us, the people. The businessmen are not fools and they will pass on the increased burden to the consumers. The price for a plate of kway teow will be increased from $1 to $2, and when business is good it can be sold at $4. You see? Consequently, all these extra costs will be passed on to the consumers. The fleece comes from the sheep. We are like sheep; our wool is fleeced by other people. How much fleecing can we tolerate by other people? Sir, I thank you for giving me this opportunity to speak.”
“Thank you, Sir, for your permission. (In Mandarin) I rise to support the Member for Tiong Bahru in his suggestion that the present tender system of allocating shop premises should be reviewed. I remember last year at this time I also raised this matter here. In my constituency, the HDB estate is very small and there are only about 200 units of flats. Yet there are about a few scores of shophouses. The tendered rentals paid by coffeeshops ranged from $2,000 to $3,000 p.m. not $5,000, but after two to three months they closed shop. Many of the other shops also have to close down one after the other because they could not pay the high rentals. Ta'boleh tahan - they could not bear it any more. I would like to know whether in deciding to build any shop premises the HDB has made a detailed survey of the surrounding areas to see how big the population is and how many shop premises are already there. 6.30 p.m. Take, for example, Jalan Kayu. On both sides of the street there are about at least 200 shophouses. In the past, these 200 shops catered for the needs of the British forces in the Seletar base. Therefore, the place developed into a township. But during 1968 and 1969, with the withdrawal of the British forces, their business was badly affected. Some of them moved to other places and some others changed their lines. After two or three years, they have adapted to the new situation and their business is picking up. But the Housing and Development Board started to build a shopping centre with more shop premises at Seletar Hills around Jalan Kayu. As a result, the businesses of the shops both at the shopping centre and along the two sides of Jalan Kayu are again badly affected. This is most incomprehensible!”
“Sir, may I have your permission to raise a point?”
“At the beginning, fair enough. Because in those days they did not have metalled roads. They did not have water and electricity. But now that we have given them metalled roads, electricity and water, are we suggesting that we deprive them of that standard of living? I would have thought that the policy of this Government is to make sure that we go on giving qualitative improvement in the standard of living of our people and not down-grading it. I am, therefore, rather surprised the other day to find that one of the farmers, who had taken a piece of land in this so-called farmway and who had applied to have a few Of these electric poles removed from the centre of the land, was asked to pay a removal fee of more than $2,000. This fee of $2,000 is now being referred to the URSC. I do not know whether URSC is going to pay for it. Who is going to pay for it? I do not know. There is a lot of buck-passing going on. I am not exaggerating, Sir. This is a very serious problem. We resettle an entire community from one corner of Singapore to another. They sacrifice. They have to put in a lot of hard work. They do not mind. The very least we can do is not to make life too difficult for them. The least we can do is to make sure that they are given the same standard of living, if not a better standard.”
“Take, for instance, those farmers in Jurong and Chua Chu Kang. They all have metalled roads and street lightings, water and electricity supplies. But if we go and look at the so-called farmways in Jalan Kayu and Punggol, which have been cleared and waiting for the farmers in Kranji to move in, we will see the difference. They are just mud tracks.”
“Sir, I rise in support of the Members for Punggol and Jurong. I share the sentiments which they have expressed on the work of the Primary Production Department. But in all fairness I would say that technically the Primary Production Department has over the years done a lot of good work in research and introducing a special breed of pigs and poultry to Singapore. To that extent, I think they have succeeded. As I see it, it is not so much a question of whether the Primary Production Department has done this or that or has not done this or that. It is more a question of whether we, the Singapore Government. think we ought to have a comprehensive policy on Agriculture, bearing in mind the very limited size of Singapore; whether we believe Agriculture has a future in Singapore. Personally I am inclined to be optimistic about it. I think it has a future. We only have to look back to the last 10 or 15 years. Time and again we have heard in this House that agriculture is a thing of the past, and that it is going to die. We might just as well let it die. But it has not died. Not only has it not died, but it is doing even better. If anybody cares to make a survey, he will be surprised to find out that the number of people engaged in agriculture today is probably much smaller in number, and yet we are self-sufficient in pork, chicken and eggs, in spite of a bigger population. What does this mean? It means that the productivity rate of our farmers has gone up, despite the lack of encouragement. Very rightly so, as the Members for Punggol and Jurong have pointed out, when the Department resettles these farmers not only do they not help them sufficiently but are in fact giving them a standard lower than what they have been used to.”
“I do not know about writing to the press. Sir, the time has definitely come for us to look at it positively. Year after year, Members of rural constituencies have been bringing to this House the same old problem about the delay on the part of the Building Control Division and the rather inflexible attitude of its officers who go round to see whether there is a breach of Building rules. I did mention the other day in this House that someone who was using his kitchen to do a bit of business of frying kropok just as a sideline was not allowed to do so on the ground that the house is a dwelling house and is not allowed to be used for industrial purpose. I cannot imagine by any stretch of the imagination that frying kropok can be considered as using the place for industrial purpose. I think it is high time that we looked at the problem positively. Sir, I must thank you for allowing me the time to speak because I have not filed an amendment on this subhead.”
“Sir, I rise in support of the two hon. Members who have spoken before me. There is no exaggeration of the fact that to try to get approval for even very minor repairs to these so-called temporary structures in the rural areas can be a very frustrating experience. In fact, in many cases two departments are involved because most of the land in the rural areas are State land. In order to get approval from the Building Control Division one has first to obtain the approval of the Land Office. So he goes to the Land Office. The delay here will be several weeks, if not several months. Then the matter is in turn referred to the Building Control Division who again delays for several weeks, if not several months. In fact, I can quote one particular case. I am not making up the story. My constituent, having waited for months, got rather impatient. He came to see me and brought to my attention the fact that the delay has gone on for far too long. So I gave him a letter addressed to the Department concerned. When he presented my letter there, he was told by the officer, "Well, you saw your MP. I am going to make matters worse for you." Sure enough, he has had to wait longer than someone who has applied much later. An hon. Member: Write to the press.”
“Sir, I would just like to take this opportunity to refer to the statement made by the Minister earlier on. The Minister mentioned about syndication in financing of large-scale shipbuilding. I am just wondering to what extent the Government is encouraging this particular approach of financing?”
“Sir, my question is simply this. If a person has worked for 20 years and, just short of a few days before he qualifies for it, he should kick the bucket, should we not be more humane and sympathetic and pay pro rata to his dependants?”
“Sir, can the Minister of State inform this House whether it is true to say that there has been a change in the policy requiring both contracting parties to be sterilised? Why both?”
“I found that there is no certain standard set for the simplified version of Chinese characters. For instance, in Primary I they used the character wu ( ) (noon) to indicate the wu ( ) in tiao wu ( ) which means dancing. When my children attended Primary II the teacher told them that they could not use the same character to mean "dancing", tiao wu which has the same sound as the wu we use in xia wu ( ) for "afternoon". So one is not sure what simplified Chinese characters can or cannot be used now. So in the dictation tests the children cannot get 100 marks. When they get home, the parents will blame the children for not being able to get 100 marks. And if the parents were to ask the teachers, they would say that it is the parents who have taught their children the wrong words. So there must be a certain standard. Which simplified version is the correct one? Should it be our version, or should it be the version from mainland China? Or from Taiwan? (I am told there is no simplified writing in Taiwan, but I am not aware of it.) Perhaps this simplified form now in use here has come from Nantah. This is an important matter. This has been bothering the parents for quite a long time and has eroded their confidence. No wonder the enrolment figures in the Chinese primary schools have been decreasing year after year, because every school is using different textbooks. I am wondering, since Singapore is so small, why the schools are using different textbooks everyday. The books are being changed. This is a very important matter to look into. Sir, thank you for giving me this opportunity to speak.”
“Sir, I would like to support what the Member for Jurong has said about post allowances for school principals. I think this issue has been debated in the past in this House. But until today we have only heard the sound of footsteps coming down from the staircase without seeing anybody coming down. In view of the maxim "to each according to his worth", I feel there should be some solution so as to carry this out well and not shove the responsibility to the Ministry of Finance. That is not right. There is another issue. I have found that in the implementation of education policies, it seems there has been an over-reaction by officials of the Ministry of Education. For instance, last year when we were discussing matters relating to the Ministry of Education, everybody was saying that the Ministry had no liaison with the schools. Not long after the Ministry began to ring up all the schools everyday asking the teachers to take part in meetings, to take part in discussions and so on, all kinds of meetings. Even in the rural schools, in one day alone all the four or five teachers in the school were called up for meetings, leaving no one to run the classes. This is too much. The reaction from the officials has been much too great. This will have to be rectified. If officials of the Ministry of Education could accept the opinions aired here by MPs, of course, it would be most welcome. But over-reaction is not a good symptom. So I hope the Minister will pay attention to this point. There is another problem, and that is a personal one. In some schools, there are teachers who think that pupils must get some private tuition at home to catch up. I could not help it. I have to look after my own children. In my own experience of teaching my children.”
“Sir, I think I will collect a few cards and send them over to the Minister.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, with your indulgence I like to follow up a bit further. On the odd occasion, I did write to the Minister concerned and what I got was a little yellow card from his Permanent Secretary acknowledging receipt. Mr Chua Sian Chin: Sir, can the Member tell me when was that? I cannot remember. Was it years ago?”
“Sir, I do agree that it ought to be a two-way communication. As it is, it is not two-way and I am quite sure that there is no lack of attempt or effort on the part of the MPs to try to establish this two-way communication. Time and again I have written to the OC, but time and again I have never received any replies from him. So we never know whether the matter has been attended to or not attended to.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, just one small point of clarification. It is a follow-up on the point made by the Member for Boon Teck. I do know there is a standing instruction for the new OC to contact MPs and CCCs as soon as he gets appointed to an area. But from my own experience, beyond that the OC never makes any effort to try to follow-up once in a while to see whether there is anything that need to be discussed. The contact just stops there at the point of his assignment to that post. That is all.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I am not sure whether the Senior Minister of State is aware that the zoning criterion has been relied upon rather inflexibly by his Department. I have a recent case where a person was doing business frying kropok in his house. This was considered by the Department to be an industry, and he was given notice to stop doing it,”
“Sir, the Minister used the word "assume". He said that he assumes the annual value, being based on the rental, therefore the annual value would come down. But I think the existing practice is that, quite independent of what the rented value of the property might be, the Property Tax Department lays its own assessment.”
“Sir, in view of the steady drop in property values over the last few years, particularly in the last few months, would the Minister consider a downward revision in the rates of property tax?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, a supplementary question. First, to what extent is the Singapore Government still interested in the Sugar Industry of Singapore? I am quite sure that the Government has still got a considerable equity interest in that company. Secondly, the Hon. Minister has gone to great lengths today to explain or to inform this House of the administrative decisions and actions taken by that company. This does seem to be in contradiction to what he has told this House a few days ago, that is, he is not accountable to this House for the administrative actions of all companies owned by Government, either wholly or partially-owned. Would he explain the apparent contradiction? Mr Hon Sui Sen: Mr Speaker, Sir, I will explain the apparent contradiction. In this particular case the agreement with Australia and Fiji was brought to the notice of the Government and we were asked to give a letter of awareness. As representing the Government of Singapore, I think I am also involved other than as a shareholder of the Sugar Industry of Singapore. In the case of the particular question as to what interest we have, we have 40% interest in the Sugar Industry of Singapore. So we are not in control of the Sugar Industry of Singapore except to the extent that 40% gives any particular shareholder control. TAX ON RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY (Particulars) 11. Mr Ch'ng Jit Koon asked the Minister for Finance (a) what are the various rates of property tax levied on residential property; (b) how much revenue was collected in respect of each category in FY 76; and (c) what is the estimated revenue in respect of each category for FY 77.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker, Sir, this is just a point of clarification. In the Minister's reply to the Member for Boon Lay, he used the expression, "The lowest of the low." I do not know exactly what he meant to imply, but I certainly loathe to think that one of our Ministers could be thinking of class distinction or class consciousness, in terms of high class or low class, especially when we are a party committed to striving for a more just and equal society, bearing in mind what the Member for Khe Bong has just said. Perhaps the Minister would care to clarify what he exactly means by "lowest of the low".”
“Is the Minister suggesting or implying that Members may raise questions concerning policy matters relating to all these companies and not day-to-day administrative matters?”
“Sir, who are the owners of all these monies belonging to all those companies?”
“Sir, will the Minister please inform the House, as a matter of principle why should he make an exception in this particular case?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, who undertakes the investigation? I believe that up till now nobody from any of these departments is undertaking an investigation.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the Senior Parliamentary Secretary has mentioned in his reply about liberalising the issue of hawker licences. I would like to ask him how is the issue of licences to be liberalised. Secondly, in the case of those affected by resettlement and suffer financial hardship to whom consideration would be given, I would like to ask who is to give such consideration?”
“In the final analysis, the efficacy of the tax incentive will be determined by two things:- (1) Willingness on the part of the industry to invest on personnel development and training. Reinsurance business by its very nature is international in scope. We need, therefore, to train up a new breed of insurance men who will be not only technically competent but also possess an international outlook. (2) Greater appreciation of the technical and practical aspects of the insurance business by the regulatory authorities. It is accepted that legislative control on such type of business is necessary and desirable. Over-regulation will, however, on the other hand stifle the growth of the business. Meaningful dialogue has hitherto existed between the industry and the Insurance Commissioner's office, and I feel sure that notwithstanding the organisational change there will continue to be regular opportunities for views to be exchanged between the Insurance Commissioner and the industry. In concluding his Statement to the House, the Hon. Minister forecasts that the weather is getting fine and fair and that our Ship of State is in good shape. Sir, as I see it, given the same competent command. our Ship of State should be able to face up to any weather condition, foul or fair. 4.10 p.m.”
“The concessionary tax rate of 10% added to our locational advantage and good business infrastructure, such as a highly efficient telecommunication system among other things, will greatly assist in the development of this type of international business. It is a little known fact that one of the larger items of Britain's invisible earnings is from insurance and reinsurance. For example, in the year 1974 the City of London derived 41% of its invisible earnings from insurance and reinsurance, whereas the rather more prestigious business of banking contributed only 20% of a total sum of 905 million pound. The Swiss and the Germans have also over the years developed extensive interests in the reinsurance business. Given the necessary encouragement from Government and the determination on the part of the private sector to succeed, there can be little doubt that the tax incentive will go down as an important milestone in the history of the insurance industry in Singapore. The gesture on the part of the Government, I hope. is also an indication of the greater recognition of the potentials of insurance business by the Government which hitherto has paid very little attention to the development of insurance industry. This is evidenced by the fact that for some time now, the Insurance Commissioner's office has been without a full-time Commissioner; the present Commissioner being concurrently a Deputy Secretary attached to the Ministry of Finance, and insurance is but one of his many responsibiIities. Since the Minister's announcement of the tax concession I have read in the press that with effect from 1st April the Insurance Commissioner's office will come under the control of the Monetary Authority of Singapore, and I do sincerely hope that this will be a change for the better.”
“The idea of setting up permanent exhibition centres in selected countries abroad is a good one, but before doing so I feel that we should perhaps look at our export promotion efforts ir. a rather more systematic manner and with the same degree of special care and attention that we have devoted to the task of investment promotion abroad. Up to this point of time, our export promotion efforts seem to be conducted haphazardly, rather disorganised if I may say so, and without much co-ordination. We hear of trade missions from different organisations going off every now and then, but what follow-up actions are taken and with what results -do like to know. I think we could achieve more if there is proper overall planning, organisation and co-ordination among the various trade and manufacturers' associations. Surely, Sir, the creation of an export promotion agency is the answer. With the Government providing the necessary organisation and the lead. I have no doubt that our businessmen will be only too happy to give their wholehearted support and cooperation. There is no short-cut in trade development. In order to do well in our export drive, we need to know more about overseas markets; to know more. we need to travel more and ultimately we will sell more. Sir, as an insurance man, I find it difficult not to say a few words on the concessionary tax rate of 10% announced by the Minister on reinsurance business. To the lay public, this gesture on the part of Government may not mean very much but, speaking as a professional. I cannot help feeling excited over the likely prospect of Singapore developing rapidly into a significant international reinsurance centre over the next few years.”
“There will be only four cylinders instead of eight cylinders working, Sir. Or maybe two cylinders! Whichever the course of action or attitude he finally adopts, it does us no good as, at this stage of our economic development, we need all the experienced people in the industry and in Government service continuing to give of their best. It is all very well to say we believe in "taxing the rich to subsidise the poor", or do we? I am not sure. Are we sure that those bearing the brunt of tax incidence are really "the rich" and those benefitting from whatever little State subsidies left, are really "the poor"? I am not sure, Sir, but I would humbly suggest to the Minister for Finance to give some thought to my queries. With all the brains that he has at his command in his Ministry, I am sure, Sir, he would be able to come up with an answer and hopefully we, the wage earners, can look forward to a more equitable system of taxation at the next Budget. Sir, I would not like to turn to the Hon. Minister's comments on Trade Development in 1977. First of all, I would like to know what he proposes to do about narrowing the very substantial trade deficit of close to $2 billion with Japan. This is not the first time queries are raised in this House on this perennial imbalance of trade and it would seem to me that little has been done to get the Japanese to buy more from us. If we have not already lodged a strong representation with the Japanese government in this regard, I would urge the Government to seriously consider doing so. On Trade Development generally, I agree with the Hon. Minister that our tactics should be to consolidate markets that we already have and at the same time explore new ones.”
“Minister for Finance has time and again refused to consider any change in a system which we have inherited from our colonial past and, to say the least, is clearly unsuitable for a fast changing and developing society as our own. We aim to motivate our members to give of their best and to give rewards and recognition to those who excel in high performance but our tax system does not seem to reflect this philosophy! What we have is a system that encourages every man to try to be his own boss so that he could beat the system, so to speak, and enjoy all the tax deductions generally available to business firms, big or small. The end result: A nation of shopkeepers - if we do not watch out. Only a few days ago we heard of the Hon. Minister for Health lamenting the high rate of turnover of young doctors at Government hospitals; instead of just blaming these people for their lack of sense of belonging or loyalty or whatever you may choose to call it, should we not try to look objectively at the way in which they are remunerated and the way in which they are taxed if they stay on as employed persons as against the financial prospects of their becoming their own bosses in private practice. Sir, the personal taxation system that we have, I submit, needs to be completely overhauled fairly quickly before an increasing number of key personnel which include all categories of professional managers, administrators and technicians employed on salaries, in both our private and public sectors, work themselves to a point of financial disincentive. When that point is reached, a person either feels discontented, in which case he starts to look for greener pastures or try to set up some sort of business or practice on his own; or, he simply allows himself to slacken off in his job.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, to the average taxpayer in the wage earning, class, the budget is a disappointment. As the economic situation recovered, albeit slowly in 1976, he had perhaps wistfully hoped that there would be some form of tax relief in 1977. In the event he is disappointed. From his point of view, the budget is not really a painless one. He is not sure whether he should be thankful or annoyed with the Hon. Minister for showing such persistent concern for his health by raising the taxes on tobacco and liquors second year running; even the concession in estate duty on owner-occupied property appears quite meaningless to him for the time being, as he has no wish of taking advantage of it as yet. It would have been more meaningful if he were allowed the use of his CPF balance which has by now totalled thousands of dollars attracting only a meagre rate of interest, to repay part of the mortgage which he has on his private accommodation. As our average taxpayer ponders on the implications of the Hon. Minister's Budget Statement, I believe he feels a little sore and perhaps confused as to what it all means -all these talk about "from each his best; to each his worth". It seems to him that under the existing tax structure if a person is unfortunate enough to be a wage-earner who, for the purpose of the Inland Revenue Department, may be defined as a person having no chance of being able to either legally avoid or illegally evade the full incidence of tax, the better he is in his job the more heavily he is taxed as he rises in his position. Sir, the plights of our tax-paying wage-earners have been raised time and again in this House but the Hon.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, a supplementary question. Judging by the number of questions raised by a number of hon Members these two days, it would seem to me that there is no comprehensive planning of the provision of basic facilities and amenities in the new housing estates. Would the hon. Minister of State please inform the House as to what sort of coordination exists between the Housing and Development Board and all the other Ministries?”
“There is perhaps some truth in the accusation as many of the sins, major as well as minor ones, of the civil service were allowed to be perpetrated because of the lack of timely intervention or wrongful intervention on the part of hon. Ministers. We also spoke of "buck-passing" in the past. Let us hope that we will have no cause for complaint in this regard in the coming months. Let us hope that all hon. Ministers will work collectively and conscientiously as a team and will lose none of the political awareness and sensitivity that are the hallmark of the PAP. It is, Sir, this exceptional quality of our entire Cabinet under the leadership of the Prime Minister that has enabled the party to continue to inspire confidence in our people. The road ahead may not be as smooth as the distance that has been covered so far. The hazards that we are likely to face are numerous and have been clearly pointed out by the President. Suffice it here to add that our continued survival as a nation will depend on the collective determination, ingenuity and hard work of all parties concerned, namely, the political leadership, civil servants and the people of Singapore. Finally, Sir, I join my colleagues in thanking the President for his gracious speech to the House. 5.07 p.m.”
“As Backbenchers we may at times feel a little tedious or frustrated having to repeat ourselves, but we are duty bound to go on pointing out all such anomalies and shortcomings for as many times as may be necessary so long as they appear to us remain unrectified. The President's speech, together with the Addenda, illustrate once again the practical and down-to-earth approach of our leadership. There are no empty and fanciful promises. The objectives that all Ministries have set for themselves are realistic enough and perhaps, typical of our traditional style of "deeds and not words", the descriptions of such objectives are generally brief in words. However, for the words to be translated into deeds, the continued good service of hon. Ministers is to my mind absolutely vital. In this connection, I am confident that all Members in the Backbenches will gladly take on the challenge of the Leader of the House, when on the first Sitting of Parliament, he urged Backbenchers to speak freely with open minds. I can assure hon. Ministers that if it is frankness they want, they will certainly not be disappointed. They can look forward to some exciting moments and may never have to complain of the lack of debate in this House. To do our job well, we may have to take to task without fear or favour any hon. Minister found to be wanting in his duties because he delegates or depends too much on civil servants, and in the process fails to exercise sufficient control and supervision upon the formulation and implementation of policies. All too often. Backbenchers have been accused of using civil servants as convenient "whipping boys".”
“As Backbenchers we shall be failing in our duty if we are insensitive to the feelings on the ground. Let us voice the opinions of the people without constraint or inhibition. Let us not treat this Chamber as a place for expounding academic theories which are best suited for scholarly seminars. In the years ahead we have been reminded that it is our duty at the Backbench to ensure that no major policy or legislation be passed without the closest scrutiny and the most thorough debate at this House. It is, I submit, also our duty to watch out most carefully the manner in which our civil servants go about implementing Government policies. We should always make sure that all administrative measures taken are both just and humane and that quality of service is not sacrificed for expediency. It is accepted that for the long-term benefit of our people, unpopular measures may have to be taken from time to time. It falls upon us, however, to question whether on all such occasions the most thorough consideration has been given to minimising the degree of hardship and inconvenience to those affected. During the last Parliament, we often talked about the growing tendency towards bureaucracy, the rudeness and callousness of some of our civil servants, the lack of coordination between Government departments, the apparent changeability of Government policies and measures in certain areas and the unhealthy inclination towards commercialism of the civil service. There is sufficient evidence to indicate that much of what we complained of, remains with us today.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, as I sit and listen to my learned colleagues here these two days, I could not but feel and see the difference in the Backbenches as compared to my last two terms as a Backbencher. We have a number of new faces and we also have an unprecedented number of Ph.Ds. I counted and found there are altogether seven of them; a line up which I am sure compares most favourably with any other legislature in the world. However, it is perhaps pertinent to remind hon. Members that the reason all of us from the same party are here today is not because of the number of Ph.Ds, or doctors that we have been able to parade before our people but because for 1 7 long years the first generation of PAP leaders have dedicated the best part of their lives to working for the well-being of the people of Singapore, and they, the people of Singapore, have in turn shown their confidence, if not appreciation, in no uncertain manner by voting solidly for the PAP. By entrusting the entire Parliament to us, our people have demonstrated once again their faith in our ability to continue to exercise self-control and self-discipline both as a political party and as a government. They have demonstrated that they believe in our ability to continue to work for a more just and equal society, to maintain law and order, and to ensure social, economic and political stability. What we say here, will, I feel sure, be followed with ever greater interest, as the constituents that we represent today are much better educated, informed and more sophisticated politically than say, five or 10 years ago. They are keenly conscious of their rights. At the slightest suggestion of unjust exploitation or unfair treatment, they expect us to come to their defence.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, in my capacity as Chairman of the Estimates Committee. I must express my regret that the Minister for Finance seems to be trying to ram this Amendment Bill through the House without prior consultation or extending a courtesy to the Estimates Committee. I would rather prefer that sufficient time be extended to the Estimates Committee and that particulars of any change be submitted to that Committee. On that courtesy Members of the Estimates Committee would be able to air their views, and indeed, this was the practice before. I suppose there must be a good reason why this has not been done this time. I do hope that the Hon. Minister would bear my suggestion in mind.”
“In making the second suggestion I have in mind the construction and alteration of wooden structures commonly seen in our rural areas. At present, the services of architects are required in conjunction with all such structures except. I believe, where the built-up area is less than 200 sq, ft. In practice considerable confusion has been caused by the regulating authorities in this particular area of work. For instance, I have come across cases where occupants, applying for a change of roofing from attap to corrugated iron sheets, have been asked to submit architectural plans. Another area of development that has prompted me to suggest a review is the increasing tendency to use prefabricated steel structures for industrial and warehousing purposes. Looking at such type of structures, as a layman it would appear to me to be sufficient to require only the services of engineers without involving architects. In this way we could help to keep construction costs down, as we all know that the architect's fee is normally calculated at 7½%, whereas the engineer's fee is only 2½%. It is pertinent for me to make clear that I have not been lobbied by the engineering profession and therefore hold no briefs on their behalf. My concern here is simply the saving of construction costs for our general public. 3.30 p.m.”
“This is the sort of internally-generated inflation which is well within our control, and something ought to be done about it, perhaps by suitable provision in the law giving the regulating authorities the right to step in as and when the occasion so demands. At a time when we are energetically pursuing the renewal of our City state, we should wherever and whenever possible endeavour to bring down the cost of construction. Clause 17, sub-clause (1)(c) imposes certain penalties upon unauthorised persons undertaking "architectural work". However, there appears to be no attempt under the Bill to define what is "architectural work". This leads me to wonder whether in the actual implementation of the law a situation might not arise whereby owing to ambiguities of the law, offences could be committed unwittingly by certain members of the public under the relevant section. What is architectural work? Is interior decoration involving minor structural alteration to be considered as architectural work? There are at present a number of small-time contractors involved in such type of work at HDB flats and other private residential estates. Would they be considered as undertaking architectural work? Presumably the legal definition is to be found in our Building bye-laws and regulations. Perhaps the Hon. Minister would care to clarify for the benefit of the general public. I would also take the opportunity of urging the Minister to review our existing bye-laws and regulations at an early date; first, to ensure whether they are still in keeping with and relevant to our present circumstances, and secondly, to consider excluding therefrom certain types of work which may not strictly require architectural expertise.”