Irene Ng Phek Hoong
Singapore
“Mdm Speaker, elder abuse may be more common than is recognised, particularly amongst seniors with dementia or other cognitive impairments. Does the Minister agree that the barriers to recognising and reporting elder abuse should be addressed? One of them is the lack of a clear definition of elder abuse.”
“I am heartened by the Minister's reply. In my duties as a Government Parliamentary Committee (GPC) Member for Defence, I have interacted with many women officers, including commanders in combat units, and they hold their own in a male-dominated workforce.”
“Madam, my condolences again to the families and friends of those who lost their lives at the Sabah Earthquake. I thank the Minister for his reply and we support the Ministry's approach to outdoor adventure learning and its continuance.”
“Thank you, Madam. It is heartening to see how readily Singapore responded to the disaster in Nepal. I would like to ask the Second Minister: now that the disaster relief phase is coming to an end, how would Singapore contribute to the long-term reconstruction phase that follows?”
“This will help to sustain the practice and tradition and increase appreciation of their artistry within the community and beyond. We should also conserve the unique tools of traditional art forms, such as the last remaining dragon kiln in Singapore, and protect it as part of our heritage.”
“I would like to ask about the stress levels on the students. I welcome the Ministry of Education's (MOE) shift to go beyond grades. But, on the ground, Page: 123 the reality is that there is increasing pressure on the students to chase good grades, given the very competitive system and also the high expectations of parents.”
The complete record
Every one of 931 lines we hold for Irene Ng Phek Hoong, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 6 of 19.
“Sir, I would like to thank the Minister for his reply. I just want to clarify that I did not call for the abolishment of race as a category in the identity card and I did not call for anybody to ignore that we are ethnically diverse. In fact, I am all for celebrating our cultural diversity and maintaining that. What I was referring to in my speech was the trend of mixed marriages and the expectation that with more Singaporeans inter-marrying, there will be a situation where they will be forced to choose a dominant race for their child which is artificial. Let us say, if you are a quarter Chinese, quarter Malay, quarter Indian, quarter Eurasian, you are forced to choose one as a dominant race. After a certain point, and that can be multiplied over the generations, it becomes entirely artificial. So I am asking the Minister to open his mind to just consider the possibility that there might be, may be not many, a few Singaporeans who are stuck, and they might want to choose another category for their own race which may not be the dominant ones – a new category called "Singaporean". This is not as far-fetched as it sounds. For instance, the Babas and Peranakans, originally from China, settled in the Straits for a long time. But they imbibed the Malay culture, there were inter-marriages, they assimilated into the western culture, spoke English, formed their own culture and, today, it is a very distinct racial group from the Chinese. Similary, the Eurasians. And if you look at other national groups, for instance, the Filipinos, they are also of a mixed tribe. But when we look at them in the identity card, we call them Filipinos. Sir, I just raising the idea and, of course, I did not expect the Minister to agree today.”
“Some people believed that race determines culture and behaviour or that racial groups have by nature specific characteristics. Such beliefs can lead to racial stereotypes and bigotry. There is no valid scientific basis for such assertions. Madam, our founding leader, S. Rajaratnam, who wrote the national pledge was the strongest proponent of a Singaporean Singapore. He was born in Sri Lanka and his race was classified "Ceylonese" but in his later years, he made a conscious decision that he did not identify with Sri Lanka or any racial category, so he put himself under the category of "Others". If there were a classification "Singaporean" at that time, I have no doubt that Mr Rajaratnam would have chosen this instead of "Others". Madam, we should review our race-based approaches to national problems and provide for those who want to classify their race as "Singaporean" so that we will become truly a Singaporean Singapore. Religious harmony”
“But when it came to declaring his race for the purpose of applying to university, he was happy to put himself down as "Indian" because Indians had an easier time getting into university than the Chinese given the racial quota system in Malaysia. In Singapore, we have to guard against the danger that such cost-benefit calculations guide one's choice of racial classification. We must ensure that all races are treated equally with no one race enjoying more benefits than another. This is the very foundation of our national creed. We should not force citizens to fit into racial categories just to suit our race-based policies, such as the ethnic-based self-help groups. Instead, we should encourage the blurring of lines rather than encourage people to assert their racial consciousness. Rather than adopt a race-based approach to solving problems, we should pour our combined resources and energies into national programmes. If you are poor or come from a dysfunctional family, you will get help as an individual, as a citizen, not as a member of some racial group. To call for a Singaporean Singapore is not a call for people to ignore or deny their cultural roots. Today, many people still confuse the effects of biology and those of culture. Culture is essentially a system of shared beliefs, values, customs, behaviour and artifacts that the members of society used to cope with their world and with one another and that are transmitted down the generations through learning. For example, you can be genetically Indian but be identified as a Malay-Muslim because your race is one and accepted by the community as one. Similarly, you can have Chinese parents but identified yourself as Korean if you are adopted by a Korean couple and raised as a Korean.”
“As the Government now allows a double-barrelled race classification, but if a person with such a classification marries someone of yet another race, he or she is forced to choose which two of the three or four races are to be declared as the child's race. This seems a very artificial means of human classification made more for the convenience of the State than for one's personal identity. Not only is this at odds with the anthropological facts, it also leads to confusion and compounds and perpetuates the error down the generations. For these reasons, it is better that the attempt to force people to select a dominant race be dropped altogether and a new category "Singaporean" be created for people to choose should they wish. Presently, in the identity card, there are 91 other races that Singapore citizens are classified under besides Chinese, Malay, Indian and Eurasian. They include Filipinos and Thais. Why not the creation of this category "Singaporeans"? Our multi-racial mix is increasingly diverse. The trend of inter-marriages is a strong indicator of integration in Singapore. It shows we share common values and lifestyles and have become more race blind. We should also ensure a level playing field for all citizens in every sphere, regardless of race, language or religion so that individuals do not find themselves having to choose a race for convenience and expediency just to enjoy greater advantages. When I was growing up in Malaysia, I had a good friend who is half-Sikh and half-Chinese. He identified with the Chinese culture more than the Sikh. He eventually married a Chinese.”
“Just a short point. I just want to say that I respect the Minister greatly and I know he has done a lot for the workers and his speeches are very lively. But there was one anecdote he gave which I know is meant to be entertaining which is about Triumph. I have to say this because there are school girls in the gallery and I do not want them to leave the Chamber with the wrong impression. Because the Minister said that women want to look good for the men and they need their husbands and boyfriends in the changing room to help them make up their minds on the undergarments to buy. I just want to clarify to the Minister that women choose their clothes, including their undergarments to look good for themselves, not only for the men. And that for many years, women have been helping to choose shirts for their husbands as well so that it is not something new. But what will really help is to have very good sales assistants so that we can make up our minds better, both men and women.”
“We have to guard that, as our pace of life becomes more frenetic, we do not end up as a materialistic and self-centred society, unable to empathise with those who struggle to catch up or to appreciate the simple things in life, and also the finer ones. Observe the reaction of some Singaporeans to the construction of rental flats near their homes. The rental flats are for needy Singaporeans. Rather than welcome the move to meet the housing needs of the poor among us, they complained that the rental flats blocked their views, that they would reduce the values of their homes, and they would threaten the security of the estate. Sir, I am glad that many Singaporeans disagreed with such views and made that plain. We want to live in a developed city powered by productive workers but this vision needs to be anchored on sound moral values. We must ensure that no one should seek to become wealthy at the expense of the poor and helpless, and that everyone has access to a better quality of life. With that, I support the Budget.”
“There were lobbying that went on behind the scenes. The way the labour MPs and labour Ministers have to fight for measures to be implemented to benefit workers is something not often seen in the public – the lobbying that goes on with employers and the Government. So, I think we should give more credit to NTUC for the work it is doing. My third point: the growth of productivity is also predicated on an innovative population and an environment with a strong and supportive value system. Innovation and creativity work hand in hand – and an important key to creativity is in the arts. They generate the sparks which ignite innovation. The arts also play a central role in setting apart great cities from ordinary ones. Hence, support for the arts and the infrastructure which nurtures it is vital. The arts themselves, however, are not significant beneficiaries of improved productivity. The input of capital and labour for a live performance of the music of Mozart is the same today as was required when they were first composed in the late 18th century. For example, the cellist cannot play any faster or play more than one instrument at one time. And you cannot really have a robot playing the cello in an orchestra. As such, over time, the cultural sector, which is subject to lower productivity growth, is likely to absorb a higher proportion of the national Budget than those which can benefit from higher productivity growth. The Government should understand the dynamics of this. It should be prepared to allocate more resources to the arts and be proactive in getting public support for this. In conclusion, this year’s Budget has laid out the economic imperatives.”
“But the second thing that will happen is that services will go down in terms of the cleanliness of your blocks and estates, because employers cannot hire the number of workers they need to do a good job, so the level of cleanliness will go down. Are we willing to put up with dirtier blocks, a dirtier Singapore, because we do not have enough cleaners to do the job? But there is something interesting about the idea of limiting the number of workers so that the wages of local workers are forced to go up. But when that happens, and I am all for higher wages for our low-end workers, we have to know the consequences which are that the cost of living will go up, and somebody has to pay for the higher cost. The employers will not foot the entire labour cost that is going to go up exponentially if we are going to squeeze down the number of foreign workers. So, who will pay for the higher cost? The consumers, ie, Singaporeans will pay for the higher cost. If the Workers' Party comes and tells us that if the cost of living goes up because of this policy that it advocates, it will support the Government, then I think it is something that maybe the Workers' Party might want to put in the manifesto. Sir, now the Government is using both tools. It is a more sensitive tool, it is not an exact science, it is not perfect, but I think it is a tool that can be worked further. Like many MPs today, I think we are all very concerned about the low-wage workers, but there are other ways of helping them and NTUC is doing a good job. And I think it is unfair to call NTUC the mouthpiece of the Government or not being able to have their own power to negotiate. In fact, having been in the labour movement before, but now not, I can speak maybe more objectively.”
“And the other possible thing that would happen from removing the foreign worker levy is to suppress the wages of Singaporeans because the foreigners are willing to work for less and, if more comes in, there will lower wages for all and that will affect the wages of Singaporeans. Surely, that is an option that Mr Low Thia Khiang cannot seriously be considering. The second option is to use the dependency ratio in isolation, which is what Mr Low Thia Khiang is advocating. Say, we do that, but I am a bit worried because Mr Low Thia Khiang was not very specific about what he meant by dependency ratio, what he had in mind on the numbers – is it one to 20, one to 50, one to 100, one to 1,000, because that would have quite different implications. It is such a sensitive mechanism that every move we make would affect the market conditions in our economic growth. So, it is very easy to say just to apply dependency ratio, but I think we need more details to understand what he really means. Take, for example, the low-wage workers, which he is so concerned about and which all of us are, and one of the lowest wage workers are cleaners. So, let us say that we want to increase the pay of the cleaners, and Mr Low says that means we have to increase the dependency ratio, say, one to 100, just to make it a bit more stark, so for every one foreign worker you need about 100 Singaporeans to work as cleaners. Two things will happen. One is that employers will say that they cannot find the cleaners because Singaporeans do not want to take on those jobs. So, unless we can find Singaporeans to do those jobs, there will be a perennial problem. There is a way around that which NTUC is working on, and I can elaborate on that later.”
“In fact, our foreign domestic workers, like the foreign workers in our midst, deserve our respect and gratitude. How we treat the foreign workers who do the jobs has a direct bearing on how we regard those jobs. Until we change our attitude towards serving others and towards those who serve us, we will continue to find it hard to improve our service levels and productivity in the service sector. Now I would like to just take up the hon. Member Mr Low Thia Khiang's point. I was hesitant whether I should revisit it but I thought it is worthwhile just to rationally go through the options and spell out the consequences clearly so that everybody understands what our hon. Member is really saying and, perhaps, to also, hopefully, get it cleared in his head as well what he is saying. Basically, there are right now two tools being used – one is the foreign worker levy and the other is the dependency ratio, and the Government is presently using both. Mr Low is saying, throw away the foreign worker levy and just use the dependency ratio. But let us just look at each option in isolation and see how it works – the foreign worker levy as it is. Let us say there is another Member who says if you remove the foreign worker levy, what will happen? There are two things that will probably happen. The first is that employers will more likely hire more foreigners than Singaporeans for various reasons. One is that they say foreigners are willing to work overtime, take lower pay, attitude is better, late-night shifts, work weekends, and no complaints. So the inclination for employers is to go for what he has called the "opium" option.”
“Indeed, how can we be sure that employers would not pass on the cost of the higher worker levies to these foreign workers by reducing their salaries or some other way? Sir, we need to step up protection for our foreign workers to ensure they would not be exploited. We should also look into legislation to ensure that employers engage only local recruitment agents who charge reasonable fees – a maximum sum which should be stipulated by the Government. We should also work to improve the working conditions of foreign workers, so that they are not reduced to modern-day slaves. At the same time, we should recognise that there are some jobs which Singaporeans still tend to shun. A fishmonger in my Tampines Round Market recently came to seek my help to hire a foreigner to work as his assistant. He says he just cannot find a Singaporean to do the job, even though he is willing to pay $1,500 a month. He says Singaporeans just find it too hard work. But how can we change the mindset of Singaporeans towards such jobs once done by foreign workers? But turning to the easy solution of cheaper foreign workers to get things done seems to be increasingly ingrained in the thinking of the average citizen. This starts with the availability of the ubiquitous domestic maid who is expected to work seven days a week and whose job scope includes everything from walking the dog, sending children to school, picking up after them, and taking care of the elderly at home to the never-ending household chores. No need to think about how to do it ourselves, just ask the maid. No need to teach our children to do things for themselves, just ask the maid. No wonder many grow up thinking that service jobs are jobs for servants, and turn their noses up at the service industry.”
“That and the relatively low pay. In companies which insist on 12-hour shifts, they kept the basic pay low – $600 to $800 a month. With the compulsory overtime, the pay goes up to about $1,300 to $1,800. My point is that this is already happening in an industry in which foreign workers are not a factor and where employers are already forced to take productivity measures and with some results together with NTUC. Now with the push for greater productivity, will this also be the norm in other industries as the flow of foreign workers is reduced? Workers need to be assured that this will not be the case. At the same time, workers should also change their mindsets and actively apply themselves to finding ways of improving work processes and to add value to their companies. But how do we get workers to think about improving work methods, upgrading their skills, and so on? Improved welfare for workers is a big carrot. Valuing staff and providing benefits for them is more likely to increase productivity than not. Instilling those values has to start from employers, offering better terms of employment than currently on offer. Sir, the Government should take the lead in this, being the largest employer. My second concern relates to the welfare of foreign workers. As it is today, they are known to work for little or no pay for months on end to pay back their recruitment agents who charge exorbitant fees. They already work extremely long hours, sometimes with no rest day. Given the higher foreign worker levies, what guarantee is there that employers would not work them even harder under worse working conditions, to make up for the fewer numbers of foreign workers in their employ?”
“Will the drive towards greater productivity lead, in fact, to a lower quality of life for Singaporeans, with less time to enjoy the fruits of their labour and to build strong relationships with the family and the community? This is not about going soft as a society, of not being a hard-driving people; it is about wanting to lead a higher quality of life, one measured not only in terms of material wealth but derived from and deeply rooted in relationships and experiences, where there is more time for families, leisure, cultural pursuits and community service. Although the Government has assured Singaporeans that increasing productivity does not mean increasing work hours, we need employers to also say it loud and clear. And not only with words, but with deeds. I know of industries today where employers expect workers to routinely put in 12 hours a day as a matter of course. The overtime is, in fact, factored into the salary. This happens in the security industry, where jobs are already largely protected for Singaporeans and permanent residents. Given the security imperative, the only foreigners allowed in this industry are Malaysians, who make up about 20% of unarmed security officers in Singapore. Sir, I am the Advisor to the Union of Security Employees and I know that most security officers are on compulsory overtime. Often, when the union leaders talk to employers about reducing the work hours from 12 to eight, the usual outcry from employers is that there are not sufficient Singaporeans willing to take on the job and, hence, they need security officers to put in 12 hours a day, so that there will be three shifts instead of two. Never mind if they become less productive with fatigue, or that the 12 hours is a reason why Singaporeans are not rushing for these jobs.”
“Sir, I would like to commend the Finance Minister for the carefully-crafted Budget. It takes a bold, long-term view, and charts a new course for our economy by focusing on improving productivity. The Government’s Budget is a statement of its economic priorities. But it must also be underpinned by values and guided by a vision of the type of society that we want to be. Sir, we want a growing and a more developed economy, a distinctive global city but, at the same time, we also want a society which is more just, equal and decent, in which the poorer and weaker among us are not left behind – a constant refrain in today's sitting. We also want a society which is not only a great place to work but also to live and play. We want to be a happier and more gracious society. Sir, I applaud the Minister for the moves in this Budget which translate this vision into action. They include the moves to expand the wife relief to a gender-equal spouse relief, to a progressive property tax regime, and to give more help to older low-wage workers. These moves make for a more just and equal society. While I support the overall thrust of the Budget and the emphasis on productivity, however, I would like to highlight three areas of concern. First, the talk about increased productivity has perhaps not unsurprisingly provoked a fear among workers that they would have to work harder and work longer hours, especially with the phased reduction of foreign workers. Presently, it is often the foreign workers who are putting in the long hours and the late and overnight shifts.”
“Sir, I am puzzled by the Minister's statement that the Romanian Foreign Ministry has said that it cannot compel Dr Ionescu to come to our Coroner's proceedings because he has been suspended from service as well as the comment that the Romanian Foreign Ministry dissociates itself from comments made after his suspension. Surely, Sir, the Romanian government should take responsibility for the behaviour of its diplomats, especially when he has cast a serious slur on the Singaporean Government. Can I ask the Minister whether such comments by the Romanian Foreign Ministry indicate a lack of sincerity in carrying out the necessary procedures to make sure that he faces up to his charges?”
“Only with all these pieces in the picture can loansharks be defanged. With that, I support the Bill. 4.59 pm”
“This is because, for those in financial difficulties and out of work, we do have a safety net, especially the Comcare. However, not all want to come for hand-outs or they do not qualify, especially if they need large amounts of money to the tunes of thousands. For some, it is a matter of maintaining a comfortable lifestyle. For others, it could be a desire to start a new business. The question is where could they borrow such large sums of money, with a poor credit record. Given the present situation, I find it hard to agree with those who call to criminalise borrowing from loansharks. If we criminalise acts of borrowing, we will only be adding to the pool of people with criminal records. This will not solve anything – indeed, we may well be aiding the work of loansharks for we know that many of the runners today are ex-convicts who could not find proper jobs. Sir, I urge the Government to take a more holistic approach to the problem, beyond tougher enforcement. They should include the following: First, an education programme about gambling addiction aimed at youths; Second, regulate internet gambling to protect youths from compulsive gambling. Make it a requirement for licensed operators to block minors from gambling online; Third, step up counselling and support for gambling addicts and their families; Fourth, continued and improved support for ex-offenders to find jobs and to integrate them into the mainstream; and Finally, we should review our credit policies and schemes to ensure the availability of ready loans for cash-strapped individuals. We should encourage the growth of cooperative banks and micro-credit loan programmes to cater to the financial needs of the poorer segment of the population, which is now largely ignored by the existing large banks.”
“So they paid off his debts, and not only that, they also continued to finance the gambling of their son by giving him $200 to $300 to gamble every week. Not knowing what to do, they went to see a social worker. They were at the end of their tether – what to do with their son. Their son refused to seek help for his gambling addiction. The son refused to consider it as a problem. But, Sir, that is the problem. Bailing people out may be an easy solution but it has no effect on the habit. Such cases are worrying counsellors, who are seeing more young Singaporeans hooked on gambling online. Another social worker told me about a middle-aged taxi driver, also a gambling addict, who borrowed from 41 different loansharks to pay his gambling debts. 41! He just could not stop gambling. So he hopped from one loanshark to another. It is such addicts who feed the growing loanshark machine. Sir, if we want to tackle the problem of loansharks, we need to also tackle the problem of gambling addiction. Reverend Dr Edward Job, who runs One Hope Centre and the Christian Care Services centre, is among those who are convinced that this would help to diminish the loanshark business. I had a meeting with him to find out more about the problem and he told me that about 90% of those who come to him with loanshark problems are gambling addicts. He would help them negotiate with the loansharks on their debt repayment, on two conditions: firstly, they have to attend weekly support groups for their gambling addiction; secondly, they need to bring along their wife or a family member to these sessions. There are those who borrow from loansharks because they have financial difficulties, but their numbers are not many.”
“Sir, earlier on, our colleague, Mr Hri Kumar mentioned that the loansharks are more like cockroaches than loansharks in the way they behave, given their nature. So there is an important difference in this case because cockroaches do not breed fear among people generally, but sharks do. If you talk to residents who have been harassed by loansharks, they are fearful, they live in constant worry for their children and their own family. So I think it is important that when we treat the loansharks, we treat them as a menace, they are evil – like Mr Heng Chee How mentioned – but it is important that we also bear in mind that we have to tackle the problem as the fear persists on the ground and as long as the fear persists, the trouble with the loansharks will persist. Sir, we need to be tough on loansharks, their recruiters and runners. But we should also be tough on the root causes that fuel the demand for loansharks. From my discussions with social workers, I understand that many who turn to loansharks are gambling addicts. Increasingly, they also include youths who are addicted to betting on the Internet. They will be desperate for money as long as their addiction remains. If they could not turn to loansharks, in their depths of anguish and desperation, they may be driven to other actions for money, such as crime – which could be mugging or robbery; for women, it could be prostitution; and for others, perhaps, even suicide. A social worker told me of a case involving a 16-year-old student who is addicted to Internet soccer betting. His gambling debts amounted to about $30,000. He told his parents he would commit suicide if he could not continue gambling online. His parents were desperate and worried.”
“Sir, I welcome the harsher measures to crack down on loansharks. The loanshark menace has been an increasing scourge in our HDB heartlands. In our MPS, it is increasingly common to see desperate residents appealing for the Police to act against loansharks and their runners who have been spraying paint on their doors and harassing them, even though they were not the borrowers. Some residents had to come back repeatedly to the MPS, as the Police had not taken any action despite their many reports to them. One example I can give is a resident who came to me. She faced harassment for over one-and-a-half years after moving into her new flat in Tampines, although she had never borrowed from loansharks. She believed that the debtor was the previous owner of the flat. She had reported the loanshark harassments to the police in June 2008, and again in December 2008 when there was no action taken. I wrote to the Police twice on her behalf. The latest was in July 2009. It took several appeals before we received a reply from the Police to say that it has stepped up patrol at this resident’s block. During all these many months, however, the resident is still left wondering why the loanshark had not been tracked down and caught, even though she had given the loanshark’s phone number to the Police. I would like an assurance from the Minister, that with these tougher laws, there will also be a more robust and active response from the Police in cracking down on loansharks and their activities. The Police should take the complaints of the residents seriously and act on them and not just take down the reports with little concrete to follow up. It will leave us in a helpless position if all that is being done is for Police reports to be filed.”
“Sir, while the number of fatal accidents may have decreased slightly, the roads remain very dangerous for cyclists. Recently, there was a report that three cyclists were killed in one day on our roads. Can I ask the Senior Parliamentary Secretary, given that the Government is now promoting cycling as a green mode of transport and that there are many more cyclists on the roads today, whether he would consider more robust and proactive measures on the part of the Police to educate motorists? As he said, they accounted for more than 50% of the cause of fatal accidents on roads involving cyclists.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, in summary, MAS and all financial sector stakeholders have important roles to play in strengthening financial stability and market confidence in our financial system. Investors too have a responsibility to understand the products they invest in. MAS will take a balanced and pragmatic approach in reviewing any regulatory changes, and will complement this with a focus on board and senior management effectiveness, including their role in safeguarding the safety and soundness of their institutions and in delivering fair dealing outcomes to their customers.”
“Over the next one to two years, as details of the international proposals are firmed up, we will consult widely with the public and the financial industry and ensure that we adopt the new international standards in ways that are appropriate to our context. Second, the crisis has led regulators in many countries to re-examine aspects of their approach regarding the sale and marketing of structured products. In Singapore, MAS undertook a review of the regulatory regime governing the sale and marketing of unlisted investment products. In March last year, MAS published its policy consultation paper with proposals that covered issues such as promoting more effective disclosure, strengthening fair dealing in the sale and advisory process, introducing an enhanced regulatory regime for the sale of complex investment products, and enhancing MAS' powers. In its review, MAS has been careful not to come up with overly prescriptive rules and the approach is intended to continue giving Singaporeans choices in their investment options. MAS' regulation cannot replace the primary role of the board and senior management to ensure that the requisite controls and risk processes are implemented robustly throughout their organisation. MAS will be reviewing the Corporate Governance Regulations and Guidelines for locally incorporated banks and significant life insurance companies. These Guidelines were introduced in 2005 and were implemented in 2007. So it is time for review. The review will focus on the effectiveness of risk management at the board level, including the role played by the boards in safeguarding the safety and soundness of their institutions, managing market conduct risks and setting remuneration policies to manage these risks effectively.”
“This will improve the quality and comparability of financial information available to the public and investors. In short, Singapore's regulatory philosophy is to maintain a sound regulatory framework but to complement this with board and senior management responsibility at the various financial institutions as well as disclosure and market discipline. We believe that this continues to be relevant and appropriate. Nevertheless, while our local financial institutions have generally weathered the financial crisis well, there is no room for complacency. International standard setters have been busy deliberating specific areas for strengthening regulation and board and senior management oversight, and MAS will continue to keep our regulations and industry abreast with global best practice. Let me explain more in greater detail what MAS is doing. First, in the area of prudential regulation, MAS already requires our banks to meet minimum capital requirements which are higher than international standards as well as liquidity and provisioning requirements which were not widely adopted internationally prior to the crisis, but are now regarded as necessary and appropriate. In December 2009, the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision released a package of proposals to strengthen global capital and liquidity regulations for consultation. These are targeted for adoption internationally by end-2012. Our relatively conservative regulatory framework and the strong capital and liquidity positions of our financial institutions mean that we are well placed to meet these new stringent international regulatory standards.”
“Mr Christopher de Souza asked the Senior Minister in view of the past year's global financial crisis (a) whether the level of Government regulation of our financial market will increase; and (b) whether the Government’s regulatory philosophy of the market has shifted due to the lessons gleaned from the crisis and, if so, (i) how has it shifted; and (ii) what have been the lessons gleaned. The Minister for Trade and Industry (Mr Lim Hng Kiang) (for the Senior Minister): Mr Speaker, Sir, the general view that has emerged from the financial crisis is that following a period of deregulation of financial markets and fairly benign economic conditions in advanced economies in the US and Europe, there has been an over-reliance on markets to self-correct and on financial institutions to manage their own risks. As a consequence, a variety of risks were under-estimated and when these risks materialised and interacted in unexpected ways, many financial institutions came under stress and had to be bailed out by their governments. Mr de Souza asked what lessons we have drawn from the crisis and whether our regulatory philosophy has shifted. I should first point out that Singapore is at a different starting point from the advanced economies. We have always maintained a robust regulatory framework and a rigorous supervisory approach which helped our financial system to remain resilient throughout the crisis. We also believe that a stable and dynamic financial system that serves the needs of the economy and the public cannot be built on regulation alone. Responsible and competent board and senior management who manage the risks of their financial institutions well are also critical. In addition, MAS also promotes transparency and market discipline in our financial system.”
“Sir, I am encouraged to hear that the Ministry is planning to build more infrastructure as part of its plans to promote environmentally friendly practices in Singapore. Can I ask the Minister whether there are any plans to work with the relevant agencies to make sure that beyond the infrastructure, cycling is also a viable and safe mode of transport? If we want to promote cycling as a green mode of transport, it not only requires infrastructure but it also requires shower rooms in offices, education and enforcement to ensure that cyclists ride safely. Assoc. Prof. Dr Yaacob Ibrahim: Sir, as mentioned in my earlier reply, the Ministry of Transport (MOT), together with HDB, has a programme to build up the cycling infrastructure. I do not have the details of it, to the extent, as mentioned by the Member, of shower facilities in some of the buildings. But, certainly, this is being tried out by MOT, together with the various local agencies, to ensure that if the infrastructure is built, the users are responsible and safety is ensured. As you know our roads are already crowded and if we were to build cycling paths within the main roads, there are concerns and issues which we should bear in mind. But, as I said earlier, this is something which MOT is studying very carefully. This is one of the plans in the Sustainable Singapore Blueprint. So we have to test it out and pilot it. But, to a large extent, if you ask me personally, it is about personal behaviour on how we work together as a community, ie, when we use the roads, we use it in a responsible manner. REGULATION OF FINANCIAL MARKET (Post crisis) 4.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I thank the Minister for his reply. If I may say so, I think the army of volunteers and all the staff involved in organising APEC, including the security agencies, deserve special commendation for hosting such a good meeting in Singapore and showcasing Singapore's ability to host such a major global conference. As the Minister noted one of the spin-offs of APEC is the meetings that took place on the sidelines. One of them was the historic meeting between US President Barack Obama and the Leaders from the ASEAN countries, including Myanmar. Can I ask the Minister, first, for his views on the significance of the renewed US policy of engagement in this region, in particular towards Myanmar? The Minister also mentioned that it is getting to be a multi-polar world with the rise of China and India but with the US as a dominant pole, so can I ask the Minister for his sense of the shifting strategic landscape given that China has overtaken the US in becoming Southeast Asia's third biggest trading partner, after Japan and the EU?”
“Sir, the Member of Parliament Er Lee Bee Wah mentioned about Engineering courses and the need to have to make sure that PSC gives scholarships to Engineering courses and I think that is fine. But I am just asking the Deputy Prime Minister whether there is also a concerted effort to make sure that scholarships are also provided to those studying courses in the Arts and Humanities as well to ensure an even balance or at least that emphasis is also given to such courses.”
“Sir, can I ask the Deputy Prime Minister what is the spread of those who are awarded scholarships for Arts and Humanities because these courses are also essential in equipping our people with the problem-solving skills and different perspectives to life and problems?”
“" "Re-dress, re-vive, re-place, re-learn, re-fresh." Sir, this is the essence of what we have been debating about the last four days. Singapore belongs to us; we belong to Singapore. We can chart our own destiny. Fifty years from now, I hope our younger generation can say that we have led our country well, and perhaps, also write a poem about it.”
“Lance the Barisan boil, as ten million sing Malaysia forever, a brief sojourn, a painful parting for This our island in the sun. Assemble KPIs: Labour, Capital, Government; Meritocracy, Equality; Integrity, Commitment, Skills Development Fund; And more, to mix and match into a Pledge, a Unity. Singapura agak agak sudah jadi Walk down the years between ever taller buildings, cross Cleaner streets following a small green man who never tires. Past Copthorne, to that notorious bend which slows our river. No sulfide air. There are fish. Then backtrack past bridges Whose names sound our history. See the Merlion, Durian, Floating Platform, and emerging Double Helix bridge: Art and design enhance function as in the newer HDBs. Stroll Marina Barrage. Stop. Hear the waters on either side: One composed, one rough, two signifiers for our boundaries. Guard one; watch the other, so sanctify life within our skyline, As twilight starts to hum, stretch its limbs, as colours move. This new lake will gradually re-fresh, sweeten, fill sails, sms, Accost the rising sun, pleasure lovers who hug its shores then See the evening set in a pair of eyes, gently foreclosing. Soon moonlight will start to heap. Guardian hours that pass will come again, As I remember what fifty years of vision Un-did and did, As what was and is, and may have been, I place in the fifty years to come." Sir, I think you will agree with me that this is a beautiful poem, with many layers. You will notice that it referred to how our leaders make decisions – that we do it rationally, calculating our moves, thinking through possibilities. Another emphasis of this poem is on the word "our" and the prefix "re-": "Our city state, our leaders, our island in the sun, our boundaries, our skyline.”
“Through reading, we rehearse the great problems of life, both personal and social, and reflect on the big philosophical questions: How should I live? What is important in life? What is equality? What is justice? What are the values of this island that we call home? Where is home? We should put together a collection of good poems about Singapore, an anthology for use in schools. Such Singapore poems would help students to appreciate the wonder that is Singapore and to reflect on its social and political background. There could also be field trips to the locations of the poems. Sir, Edwin Thumboo has just written a poem to commemorate the 50th anniversary of Singapore’s self-governance. The poem, titled "1959 plus Fifty", is yet unpublished, and I want to thank Prof. Thumboo and the Straits Times for allowing me to share it with this House. I will read an excerpt of it here. You can read the full version in the Straits Times on Saturday. The context of the passage I am reading is this: The country has rid itself of its colonial masters, then merged with Malaysia, only to be separated suddenly. Then the shock of the withdrawal of the British troops, which accounted for one-fifth of the economy. Sir, now I read the poem: "This our City-State, Rose above withdrawal-symptoms creeping home from East of Suez, black-white bungalows, Nee Soon bars. We make again, but ... according to our leaders who Muster and assess; chew, cogitate; rotate dreams, inspect Possibilities including base conversion; calculate the way Ahead; split racist infinitives; re-dress, re-vive decaying Precincts; re-place Old Lobb and farm; learn to re-learn; Keep tradition, yet change, move, do. Lick trade unions Into shape.”
“In recent years, Singaporean writers and artists have been flying our national flag all over the world, to some acclaim. Soon, three Singaporean writers will read their work at the Edinburgh Book Festival, the largest International Book Festival in the world. It brings together world-class writers and thinkers from all over the world each year. This year, this will include our very own Edwin Thumboo, who was awarded our first Cultural Medallion for Literature. When I attended the Edinburgh Book Festival in 2006 and sampled its fare, I immediately shot an email to the Minister for Information and the Arts, then Dr Lee Boon Yang, to ask why Singaporean writers were not represented. I sent it when I was in Scotland, just in the midst of the Book Festival. And he replied quickly to say that the National Arts Council was working on it and encouraged me to help by sending me a big box of materials and collaterals to promote Singapore as a global arts city in Scotland. Yes, he was that pro-active and supportive. I am glad that this sustained effort by MICA and the NAC have paid off. There are many other successes in the arts but I want to highlight the literary arts because it is an often under-funded and neglected sector. Yet it adds tremendously to our creative and cultural depth. I know the new Minister Lui Tuck Yew also supports this view. In fact, just after he became Minister, I also emailed him on the need to do more to develop literary arts, and he had responded to my call with enthusiasm. Sir, we should promote the reading of Singapore literature in schools and in the community. Singapore literature is a great medium to express our society's values, its history and its uniqueness. It stimulates one’s imagination. It develops empathy.”
“If all seats in Singapore were single seats, can the Workers’ Party guarantee that this will not encourage communal-based parties from emerging again and playing the racial card for votes in single seats? Who will be the losers? It will be the minority races. How will that help us build a united nation? In his Address, the President called for a fresh re-thinking and creative ideas to the problems we face today. Sir, before we can do that, we need to gird ourselves with a spirit of creativity and adventure. Eager to explore new possibilities; to conquer new vistas; to see our country and all that it holds for us in new and fresh ways. To navigate our small island through an increasingly unpredictable world, full of uncertainty and surprises, we need to permeate our society with such a zestful spirit. And we need to celebrate this spirit wherever and whenever we find them and nurture them. In this regard, two events recently gave us cause for cheer. The first is the historic feat of a Singaporean all-woman team reaching the summit of the world’s tallest mountain, Mount Everest. They overcame tremendous obstacles to achieve their dream. It took more than five years of gruelling work in physical training, team building, fund raising. They had to make sacrifices in their careers and salaries. But few believed in them initially, they had trouble finding sponsors. They persevered. Theirs is not only a great sporting achievement. It is also a testament to their spirit of resilience, determination and adventure. This is the kind of spirit that we should celebrate and promote in all Singaporeans. The second had to do with our achievements in the arts.”
“Now the onus is on the Opposition to present the candidates to contest the seats. Once in Parliament, it is up to the Opposition to prove itself in debate and to put forward alternative ideas if it opposes the PAP’s policies. So far, the Opposition cannot be said to be very productive in presenting alternative policies which are well thought-out and detailed. I hope this will change so that our debates can be more useful in finding solutions for the country. Earlier, the Workers' Party said there is no need for GRCs to ensure minority representation because minority candidates can get into Parliament as individual candidates. Therefore, GRCs should be abolished and all should be single seats. Sir, I wonder if the real reason why the Workers' Party is asking for this is that the Opposition has found it hard to recruit capable minority candidates to stand in GRCs. Because of the GRC system, they are forced to present a multi-racial team. If they cannot get enough minority candidates of sufficient calibre, this affects their ability to contest in GRCs. Sir, we have to make it clear that this GRC system is one that was devised to ensure minority representation. It is up to the Opposition to prove its appeal to the different races of Singapore by being able to put together multi-racial teams to contest in GRCs. What we do not want to see revived in Singapore is the potency of communal-based political parties. As I mentioned earlier, Singapore had its share of communal-based parties when it had its first elections as a self-governing state in 1959. The fact that their power has been eroded over the years is not a matter of chance, it is not a natural attrition, it is because of the system that we have put in place.”
“Rajaratnam, Singapore's first Culture Minister, introduced our state symbols – the flag, the national anthem, the state crest – in the Legislative Assembly in 1959, he said: "They are expressive of the new spirit of self-reliance and dedication which inspired our people today." Self-reliance, dedication. This spirit of self-reliance and dedication is what we continue to need today and in large measure. The Prime Minister yesterday said that his most critical job is to find and nurture men and women to be the next generation of leaders. I am sure top of his mind is also renewing the Cabinet team and finding his possible successor for the future. Sir, there is a sense on the ground that the Government may not be looking at the right places for talent. While CEO types and capable technocrats have their place in the Cabinet, it is important to ensure there is a diversity on the front bench from different fields and with different talents. In the 1959 PAP team, it was the diversity of the leadership class that was largely responsible for the breadth of political ideas and their resonance on the ground. Very often, it was the interaction of their talents and characteristics that made the policies more persuasive and palatable to the people. Sir, I welcome the move to reduce the size of the GRCs and to give Opposition MPs up to nine seats in Parliament, whether as elected MPs or NCMPs. We often hear the Opposition complaining that the PAP suppresses its voice and does not give a level playing field during elections. With smaller GRCs and more single wards, I hope the Opposition will be able to muster up the candidates to contest in all the seats. Singaporeans want an opportunity to vote. There are too many walkovers in the last election.”
“Even those born in Singapore were bitterly divided, with the English-educated and the vernacular-educated separated along the lines of social and economic class. Communal pulls were strong. Indeed, several of the parties which contested were communal-based parties, such as the Malayan Chinese Association, Umno, the Malayan Indian Congress, the Singapore Chinese party, and the Pan-Malayan Islamic Party. But the PAP campaigned as a multi-racial party. It stood for justice and equality. Its key message was providing an "honest and efficient government" that would give priority to tackling employment, housing and education. It talked about infusing into the multi-racial society the spirit of belonging to a nation and promoting equality of women in all spheres. A striking feature of the PAP’s 1959 manifesto was its injunction to the people to play their part in building the nation and solving its severe problems. It said: "Let us never forget that self-government is not possible without self-reliance." When the PAP became Government, it set about to fulfil its promises, against a backdrop of great economic pessimism and political turbulence in the region. It took hard work and determination, with a dash of genius and good luck, to get to where we are today. This is a tribute to the leaders and also to the people of Singapore. I am recounting this today to remind us how far we have come within the last 50 years, and to ask: Will the next 50 years be as stable? Will we be more united, with a greater sense of belonging to the country as Singaporeans? Will the political system be one that ensures Singapore’s survival and success as an independent state in the future, and not regress to a failed state where it had no control over its own destiny? When S.”
“Sir, on 5th June, we will be marking a significant milestone in Singapore’s history: it will be the 50th anniversary of Singapore’s birth as a self-governing state. Fifth June 1959 was a crucial turning point. Singapore took on the status of a State of Singapore with full powers of internal government. Britain retained control over foreign affairs, external defence while internal security rested in the hands of the Internal Security Council. It was a step towards the independence that Singapore had so longed for and worked so hard for. For 100 years before that, Singapore had been a British colony. In all those years, there was no sense of a national identity among the people, of being united as one people, of Singapore belonging to them, that this was their island, their home. They did not elect their own government; they had no control over the destiny of the country. In 1959, life was grim. At that time, unemployment was 12%. Economic prospects were poor, made worse by the militant climate of labour unrest. Around this time 50 years ago, end of May, people in Singapore were voting for the first time for their own elected government with full internal powers to run the country. Polling day was May 30, 1959. The People’s Action Party, which was then a small Opposition party, won 43 out of the 51 seats, with 53.4% of the votes cast. It was a rigorous campaign, with 12 political parties contesting. In the 1959 elections, of about 600,000 voters, only about 270,000 – less than half – were people born and bred in Singapore. As new migrants with no roots in Singapore, their loyalties and worldview were wrapped around their own kin and motherland.”
“The Minister said that the net effect of the Bill and the amendments will be a substantial relaxation from the current situation. He mentioned about 50% of the current permits will no longer be needed. I feel more focus should be given on this. Can I ask the Minister which groups or activities would benefit from this liberalisation and can look forward to it?”
“But can the Minister clarify if routine police work includes controlling mass demonstrations? It is important to make explicit, and as explicit as possible, if not in the Bill, then in the explanatory statement, to assure the public that these powers are very well defined and can be only used in certain situations, and cannot be abused by the Police. In conclusion, like many Singaporeans, I would like Singapore to remain safe and peaceful. We do not want mass protests to be a way of life in Singapore or to disrupt our everyday life. In general, Singaporeans get agitated if their bus or MRT train gets held up by even 10 minutes, whatever the reason. They have a low tolerance for road closures. But at the same time, given the changing times, we have to make more space for people to exercise their right to peaceful assembly. While I may have reservations on some details, I support the principle that necessary measures must be taken to ensure that public order can be maintained during public protests, and that the security of country is not put at risk. With that, I support the Bill. 5.19 pm”
“While I understand the concern with ensuring public order with large groups, I am puzzled why even a lone person is now also to be considered a threat to public order and has to apply for a permit to protest? The Minister says it is to rationalise the current provisions in other Acts and to focus on the activities and not on the number of people involved. On the face of it, this is sensible. But in practical terms, does it mean that one person will be accused of illegal assembly if he shouts into his mobile phone to protest about some political issue? I have another objection to this: it commits violence against the English language. In every respectable English dictionary I refer to, "assembly" means a number of people gathered together. You cannot have a one-man assembly. It is a contradiction in terms. It is unlike the language in the Public Entertainments and Meetings Act (PEMA) which says that any activity by one or more persons will require a licence, if the activity amounts to public entertainment. This is because you can have a one-man performance, or a one-man lecture, it makes sense to say "one man". But you cannot take the PEMA provision for one person for public entertainment into the POA for public assembly and say you can have a one-man assembly. This is just odd. My final reservation relates to the special powers conferred on law enforcement officers to direct any person to stop filming, taking photos, and to, without a warrant, search any person believed to possess such films and photos and to seize these materials and their equipment. I am glad to hear the Minister’s assurance that these powers are not intended to be used to prohibit the filming of routine police work or events and are tightly scoped for anti-terrorist activities.”
“They want to be locked up, so that they get to look like political martyrs, fighting for their freedom of assembly. Why should we give them that satisfaction? While we want to preserve our reputation for peace and security and the right of the people to enjoy the benefits of law and order, I do not think Singapore will fall apart or become a nation of rioters by allowing a group of people to hold processions peacefully in a safe environment outdoors. There is a fine line, of course, between peaceful public protests and violent ones. A peaceful protest can turn violent with just one demonstrator throwing a brick or a punch. I know this will be a challenge to our law enforcement officers, particularly if the group is intent on staging a confrontation with the Police for maximum political mileage with the international media present. Such individuals or groups, proven to have such an anarchic bent or with a record for violence, can be justifiably blacklisted. For this, having good intelligence is important. It is equally important for our police officers to be well-trained in handling mobs and agitators in a tense situation and to react appropriately. Policing mass protests are, by its nature, noisy and messy affairs. Police officers often risk their lives to keep order when violence erupts. It is human for them to be on edge and sometimes over- react to situations. They need to develop a good feel of what counts as a peaceful if lively protest, and what is a violent one. This brings me to another amendment in the Bill: The redefinition of "assembly" to include a demonstration by a person alone. It seems over-the-top.”
“While I welcome the Minister's point that the net effect of the Bill will, in fact, be a substantial relaxation from the current situation – about 50% of the current permits will no longer be needed – some international press reports and some Members of this House have portrayed the proposed amendments as making our laws on public protests even tougher. Can I ask the Minister to clarify for the record, whether this is a tightening up or a relaxation when it comes to the right to freedom of assembly, which includes the right to protest peacefully? Sir, we have to be consistent in how we deal with public protests, regardless of who is demonstrating. We have to adapt to the changing circumstances and allow the different groups the space to protest and shout slogans and, at the same time, ensure that things do not get out of hand and become violent. We have been fairly successful with the experiment at the Speakers' Corner. The protests there have been peaceful thus far. It is presently an unrestricted area, which requires no permit for holding assemblies or processions. We should take the experiment further and allow certain streets, which lead up to the Speakers’ Corner at Hong Lim Park, to be designated safe for processions – not completely unrestricted as in the Speakers’ Corner, but less restricted in that approvals are granted more easily. The procession route so designated should pose minimum disruption to the public and have permanent security cameras mounted along the streets. If we do not facilitate the people’s right to hold a peaceful procession, sooner or later, some groups would only proceed without permits, and make a show of breaking the law.”
“And innocent bystanders, who want nothing to do with the demonstrations, can become the victims of a tense situation with a highly keyed-up police force. While we may not be comfortable with such scenes in Singapore, we have to recognise that, for better or worse, mass protests have become a part of the landscape at big international conferences involving world leaders. Radical anti-capitalism and anti-globalisation groups, environmentalists, and anarchists fly in from different parts of the world to take part in demonstrations in the city hosting these meetings. These include APEC meetings. [Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Matthias Yao Chih) in the Chair] 5.12 pm For example, at the APEC meeting in Santiago in 2004, thousands of protestors took to the streets. While most demonstrators were peaceful, there were several hundred who stormed police positions, throwing rocks and petrol bombs. Similar scenes disrupted Korea, which hosted the APEC meeting in 2005. Singapore will be hosting the APEC meeting in November. How are we geared up for it? The spotlight will be on Singapore, on how it manages mass protests and demonstrations. While we do not want our city to be crippled by uncontrollable mass protests, we should not swing to the other extreme and make it overly onerous for groups to carry out peaceful demonstrations outdoors. Singapore already has a reputation for being tough. This toughness was on display when Singapore hosted the IMF/World Bank meeting in 2006. While delegates might be impressed with the efficiency of the country, its international image was marred somewhat by the negative publicity over Singapore's strictness on outdoor demonstrations.”
“First, I would like to thank the Minister for a thoughtful speech. I welcome the Minister's calibrated approach in managing public order. We live in an age where mass protests are a common sight in many cities around the world. Indeed, for some, it has become a way of life. We need not look far. In Thailand, political protests have choked Bangkok since the military coup in 2006. We witnessed a spectacular display of public disorder just over the weekend when the 'red shirts' flooded Pattaya and derailed the ASEAN Summit. The people who suffer most from these political protests are the Thais themselves, with the country's economy and credibility at stake. I cite this example not as a rationale or a justification for this Bill, but as a description of the reality of the effect of public protest gone out of control. Before the Pattaya incident, we also saw violent demonstrations in London as it hosted the G20 meeting. The Metropolitan Police, said to be among the best public order officers in the world, were pushed back in some areas by the sheer force of the demonstrators. I saw snippets of the demonstrations on videos on the website of The Guardian newspaper. What started off as a peaceful protest – and it is almost like a street party in some areas – ended up in angry violence. I also saw the video of a bystander, Mr Ian Tomlinson – as mentioned by some Members in this House – who was not part of the demonstration, being pushed to the ground by the police. He died shortly after from a heart attack. The videos are instructive. Even these highly-experienced police, used to dealing with protests and riots, have trouble ensuring that mass protests stay peaceful.”
“Can I ask the Minister, given that MINDEF has convened a board of inquiry and made findings that the matters related to Dr Ooi's service were managed appropriately, would he consider making the findings public or, at least, available to the family?”
“Sir, I would like to ask the Minister whether he can review the way the SAF contracts army personnel to make sure that before a person signs a bond with the SAF, the contract terms are clearly explained to him in language that he understands and confirmed with his parents, if he is below 21 years old. Would the Minister agree that while the bonded officer has the moral obligation to serve his bond, the SAF as an employer also has a moral obligation to create a work environment that makes him want to stay and be passionate about his job? Can I ask the Minister if the SAF's human resource policies ensure that? And, finally, this is related to the case of the late Dr Allan Ooi. Sir, as you know, the parents are still asking for answers –”
“Sir, on the panel, it is important to ensure that the committee consists of non-partisan people of standing, especially established historians who understand that history can sometimes be interpreted in various ways. It is not unusual for documentaries, for example, to take different historical perspectives and even challenge the prevailing one. The important thing is that they are based on rigorous research and facts. Sir, I note that the Chairman for the new committee is the retired Senior District Judge Richard Magnus. Can I ask the Senior Minister of State how the Government decided on this particular retired judge for this role? Not that I doubt its judgment but I think it is good for the public to know on what basis does the Government decide that this person is non-partisan and an independent person to chair this important panel. Besides being even-handed, the panel should be expeditious in its decisions in processing a film. This will prevent it from being accused of holding up a film unnecessarily, or of applying double standards. Is there an estimated time frame for party political films to go through the process? And how will the panel work during an election campaign, given the timeframe? Sir, it is important to make sure that the panel can, itself, withstand the test of public scrutiny in its application of the amended law. This is after all a liberalisation, and should be seen as such.”
“2", which used animation to put out ERP gantries which are thrown by a mob into the sea are shown without any great fuss by the official circles. So the Government is already ruling with a light touch. And I am quite sure that the intent of this law is to liberalise further and not to further make it more difficult for film makers to express themselves but in ways that will add insight, that will add to a reasoned debate and not mislead and distort the truth. Sir, I would like to ask the Senior Minister of State for an assurance that the independence of the new advisory panel. In assessing films, it should be transparent and fair, and seen to be so. Its decisions should be made public and explained. Opportunities should also be given to the film-maker to re-edit the film, based on the committee’s comments, and resubmit it for approval. Otherwise, it will merely stir the unhealthy imagination of those who feed on conspiracy. I hear Prof. Thio Li-ann and Mr Siew Kum Hong talk in terms of freedom of speech. I think that is a worthy topic but I would urge the Members to, perhaps, move a separate motion on freedom of speech and deal with it holistically to do with publications, films and all other media, and not use that argument for the Films Act which is one aspect of freedom of speech. And I think it is, in a way, confusing the debate to bring in what you call "a constitutional right" to freedom of speech. All of us value the freedom of speech. The question is: What serves society? And it is up to this society to decide what limits we place, what we think is valuable. I think it merits a deeper and wider debate.”
“They feed on the conspiracy that this Government stifles dissent and runs a police state. They spin the story that there are plots in Government to go after them, that its leaders indulge in duplicity and intrigue, that all power is traced to a few absolutely evil and omnipotent men. They juxtapose one set of facts with another and say they must be related. All these innuendoes in all their complexities appear highly mysterious to the general public. The paranoid mentality, however, is one that does not listen to logic. Its reasoning requires several, sometimes wild, leaps into the imagination. Yet the film-maker is dexterous enough to keep the storyline on such a level as to make it all seem true and logical. Which leads to a basic question: Why are such political videos and films made, although they are presently illegal, and loaded up on the Internet? The answer seems fairly clear: Because they can. And also, on the Internet, an audience for such sensational political entertainment exists. My view is that such political films based on distortion of facts make no contribution to enhancing the conditions of this country’s political reality. Instead, they coarsen and lower the standards of political discourse. Sir, this amendment to the Films Act is a relaxation, but listening to the arguments of some Members of the House, the concern seems to be it is, in fact, not a relaxation but a clamping down. I ask assurance from the Senior Minister of State that this is not so. In fact, I would argue that the steps taken in this amendment in fact are quite bold and I have seen many films including from Miss Tan Pin Pin, the film maker named by Ms Sylvia Lim, and many of them take issue with Government policies, even entertaining films like Jack Neo's "Money Not Enough No.”