Ivan Png Paak Liang
Singapore
“Indeed, Sir, have we reviewed our force structure accordingly? For instance, last year, the US Army was busy converting artillerymen into MPs - not Members of Parliaments, but military policemen. Given our tax revenue and investment income, if we spend more on defence, we must be spending less on something else, for instance, R&D.”
“I think this should reassure Members that we adopt a very disciplined and focused approach in our attempts to bring in investments. We try not to give specific numbers because, as I said, we are in a very competitive environment. Other investment promotion agencies also look at what we are giving and try to top it.”
“This would be a superb complement to all the other attractions that we have around the Marina Bay - a functional maritime museum. Not one of those full of dead things, but one which is alive, with real people, real boat building. We can bring in the craftsmen from the region.”
“The really big ticket items on which we should focus are questions of how to ensure value for money in Government expenditure, questions like how much the market value of an HDB block increases for every $1 million spent on upgrading and utilisation of Government buildings.”
“Sir, responding to the hon. Minister's explanation on scholarships, let me say that I am not saying that we should not send scholars overseas. Rather, I was advocating one scholarship. There should not be a local scholarship or overseas scholarship.”
“Sir, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by, leave, withdrawn. The sum of $12,771,780 for Head C ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. The sum of $265,200 for Head C ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. Column No : 619 Head R - Ministry of Law”
The complete record
Every one of 96 lines we hold for Ivan Png Paak Liang, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 2 of 2.
“It may be that the business for our integrated resorts will slacken, then the management may come back to the Government to say, "Oh, our business is not going so well. Please give us some concessions." Sir, my call is, please, would the Government commit that there would be no concessions? Third, my question, Sir, which is related to my previous call: who, if any, will regulate the quality of the other features of the integrated resort? On this point, I also echo hon. Member Dr Loo Choon Yong. Initially, as the Senior Minister has said, we will get Celine Dion, Norah Jones, one of my favourites. We will get Cirque du Soleil. But what if business is not so good? The integrated resort might downgrade. We will get second-rate singers, third-rate circuses. My question is: will the operating franchise specifies standards of performance to ensure that we get only the top-class?”
“Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, for allowing me to join in the debate. I just have two calls and a question. First, my call. The call is that for the next big issue that we face as a country, would the Prime Minister and the Government please reverse the sequence - first debate in Parliament, then decide in Cabinet. The present debate, which I have been following for the last four days, has all the flavour of a post-mortem. We have heard many moving speeches from senior Cabinet Ministers, honourable colleagues, but a decision has already been taken. I recall several years ago, the then Deputy Prime Minister Lee, gave an inspiring speech at the university. He urged our students to take an active role in the movie, not just sit back and be in the audience. So, next time, please, Sir, let us take an active role as actors and actresses in the movie, not just be the first audience. So my call for the next big issue is to let Parliament debate the issue before, and not after, the Cabinet's decision. Sir, my second call. On this point, I echo hon. Members Mr Chiam, Mdm Halimah, Mr Loh Meng See and Prof. Ong. Will the Government please commit to the House that in the future it will not relax the conditions on admission of Singaporeans to the casino? We have heard from the Prime Minister, the Senior Minister, Minister Mentor, and others, that there are many plans for integrated resorts with casinos. If they do not come here, or even if they come here, they may set up elsewhere - Bangkok, Phuket, we have heard many places. When this happens, all these would be competing for the same tourist dollars from China, India and elsewhere.”
“Sir, I believe that a good and vibrant club sector will contribute to the growth of our leisure industry, which we are trying to develop and is a subject for further discussion today. Would the Minister not consider how to build up this good regulatory environment for clubs as part of the bigger leisure industry sector? How about considering forming a working group to look at this in a more serious way? In the last few years, practically no clubs had been formed. Some would say that, in part, it was because of the weak regulatory regime.”
“Sir, how about making this requirement that it should be above a certain size of contract? This would be similar to, say, requirements for compliance with quality standards, or environmental standards. Here, we just require compliance with procurement standards. Other countries do it. US has a small business set aside. I am not asking for it to be set aside. I am just asking that we keep those opportunities so that SMEs can compete on a basis of what they can do, and not who they know.”
“The question is: could we study having a working group to keep these opportunities open to our SMEs?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, my biggest nightmare is that, one day, the Government will have one big tender and one company will get the one big tender and all the rest in the SMEs will never get any opportunities. Because that one big company will of course give all its business to its subsidiaries and friends, and GeBIZ, which is now populated every day by hundreds or thousands of new tender projects, would disappear.”
“Sir, let me disclose that I am a director and investor in various SMEs. The Second Minister for Finance (Mr Raymond Lim Siang Keat) (for the Prime Minister and Minister for Finance): Mr Speaker, Sir, GeBIZ is Government's electronic procurement portal through which public agencies procure their goods and services. Public sector agencies do not dictate how their suppliers should in turn procure their own goods and services. This applies to all suppliers, including Public-Private Partnership (PPP) service providers. After the public sector agency selects its PPP provider, how the provider in turn procures, from whom, and at what terms, is a commercial decision to be made by the provider itself. It would not be appropriate for the Government to intervene in the commercial relationship between our suppliers and their own suppliers. The Government would already have taken its value-for-money decision when it chooses the successful bid above all the competing bids. Government-owned corporatised entities and Temasek-linked companies (TLCs) are not public sector agencies. Like other private sector entities, they decide how best to procure their goods and services according to their commercial terms. It would not be appropriate to require them to procure through GeBIZ.”
“Division, please. Assoc. Prof. Ong Soh Khim: No. The sum of $5,089,240,820 for Head K ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. The sum of $1,075,968,100 for Head K ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.”
“Sir, my point is somewhat related to the point made by the hon. Member Mr Zainudin. PRIME is a programme, worth over $1 billion, to upgrade schools. One of the key deliverables is larger classrooms to fit enhanced technology. However, since PRIME was initiated some years ago, the Ministry has decided to recruit more teachers and reduce the student/teacher ratio and so, therefore, classes are going to be smaller, with fewer students. In this case, could the Ministry not realign PRIME so that there would be less need to enlarge classrooms and money could be saved or used for other purposes? Special Education Schools”
“Sir, I wish to pick up on a point made by the hon. Member, Mr Alex Chan regarding rootedness and belonging. One thing, which may be an unintended consequence of our Education Ministry's reorganisation and shifting of schools, is that we have lost some sense of belonging and rootedness. Just the other day, I found out Telok Kurau School is now in Ubi. I mentioned in this House that River Valley School is quite far from River Valley and Raffles Institution has been in three places in recent history. I think it is very important that if we want to have people establish roots here and, have a sense of belonging, it is important to respect place and name, and have these institutions endured so that the school kids, when they graduate, will know where they belong and will go back, and feel a sense of belonging. Moreover, these schools will be rooted in their respective communities. But we shuffle them here and there, and change their names. Crescent Girls' School is ---”
“I agree with him that we should find ways and means to help. In fact, our construction waste, ie, recycling waste, is one of the highest. But I agree with him that there is scope for us to do more. I will pass the suggestion to the Ministry of National Development, and we can work together on this.”
“Sir, I thank the Minister for his good news. I am so excited that I am almost rushing to get my T-shirt, pants and sunglasses to launch into the kayak. Certainly, I applaud the Ministry's efforts in reducing our solid waste. Here, I have a suggestion which is to address a particular problem in Singapore, maybe peculiar to Singapore and I think Hong Kong as well. When my wife and I first bought our condominium, it was a new condominium, we were like many other home owners in Singapore interested in customising the unit. So I told the condominium developer, "Don't put in the floor because I am going to put in a new floor." The condominium developer said, "No. We will put in the floor. You come in, you take out the floor and throw it away and then put in your new floor." Sir, this is a problem that perhaps his Ministry and the Ministry of National Development - I am very glad to see the Second Minister for National Development sitting right there - get together and arrange with the developers to say, "Give your buyers an option. If they don't want certain fittings, let them have an option not to have the fittings." In fact, we did not even ask them for a discount. We just said that to save on the environmental resources and to reduce construction waste, give the buyers the option not to have the fittings, give them a menu and say, "Tick off what things you want", and install them; those things they do not want, do not install. I think this is a win-win situation. I do hope the two Ministries can get together to do this. If he can do this - construction waste is a very large part of our solid waste - I am sure he will be that much closer to meeting his goal before time. Assoc. Prof. Dr Yaacob Ibrahim: Sir, I thank Prof. Png for his creative suggestion.”
“Sir, I must disclose an interest here. I am personally keen to bring my children to sail and row in our reservoirs. I applaud the Ministry for opening up the reservoirs for water sports. However, I am concerned that the mechanism is too exclusive. Last year, I was so happy to read the Minister's speech that we could sail on Lower Seletar Reservoir. So I went to find out. What I found out was that I must pay $10,000 entrance fee to join Seletar Country Club, then I could do my sailing. This, Sir, was very disappointing. I urge the Ministry to open up the reservoirs to the public - truly open to the public - not just to a select few. I urge the Ministry to please make it a condition that when the reservoir is open to an operator, the facilities must be open to the public, not just to a few members. Pollutant Standards Index (PSI) Reading”
“On SMEs, in his response during the Budget Debate, the Prime Minister mentioned that, in fact, the Government is one of the major purchasers in tenders under $100,000 and SMEs are one of the major suppliers to the Government. I asked that the Government uses the public-people-partnership to outsource projects. I wish to ask again that the Government insists that all these PPP outsource providers use GeBiz for their procurement, because, when the Government outsources big projects, we do not want the opportunities for SMEs to become providers to the Government of goods and services to be closed out, because the outsource providers may not use such a transparent system as the Government is using now. My second point is to thank the Minister for agreeing to publish the R&D 2006 Plan. That is a very good move. I only urge the Ministry, in planning R&D, to slice R&D into two parts. We must have pure R&D, as well as applied R&D. Let us not forget an important layer of R&D capability will be pure R&D, not necessarily tied to any particular industry or project. This is of overall importance to R&D capability.”
“Sir, this refers to the National Science and Technology Plan 2000 and the Science and Technology Plan 2005. Would the Minister please report to this House the 2000 Plan and its outcomes, and also the 2005 Plan and its desired outcomes? Further, in future, would the Minister please share with this House the Science and Technology Plans, the mid-term reviews and end-of-term reviews? Research and Development Expenditure”
“Sir, the Ministry's development budget includes $2.77 billion and $2.12 billion for Phases III and IV of the Economic Development Assistance Scheme. Would the Ministry please report to this House the rate of return on investment from these schemes? Expensive Natural Gas”
“Thank you, Sir, for allowing me to clarify. I believe the Minister misunderstood the intent of my question. When I compared the parking coupon and the cashcard, I was not referring to the use of the cashcard through ERP devices but rather modifying the in-vehicle unit (IU) so that the cashcard can be used in open car parks along the side of the street, and in car parks where there is no opportunity to build a gantry. In fact, this can be done by a simple modification of the IU. I think this will be very much more efficient.”
“Sir, let me show two things which Members will be very familiar with. In the year 2005, why are we still punching holes to pay for parking when there is an obviously better alternative? URA and HDB should please work with LTA to adapt the in-vehicle unit to charge for parking. A simple design would be to add a timer, an on-off button and a green light. The motorist can press the button when parking, then the green light will switch on. URA and HDB parking inspectors need only look out for green lights instead of doing a ton of mental mathematics. When motorists leave the parking space, switch off the button and the timer. This device would be more convenient and more accurate for motorists. You do not have to worry about punching the right number of coupons in future, and it will be more convenient for URA and HDB parking inspectors. I think, Sir, every one will benefit. Sir, if the problem is inter-Ministry cooperation, as I know LTA is under the Ministry of Transport and URA is under the Ministry of National Development, then perhaps the Prime Minister's Office should liaise between the Ministries. Carparks”
“Sir, the Ministry's development budget includes $517 million for lift upgrading. As mentioned here by the hon. Member, Mr Chew Heng Ching, on 15th January in this House, the Prime Minister announced that lift upgrading would be accelerated to 10 years. Would the Ministry estimate the change in total cost if we accelerated the programme to five years? There are two reasons why the total cost may well be lower. First, the construction industry is presently very depressed, so prices will be lower. Second, lift manufacturers will compete aggressively for larger contracts, so we can gain scale economics. Therefore, Sir, an accelerated programme might well give us more for less. Selective En-bloc Redevelopment Scheme (SERS)”
“Mr Chairman, in summing up the debate on the Budget Statement, the Prime Minister spoke about evaluating the performance of the SAF. If we enjoy peace, is it because the SAF did a fantastic job or because it was over-provisioned? My question relates to the Prime Minister's observation. Sir, if the Ministry has to cut its budget by 5%, what would it cut? If the Ministry could raise its budget by 5%, what would it add? Would the Ministry please compare our defence expenditure with those of similarly-sized non-aligned countries, which also have enjoyed a fair amount of peace, such as the United Arab Emirates, Sweden, Finland and Switzerland, on an aggregate and on a per capita basis?”
“Sir, the Ministry plans to convert the Supreme Court and City Hall buildings into a world- class art gallery. With all due respect to my hon. colleague, Mr Loh Meng See, I worry about this. Does our museum attendance really justify expanding the museum? The New Paper proclaimed that our new museum will have 11,000 square metres of space, rivalling London's national gallery which is only 10,500 square metres. But do we have a collection to justify this bigger space? Let me echo my hon. colleague, Mr Alex Chan. It is not true in this area that we build it and they will come. This does not work for museums. Let me share with Members the attendance at the Singapore Art Museum. In 1998, it was 183,000. Every year thereafter, it fell to a low of 127,000 in 2002. It recovered slightly to almost 150,000 in 2003. Before we commit the Supreme Court and City Hall buildings, I ask the Ministry to please compare the attendance per square metre of space at our Art Museum with major art museums in other leading cities. Can we really justify this use? Arts School”
“Sir, the Ministry's development budget includes over $40 million in each of FY 03 to FY 05 to purchase overseas properties. I do understand the need to house embassies and consulates. However, we always have a choice of lease or purchase. Would the Ministry please, first, clarify how much real estate it has acquired in foreign countries, and how much it plans to acquire in the future; and, second, report the gains and losses accruing from all foreign real estate from the time of purchase until the present date in Singapore dollars?”
“Mr Chairman, the Ministry of Transport has only one performance indicator in the Budget book. This is, amongst all Ministries, probably the shortest list. May I suggest that the Ministry adopt some of the following indicators: (1) average travel speed on Singapore roads; (2) for buses and MRT trains, average journey time, including both waiting and travel, per kilometre of journey; (3) number of passengers and flights at airports; and (4) number of containers and tonnes of non-containerised freight handled at ports.”
“Sir, last month, on my way to this House at Holland Road, I observed an old woman crossing the road from one side to another. In line with our objective to leave no one behind, I suggest that the Ministry please build all new overhead pedestrian bridges and retrofit existing bridges to make the staircases more gentle and to include a ramp. This would benefit the elderly as well as couples with babies. I did suggest this idea of ramps to LTA but their reply, in part, said that they were bound by building codes and barrier-free accessibility guidelines which make it difficult to build these. I believe this should not be an all-or-nothing issue. We do not need first class or even business class ramps. I believe most of our citizens would be quite happy with economy class ramps. Could the Ministry please work with the Ministry of National Development for an exemption, if necessary? Let us help all our families with babies and our older compatriots. 5.30 pm”
“I thank the honourable Minister for responding to my suggestion. I only ask that the Minister agree that when routes are awarded, they will not be on this comprehensive basis which is so large that no small independent person can afford to bid for them. Let us offer these routes on a single basis so that small time businessmen can bid on an individual basis.”
“Sir, I believe that our transport system over-emphasises private transport, by which I mean private cars and taxis. I have a suggestion to offer which addresses also a concern raised by hon. Members Mdm Cynthia Phua and Mr Yatiman Yusof, and that is, to introduce mini-buses. Mini-buses carry more passengers than taxis. They are both socially and environmentally more friendly. Hong Kong is on the front page of our newspapers today. We have something to learn from Hong Kong, that is, how to use mini-buses. The Hong Kong land transport system is based on sound transportation economics, that is, hub and spoke. Subway trains connect the hubs, mini-buses provide the feeder. Mini-buses are better than feeder buses, addressing Mr Yatiman's complaint, mini-buses could run more routes, shorter routes and, above all, they could provide more frequent services. So, in this way, it will help to reduce the overall travel time and improve the service to our commuters. Finally, let me add that if the Ministry accepts this suggestion, the mini-buses routes be awarded not to SMRT, SBS or some large corporation, but to another "S" - SMEs. Let this be another avenue for our local entrepreneurship. Let us award the individuals and, if need be, on an auction basis. School Buses”
“Sir, I wish to thank the hon. Deputy Prime Minister for so kindly attending to my cut. Sir, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The sum of $46,227,880 for Head B ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. The sum of $615,000 for Head B ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. Head P - Ministry of Home Affairs”
“Sir, let me clarify. When I said that the Attorney-General's Chambers was the largest, I said it is the largest in-house legal department. I was not comparing the Attorney-General to an independent law firm like Allen and Gledhill. I do again urge the Attorney-General to consider outsourcing. This is the practice in not only the UK but Australia, Hong Kong and other jurisdictions. I was motivated in part by an admiralty case where I understand the Government sent a junior lawyer against one of our most distinguished counsel, and the Government did not fare very well in that case.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the total sum to be allocated for Head B of the Estimates be reduced by $100. Sir, the Attorney-General is responsible for both criminal and civil legal work on behalf of the Government. The Attorney-General's 2005 budget provides for 143 legal officers. This makes the A-G's Chambers probably the largest in-house legal department in Singapore and possibly in the region. My suggestion is that the Attorney-General follows the best practice amongst in-house legal departments. Specifically, my suggestion is that the Attorney-General outsource part of his civil work to private practitioners. This is done by governments in other jurisdictions, for instance, the UK. This measure would align with our objective of a lean Government and the best sourcing principles that Prime Minister Lee outlined in this House yesterday. This outsourcing of civil work will also help to further develop our private Bar's expertise in complex legal issues.”
“The GeBIZ fee for additional accounts should be on a sliding scale. Surely, the cost of maintaining the second, third and fourth accounts is not the same $320 as the cost of the first account. Now, of course, we are waiving the first $320, but what remains is that it is $320 for the second, third, fourth and fifth accounts. If I understand this correctly, we should be doing this on a cost-recovery basis and not a profit maximisation basis. I think it makes more sense to have a sliding scale fee. Let me disclose an interest here as well. I have investments in several small businesses, as previously disclosed, and I am a director of several companies. These would benefit from a sliding scale. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I strongly support the motion. I very much strongly support the Government's vision to build a great nation out of Singapore - a little country, great nation. I do hope that these four and a half suggestions would go some way towards helping us build that great nation.”
“I urge the Government not to create too many exemptions for particular companies, particular industries. The end result would be a system that benefits only accountants and lawyers. I do support initiatives to generate employment, even for accountants and lawyers, but let us not do it through a more complex tax system. Personally, one of the big benefits that I have enjoyed, since returning to Singapore some 10 years ago is a very easy time around 15th April. Why? A US tax return, as the Members may know, even a simple personal return, takes days to complete, and that is even with software. I am proud that the Singapore return takes only a few hours, and without any specialised software. Likewise, our corporate tax system is much simpler than those elsewhere. My wife was a tax lawyer in the US. She had this bible called "CCH" - Commerce Clearing House - which is stacks and stacks of US tax codes. In Singapore, we do not have that. It is a good thing. Let us keep it that way. Let us not lose sight of this advantage. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, my last suggestion is rather minor and so I call it half a suggestion, that is why I have a total of four and a half. It concerns GeBIZ fees. The Prime Minister and Minister for Finance announced that, to benefit SMEs, GeBIZ would give all suppliers one free account. Members would remember I cheered. Senior Minister Goh asked me why I made such a big fuss. Why did I cheer? The reason is that this decision corrects a mindset. Most Members who are in business would know that if you are procuring goods and services, you welcome more people coming to sell you things. It is a bit unusual to do the opposite - to levy a fee to exclude people who want to become your suppliers. So here is my half suggestion.”
“These initiatives would strengthen our private sector, while keeping the public sector lean and effective. In outsourcing, I propose that the Government impose a condition on the outsource provider. The condition is that the provider must use GeBIZ for all procurement of goods and services. Let me explain. One of our public sector's greatest achievements is a clean and transparent procurement system. We have a level playing field among all vendors - SMEs have equal opportunity with GLCs - although hon. Members, Mr Inderjit Singh and Mr Ang Mong Seng, might disagree. Sir, let me qualify that. Let us say that we have a somewhat level playing field among all vendors - SMEs have almost equal opportunities with GLCs and MNCs. Be that as it may, I worry that outsource providers are not going to care so much about our clean and transparent procurement system. Hence, I suggest that all outsource providers under our public-private-people partnership (PPP) be required to use GeBIZ for all procurement. In this regard, I disagree with my hon. colleague, Mr Ang Mong Seng's suggestion that opportunities be allocated in closed systems. I think that our open system is one of our bedrocks and we should do our utmost to protect that. In Singapore, competition is based on what you know and not who you know. Let us please keep it that way. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, my fourth suggestion concerns taxation. The Budget proposes a number of tax incentives to particular industries. These add to a wide range of incentives - tax, grants, loans - that are given to particular companies and particular industries. My suggestion is that our key tax incentive ought to be a simple tax system with low overall rates.”
“And, even so, how many private homes are worth $9 million? For many years, we have over-invested in housing. The Economic Review Committee has recognised that and has made a number of changes to the policy in the last few years. But I think the Economic Review Committee has overlooked changing the estate duty system. Let me give you an example. If an industrialist leaves a $9 million factory in his or her estate, the estate duty would be levied on $8.4 million. If the same person were to sell her factory and to buy a house of equal value, there would be zero estate duty. Indeed, when I told a friend about this housing exemption, his immediate response is that when he gets older, he must remember to sell his business and re-invest the money in a big house. That way, his children will get the full amount and with no estate duty. Clearly, the estate duty structure discourages enterprise that creates jobs. Let me share with Members the estate duty systems in Australia and Hong Kong. Australia has rescinded estate duty. Hong Kong's estate duty provides an exemption of HK$7.5 million, that is, less than one-fifth of our exemption for housing, but only for one, and only if it was occupied by the deceased and his or her spouse and only if it passes to the surviving spouse. So a smaller exemption and three conditions. Ours is five times larger and no conditions. Let me say it is time to re-balance estate duty, so that it is neutral between various assets. In closing on this point, let me disclose an interest. I have invested in listed shares, unlisted business. I own only a very modest condominium unit. Mr Deputy Speaker, my third suggestion concerns a lean and effective Government. I applaud Government's initiatives to outsource.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of the motion. I strongly support the Prime Minister's and Cabinet's vision to remake Singapore into a more caring and inclusive society where everyone belongs. Allow me, however, to offer four-and-a-half suggestions in response to the Budget. My first suggestion concerns CPF top-ups. Singaporeans are concerned about growing old without sufficient support, and particularly about healthcare. The Government has heard these concerns. The Budget includes Medisave top-ups of $50-$350 and CPF top-ups for older citizens of $100. The total cost of these top-ups is $400 million. Like hon. Member, Mr Sin Boon Ann, I am however concerned that these funds are not focused. May I suggest that we focus these top-ups on the people who need it the most? The Budget proposes to give top-ups to the rich and poor alike. But the well-off people will benefit relatively more from the income tax cuts. They would hardly notice a few hundred dollars of CPF top-up. So my proposal is, let us focus the top-ups on the needy. How about re-allocating the top-ups for the top quarter of citizens to the bottom quarter, and then our neediest compatriots can get double the top-up? Mr Deputy Speaker, my second suggestion concerns estate duty. The Budget proposes a new relief for successive deaths that occur close in time. Allow me to propose a more radical change. Presently, estate duty is payable on the value of any estate with a $9 million exemption for housing and $600,000 exemption for all other assets, including CPF balances. Over 82% of our population own and live in HDB flats, and the market value of the flat ranges roughly between $50,000 and $600,000. A very much smaller proportion of our population own and live in private property.”
“Sir, the Senior Parliamentary Secretary has responded to my supplementary question by saying that self-help groups have asked for this race-based information. But this is a somewhat circular argument because self-help groups were set up precisely because it was thought that race was the major factor in poor education performance. If indeed it is not the major factor, then I feel that the whole basis of this argument falls apart.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I thank the Senior Parliamentary Secretary for responding to my question. The Senior Parliamentary Secretary has told the House that, in fact, the most important factor in determining students' education performance is not race, it is not housing type; it is parental educational qualifications. In that case, why are we publishing statistics based on race? Why do we not publish the statistics based on parental educational qualifications? I ask this question, Sir, because every year we see these "A" level results, "O" level results, "N" levels, Primary Six, and so on, published based on race. It gives the impression that certain races are not doing as well as other races. But if the real reason is that for certain races, parents are not as well educated as other parents, let us make that the focus of the reporting and then let us make that the focus of our policy efforts; or else people will get the wrong impression that it is a race problem.”
“Just a clarification from the Minister. It is not just a matter of timing because, as the Minister pointed out, the losses of the LLP can be written off against personal income. So, if you take two vehicles, a company that is sustaining losses that is going to go under and an LLP which is sustaining losses, someone may buy the LLP just for the losses to write off against their income, then it is not just a matter of timing, there is actually a revenue loss.”
“I do hope that we do not graduate to a "first-world" system of high tax rates with complicated deductions and reliefs that would benefit only a selected group of taxpayers. I would like to ask the Minister what measures have been taken or are contemplated to void the LLP becoming a tax shelter.”
“Sir, I rise in support of the Bill. However, I would like to share a concern with the Minister and hope that it can be addressed. I understand that in the United States and in the UK, a key attraction of a limited liability partnership is its flexibility as a way of minimising taxes. This has already been mentioned by Dr Wang Kai Yuen. I would like to emphasise this point. In particular, partners may write off partnership losses against their personal income. Roughly speaking, this would also be true of our proposed LLP. Now, the Bill provides for transition from partnerships to LLPs and from companies to LLPs. If investors choose LLPs over partnerships, there will be no tax revenue loss because any opportunity they had as a partnership would be available with LLPs. However, if investors choose LLPs over the limited company form, our tax revenue will be diminished. Shareholders of companies may not write off the company's losses against their personal income. But, as I have just said, LLP partners or members may write off partnership losses against their personal income. So, our Inland Revenue Authority is going to lose revenue. As Dr Wang Kai Yuen has mentioned, the LLP form will probably not only attract professionals such as accountants and lawyers, but it is going to attract regular business like manufacturing, services, not just professional services. So the scope of this tax law is much wider than we might have thought initially. Sir, one of our competitive edges as an economic hub is the simplicity of our tax system. We offer a simple system with very low rates; made even simpler when recently we rescinded taxation of shareholder dividends.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I would like to ask the Minister, if it was not covered by the Act, whether the Ministry would bring in legislation to regulate this, as these are public offers made to large numbers of people, and it would be good if they were properly regulated via prospectuses and other aspects with which we regulate IPOs.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of the Bill. First, let me disclose that last year I was an expert witness in a case involving a club in which shares of the club were offered to the public and this ended up in a court dispute. I think Members will know which club it was. On a point of clarification, I would like to ask the Minister whether this law or any other law will be amended so as to cover the offering of membership in clubs on a large scale, as occurred in a number of cases in our recent history and which have resulted in very unhappy experiences for members of the public who bought membership in those clubs.”
“We should continually encourage our people to take pride. Flying the flag and wearing medals on National Day is good. We should let all those bintangs and pingkats appear more frequently. I have a small suggestion. There has been much discussion about dual citizenship, but there has not been a consensus on this. Why do we not consider the concept of "secondary citizenship", with reduced rights and responsibilities? Some Singaporeans stay overseas for a long time and they apply for foreign citizenship. If we allow them to maintain a secondary citizenship with Singapore, they need not cut off all the ties with us. So, we could allow them to continue to take pride with us. Mr Speaker, Sir, as I said at the beginning, we should be proud as we celebrate our 40th year of independence. Parents, People, Place and Pride are the four pillars of belonging. They are the foundation of our future happiness, prosperity and progress. And for Singapore, to be happy, prosperous and progressive are exactly what we seek, as stated in our national pledge.”
“I think we must do more to build up the community and neighbourhood spirit. Can something be done to improve on the design of the HDB flats? One of my friends remarked that the HDB void decks only provide concrete benches and these attract only old people. We need "cool" amenities to attract parents and their young children. In our housing policy, when allocating housing units, could we not give priority to people living in the same community, so as to maintain their sense of belonging to the area? When naming places, I think we should also put in more effort. In the 1970s, the Raffles Institution building, with a history of more than 150 years, was demolished. The school was moved to Grange Road. Then in the 1990s, it moved again, and this time to Bishan. River Valley High School and Crescent Girls' School are now situated far from the roads after which they are named. Environment, names, anecdotes, all add up to history, and they certainly contribute to our sense of belonging and nostalgia. I mentioned 4Ps: the last one is Pride. We should be proud of our economic achievements. We should take pride in our social achievements, as well as our political achievements. As Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, Mr Gan Kim Yong and Mr Iswaran have said, we have contributed significantly and generously to the victims of the recent Indian Ocean tsunami. We should take pride in our contribution. Having said that, I must say not all are proud of being Singaporeans. We now recruit foreign talent aggressively in all fields. Because of this, some locals feel that employers blindly pursue foreigners and that locals have become second-class citizens. They feel left out. We must address this issue and strive to maintain a balance when we recruit foreign talent.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I have spoken of diversity as being what is unique to Singapore and its importance to our future progress. Now, let me address a related issue, that is, what creates the sense of belonging to Singapore. As other Members have mentioned, as we internationalise, more and more of our people will live overseas. Some will go overseas to study and stay behind. There may be others who will be recruited to work in foreign countries. Singaporeans are well-educated and well-rounded. They are well sought after by employers all over the world. To bring our people back, whether in person or in spirit, we must strengthen their sense of belonging in Singapore. Mr Speaker, Sir, I believe, you would agree with me that the sense of belonging is based on four key elements - each begins with the letter "P". They are Parents, People, Place and Pride. To be filial to our parents and the importance of people is obvious. Let me focus on the third aspect - Place or the environment. This is the mix of sights, sounds and smells. A good environment or good place is also a foundation of neighbourhood and community. Research by my NUS colleagues in Tiong Bahru has shown that familiarity with place is an important part of self-identity and social memory. We have made progress on Place. My friends in Hong Kong compliment Singapore for preserving our Chinatown much better than Hong Kong. The recent decision by schools to open their facilities to our neighbourhood activities is also a very good example. However, as the pressure of school and work seems to be getting stronger and stronger, I think we have lost something in our neighbourhood and community. People have little time to know their neighbours, even less time to participate in neighbourhood activities.”
“That is why we are better able to deal with extremist threats, both internal and external. However, for our social diversity to be a stronger source of national strength, we need to work harder on social integration. Let me give two examples based on my own experiences. Some years ago, a university colleague had to read the names of students at a graduation ceremony. The names of the Malay students were printed as "Abdullah b. Ahmad", "Fatimah b. Khamis" and so on. My colleague read them as "Abdullah bin Ahmad" and "Fatimah bin Khamis". Today, how many of our younger Chinese citizens know the difference between "bin" and "binte" in terms of gender? Let me give the second example. Recently, a publisher sought my advice on the cover design of a textbook. It was a book on management targeted at the Asian market. But what was the key design motif? A bright pink piggy. Apparently, the designer did not appreciate the negative implications of selling such a book to the Malaysian, Indonesian, the Middle East and other Islamic markets. Singapore will celebrate its 40th anniversary soon. I personally feel that we have to work harder on social integration and to turn social diversity into strength. We should work within our secondary and primary school system to proactively increase the mixing amongst students of different races. For Singapore to be even more prosperous, we must draw upon every resource of every citizen. We should let everyone make their contribution - whatever the role, however sensitive the role, whether in the economy, society or national defence. So long as he is a Singaporean, if he is capable, we should allow him to make a contribution to our nation.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I support the motion standing in the name of Mr Gan Kim Yong. This year, Singapore will be celebrating its 40th anniversary of independence. With unremitting effort, we have built up a democratic society and achieved security and progress. I think this is something that we should take pride in. Yet, we must not forget that there are still many challenges ahead of us. Our national pledge begins with, "We, the citizens of Singapore, pledge ourselves as one united people, regardless of race, language or religion". Let me be bold in saying that we have made much progress towards this goal. However, we must continue to work on it to make further progress. The Singapore Tourism Board is promoting the concept of "Uniquely Singapore". What is unique about Singapore? I think the most important thing is our diversity. I believe that what is most obviously unique about Singapore is our diversity. However, this also poses a great challenge. Biologists teach us that diversity is strength. With regard to the economy, our economic diversity has contributed substantially to our prosperity. During the 2003 SARS crisis, retail shops and tourism were badly hit. But manufacturing, logistics and financial services were relatively less affected. So, overall, we did not suffer too badly. I believe that diversity is the key to our strength as a regional and international hub. We have people from different backgrounds who are fluent in many languages. They create value in management and the service industries. Our diversity has also contributed much to our national security. The whole world faces the threat of terrorism from extremists. Fortunately, we have built up a multi-racial and multi-cultural society.”