John Chen Seow Phun
Singapore
“Sir, Singapore has signed FTAs with a number of countries, including the developed nations, such as the US and Japan. These FTAs give us better access to these developed markets compared to other countries for goods that need the rules of origin.”
“Sir, I thank the Minister for asking the HDB to relook at the case I brought up, but I hope that he would not rule out providing the same loan amount to the family. I understand the need for credit assessment policy, and so on. But I think the policy should not be applied blindly.”
“It can also be stipulated that the grants can only be used to pay part of their mortgage loan monthly. I think this will go a long way in helping these families pay for their flats. I hope the Minister can look into this and see whether these families can be given such help.”
“My point is that the Minister should reconsider this case and exercise flexibility, so that the family will be helped. Otherwise, if the family was asked to sell their flat, it could be negative equity and the problem would come back to HDB. And HDB would be owed money and I do not think that is good for HDB as well.”
“We need to come up with a regular mechanism where older and lower income workers can benefit without the pitfalls of a crutch mentality. I think, in this regard, the Government has not spent enough time or thought to look into what other mechanisms that we can have.”
“On the other hand, at best, we get one Singapore pavilion with a dozen or so companies, and that is about it. If we are really serious with our globalisation effort, our Government agencies must put in more resources to encourage more companies to participate in such events.”
The complete record
Every one of 741 lines we hold for John Chen Seow Phun, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 7 of 15.
“Let us say an original notice was issued on day X. First reminder will be sent half a month from day X; second reminder will be sent by registered post one-and-a-half months from day X; final reminder will be sent three months from day X; court summons will be sent by registered post four months from day X; and warrant of arrest will be issued six months from day X. As Members can see, there really is little or no reason why errant motorists do not take action after so many reminders. It is not justifiable to claim unfamiliarity with the system after so many reminders. We know, as MPs, residents come to us with summonses and ask us to help to either appeal for waiver or reduction of fines. They know that they are in the wrong and yet some of them simply ignore these reminders. So what is needed is a strong signal to motorists that they must be prompt in taking responsibility for committing traffic and parking offences by settling their fines. If they are responsive, it would save them from the inconvenience of the more stringent measures which we are putting in place now. And it would also save the time and resources of the various enforcement agencies in issuing summons, reminders and warrants of arrest. Prof. Chin is concerned that immobilising a vehicle can be unsettling to the public and he asks whether it is necessary. The aim of these stringent measures is precisely to make owners realise the importance of settling their offences quickly to avoid facing such a situation. Motorists should realise that they cannot blatantly disregard notices to attend court that are served on them. So the issue really is the blatant disregard for the law. Sir, let me address the other points raised by Members.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to thank Members for their support of this Bill. First of all, let me clarify that the authorities have been taking action against offenders, and let me give you some of the measures that have been taken. MND, for instance, in 1994 introduced a set of measures to reduce the large number of outstanding warrants of arrest for parking offences at URA/HDB car parks, for example, by clamping the vehicles of motorists with outstanding warrants of arrest for URA/HDB offences, if they were found contravening parking regulations at the car parks. The Police also carries out regular operations to locate and arrest these offenders with outstanding warrants of arrest for traffic and parking related offences. Further, the Police has put in place stringent mechanisms at immigration checkpoints to detect and arrest these motorists. So this also answers Mr Jeyaretnam's point about whether the Police has been diligent in their enforcement actions. Even with all these measures, the problem did not go away. In April this year, the Government announced its intention to introduce tougher measures. In fact, in July this year, URA and HDB introduced a new measure which would deny such motorists the renewal of their season parking tickets if they purchase these season parking tickets for parking in public car parks. All these measures are actually part of a comprehensive set of measures that we are putting in place now to tackle the problem. So what we are seeing here today is the rest of the measures that will be put in place. And why are we taking this comprehensive approach? Let me say that under the current system, motorists are already given ample opportunities to settle their fines. Let me describe the procedure for settling a parking composition fine.”
“Sir, I do not know what question is that. Cars cannot go on the road if they do not have the COE, and the COE number is fixed.”
“That is why Mr Chng Hee Kok supported the merger into one category. But let me say that the primary objective of the COE system is not to collect revenue. There is a transport management objective to ensure that there is ownership restraint. That is the basic objective. We then let the market decide what price they are prepared to pay, and at the same time we fulfill our objective of controlling the number of cars, so that our roads would not be clogged up.”
“Sir, the whole idea of the COE system is to put in place a rational system where people would be prepared to pay what the market decides. Therefore, under the system, there will always be people who are not able to obtain a COE, because the number of COEs is fixed. The people who cannot afford it, in the end, cannot obtain a COE and they will have to try harder the next time.”
“If the Member is talking about re-validation of their COEs after 10 years, the formula is that they would have to pay the prevailing quota premium which is computed by averaging the last three months of COE premiums. As I said, between the old and new system, we do not think that there is much difference between the COE premium for small cars if we had not merged. So there is no reason why they should have special treatment, because the idea of the PQP is that one should pay the prevailing quota premium; in other words, the quota premium that new car buyers are prepared to pay. That is the objective and principle.”
“Why do we give rebates to them? We had already restructured the vehicle tax last year. We had rationalised it, put in a very rational basis for all the tax structure including progressivity. Smaller cars today pay lower road tax compared to bigger cars. So we think that the balance is about right. Assoc. Prof. Chin Tet Yung: Sir, given that the premiums have risen quite a lot since the economy improves, would the Minister consider a recomputation of the premiums payable on 1,000 cc cars, so that those who cannot afford to buy a new car, be it big or small, pay the lower rate so as to keep their old cars?”
“Of course, price is definitely a factor, besides the value that they perceive that they would get. What I am saying is that the buyers now have a greater choice. In the past, when he was eyeing for a Category 2 car, and if he could not get the COE, either he brings up his premium or if he does not want to bring up his premium, but he still wants to own a car, he would be forced to go to Category 1 to bid for the COE and buy a small car. With the merger, this restriction is no longer there. It is up to the individual. He can still buy a small car if he wants to. Or if he feels that he can pay a few more dollars and buy a bigger car, and he feels that gives him greater value, so be it. So my point is that the merger removes this artificial restriction and allows the market to decide what cars they want to buy. From experience, as far as COE premiums are concerned, we do not think that because of the merger, small cars will have to pay a significantly higher premium. Basically, if I want to buy a small car, I could bid for the COE and buy a small car without much increase in price. So that is the position.”
“As I said, it depends on competition. So if the small car suppliers and manufacturers can come out with better and cheaper cars, I am sure the buyer will take a close look. As for energy conservation, I do not think that is a problem because nowadays cars are very efficient and the difference is not much between the small cars and those above 1,000 cc.”
“The Member has asked for some figures. As far as I know, the number of small cars registered has dropped. This was because of the competition between the small car dealers and the big car dealers. That is why the new policy is correct. Under the old policy, the small car dealers were in a way protected. With this change in policy, I have received feedback from the small car dealers that they now have to compete with the big cars, because the big cars are not necessarily more expensive than small cars. In fact, data have shown that some of the big cars are cheaper than the small cars. Because of greater competition, I think the motorists benefit. To answer the Member's question, there is, in fact, a reduction in the registration of small cars but that is due to the keener competition between the dealers. Assoc. Prof. Chin Tet Yung (Sembawang): Given the collapsing of the categories into Category A and that more people now buy bigger cars, would it not be true to say that it would not really be consistent with the energy conservation policy in Singapore?”
“All right, we will take that into consideration the next time when we review the Vehicle Quota System.”
“Sir, there is no plan at the moment to do that, but if the Member feels that we should do it, let him write a proposal to the Ministry and we will consider it.”
“Fundamentally, COE premiums are dependent on the demand for cars. This in turn depends on the state of the economy and expectations of future growth. The economic recovery and lower financing costs have helped to increase the purchasing power of consumers, and this has led to a higher demand for cars. This has resulted in a rise in COE prices, despite the 58% increase in the number of COEs from last year to this year. With the recent economic recovery, COE for this month has bunched around $43,000 and $44,000 for the Category A, Category B and the Open Category, despite the existence of the different categories.”
“Dr John Chen Seow Phun (for the Minister for Communications and Information Technology): Mr Speaker, Sir, the COE categories for small and medium sized cars were merged into one category, Category A, in April this year, after a review of the Vehicle Quota System by the Government Parliamentary Committee (GPC) for Communications, led by the GPC Chairman, Mr Chay Wai Chuen. The GPC had noted that the COE quota for the small cars was becoming too small, and that a separate COE quota for small cars did not necessarily result in lower COE premiums for small cars compared to other COE categories. In fact, Category 1 premiums had at times been similar to or more than Category 2 premiums. It therefore recommended the merger of the COEs for small and medium sized cars to form a larger quota to bring about more stable COE prices. At the same time, car buyers will have greater flexibility in deciding on their choice of car models if the COE category covers a broader range of cars. The GPC is correct. Merging Category 1 and Category 2 into Category A would result in a more efficient market without necessarily raising the COE premiums for small cars. A car buyer with a Category A COE will have a greater choice of car models to choose from. He may decide to buy a smaller car or a bigger one, according to his budget. To cite an example, in 1998 during the economic downturn, many car buyers, having an Open Category COE, decided to buy a small or medium sized car - 41% used the Open COE to register Category 1 and Category 2 cars, instead of large and luxury cars. This is the advantage of collapsing COE categories, as car buyers benefit from having a wider choice over how to use their COEs to purchase cars according to their affordability.”
“What I am saying is that the Government had made known its policy of wanting to promote multi-modal operations. It was stated in the White Paper, and with the award of the North-East line to SBS, it is another indication that this is something we want to do. But whether private and publicly listed companies can come to terms is beyond our control. STANDARD SYMBOLS/SIGNAGES FOR RAIL SERVICES 7. Mrs Lim Hwee Hua asked the Minister for Communications and Information Technology, in view of the trend towards multiple providers of multi-modal transportation, if he will ensure that a standard set of symbols or signages be used for rail services in order to help the public achieve the benefits of integrated travel services. Dr John Chen Seow Phun (for the Minister for Communications and Information Technology): Mr Speaker, Sir, yes, I would like to inform the Member that the Land Transport Authority will be implementing a system of signage that will apply consistently for the different modes of public transport, as part of the move towards the provision of integrated multi-modal services. The system will use both pictograms and words to denote the different transport modes. For example, a pictogram of a train and the words "MRT" will be used at all MRT stations, regardless of who operates it. CERTIFICATE OF ENTITLEMENT FOR SMALL CARS 8. Mr Inderjit Singh asked the Minister for Communications and Information Technology whether he will consider introducing Certificate of Entitlement (COE) for small cars with engine capacity of less than 1,000 cubic centimetres instead of grouping such cars with the COE of bigger cars and in this way making small cars more affordable for those with lower income.”
“Sir, the Government sets the policy direction and the policy direction for the industry is that we want to promote multi-modal players. But how they form a multi-modal company is up to the individual companies to decide. So if they had decided not to proceed but to do other things first, it is purely based on their own consideration.”
“Ho Peng Kee (for the Minister for Home Affairs): Sir, cyclists on roads are required to obey the same traffic rules as motorists. Additionally, the Road Traffic (Bicycle) Rules set out the manner in which cyclists should conduct themselves whilst on the road. They also stipulate safety requirements such as brakes and headlamps. The purpose is to ensure the safety of the cyclists as well as other road users. In 1998, Traffic Police issued 115 summonses to cyclists. These were for more serious offences such as riding against the flow of traffic and riding abreast of other cyclists. A typical composition fine of $20 was imposed. Cyclists who commit minor offences are usually counselled and let off with a warning.”
“So, I would say that at this income ceiling, it is really very generous. KIDNAPPING (Publicity on laws and punishment) 4. Dr Lily Neo asked the Minister for Home Affairs (a) whether the team that handled the recent case of kidnapping has been highly commended, and (b) whether there are plans to publicise widely our laws and punishment concerning kidnapping, especially to foreigners in the country. The Minister of State for Home Affairs (Assoc. Prof. Ho Peng Kee) (for the Minister for Home Affairs): Mr Speaker, Sir, the team that handled the recent case of kidnapping did a good job in solving the case quickly and arresting the kidnappers. They also recovered the bulk of the ransom money. The victim was also released unharmed. As in all such cases, officers who excel will be appropriately recognised by the Police and my Ministry. Sir, the recent kidnapping case attracted extensive media coverage for about a week. During this time, the press repeatedly publicised that the serious offence of kidnapping attracts the death penalty. There will be more publicity when the case goes to Court. I am sure that the swift and resolute action of CID is additional strong deterrence to would-be kidnappers. Foreigners are also warned of the tough laws in Singapore when they come to our country to work. BICYCLISTS TRAVELLING ALONG PUBLIC THOROUGHFARES (Regulations) 5. Mr Heng Chiang Meng asked the Minister for Home Affairs (a) whether there are regulations for bicyclists when travelling along public thoroughfares to ensure the safety of themselves and other road-users; and (b) if there are, what is the number of bicyclists caught for violation of such regulations for the past year as well as the punishments meted out for such violations. Assoc. Prof.”
“Sir, for entry level, if you look at the 4-room flats and with the average income household of, say, $2,700, it would usually take about 4-5 years for the couple to be able to pay the 20% downpayment for the flat, and thereafter paying only about 17% of their household income for the monthly mortgage, and that 17% can be paid fully through their CPF contributions. Therefore, we can say that it is actually very affordable. The entry level is actually quite low. As for the ceiling, we have revised the ceiling over the years. Let me give the Member some indication of the ceiling revision. In 1989, it was about $5,000 for 3-, 4-, 5-room and Executive flats. For an extended family, it was $8,000, ie, 3-tier family which includes the grandparents. In 1991, we revised it to $6,000; in 1992, $7,000; 1994, $8,000. In 1995, with the introduction of the Executive Condominiums (EC), we raised it to $10,000, for applicants to qualify for EC. In 1996, we had the anti-speculation measures, and followed by the economic crisis. So, since then, there was no revision for the ceiling. Let me just give the Member some statistics to put the issue in perspective. If you look at applicants who apply for 4-room and 5-room flats, which is in the range of $7,000-$8,000, it is less than 1% of the applicants who apply for 4-and 5-room flats and who are in the monthly income range of $7,000-$8,000. It shows that the large majority are basically up to $5,000 monthly income, which means that the income ceiling is pretty generous. In fact, the $10,000 income ceiling covers 92% of the Singaporean household income. I would say that if you look at the long-term target of the proportion of Singaporeans who own public housing versus private housing, it is 75% versus 25%.”
“As for private condominiums, current prices are at the same level as 5 years ago. Over the last 10 years, as I said, condominium prices have increased at about 9% per annum, which is slightly higher than the corresponding wage increase of 7% per annum. Prices and affordability of private residential properties are determined by the market. Government cannot set prices for private property, like new HDB flats. However, Government can and will ensure that there is sufficient land set aside for private housing to meet the medium term demand. This is done under the regular Government land sales (GLS) programme. The Government will also ensure regular release of comprehensive and accurate information on the private property market to enable buyers and sellers to make informed decisions. In this way, the Government can contribute to a stable property market, where prices generally move in line with prevailing economic conditions.”
“Sir, as shown in the table, the price increase of new HDB flats is generally in line with wage increases over the same periods. This is because HDB takes into account wage increases when adjusting prices of new flats. In this way, the Government ensures that new HDB flats remain affordable to the majority of Singaporeans. In the absence of the table, maybe I will just go through the table which is very simple. Let me say that the monthly wage increase over the last five years is about 6% per annum. If it is over the last 10 years, it is about 7% per annum. Whereas for new HDB flat prices, the increase over the last 5 years is about 5% per annum, as opposed to 6% for the increase in monthly wages. And the increase over the last 10 years is 7% per annum, as opposed to 7% per annum increase for the monthly wages. For resale HDB flat prices, the increase over the last 5 years is 7% per annum, and the increase over the last 10 years is 12% per annum. For private condominium prices, the increase over the last 5 years is 0% per annum, and the increase over the last 10 years is 9% per annum. Sir, as I have said earlier, the Government ensures that new HDB flats remain affordable to the majority of Singaporeans. On the other hand, prices of resale HDB flats are determined by market forces. Resale flats cater mainly to HDB upgraders who have the benefit of capital gains from the sale of their previous HDB flats. First-timers who wish to purchase resale flats can apply for the CPF Housing Grant Scheme. The grant, which is as much as $40,000 for those applying to live near their parents, can be used to pay for the downpayment of the resale flats. In this way, the Government helps to enhance the affordability of resale flats for first-timers.”
“I think Dr Lee has not understood my point. I said "in a way PTC is not unlike the NWC". What I meant is the consensus part. We know that NWC works on consensus. I was on the NWC Council before and the Chairman always said, "Look, it is always by consensus that we come to the final recommendation." What I am saying is that there are important advantages of having the public transport operators sitting on the PTC. It is not just for them to advocate their own interest, but also to provide opinions on matters concerning the industry. I understand her point that we can always invite them to sit in and ask them questions. But I do not think that is quite the same as members sitting around the table, discussing throughout the whole session, offering their opinions, and when one transport operator proposes something, the other transport operator will be there also to criticise. I think there are advantages in doing that. I just want to clarify that that is what I meant when I said that the consensus and the result are quite like the NWC where we actually have this close relationship between the employers and the unions. Question put, and agreed to. Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House. The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. - [Dr John Chen Seow Phun]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. RECLAMATION (Sentosa Cove)”
“The Public Transport Council gathers all the information, including feedback from MPs, grassroots organisations and bus operators. Again, it is a consideration involving all interested parties. So I do not see anything wrong with that.”
“Because we do not think the House is the right forum to do that. These are matters that we think should be left to the Ministry, the statutory boards and the Council to do. We do not think this is something that the House should do. As for a public inquiry to look into the proposal of, say, withdrawal of services, and so on, again this is the role of the PTC. Whether it is an addition of services or withdrawal of services, the PTC is tasked to look into all these proposals and decide. I do not think we should have a public inquiry just to do this. If we conduct a public inquiry, maybe we would never move, and that is detrimental to the development of the public transport industry in Singapore. So I will not support his suggestion. In conclusion, I would just like to say that the Council's task of balancing commuters' interests versus those of the public transport operators is not easy. It has so far discharged its responsibilities, in my view, fairly and effectively in accordance with its charter. The proposed amendments would enable the Council to discharge its responsibilities even more effectively. With that, I thank all the Members for their support.”
“In the longer run, as I have mentioned earlier, the public transport industry is being restructured into a multi-modal one. As far as we can see, we are going to have two multi-modal operators by the year 2002. When the industry structure has become more established and stabilised, and if there is room for more competition, we will consider introducing new players. Finally, I come to Mr Jeyaretnam's comments. Again, he brought up old issues. He wants an All-Party Parliamentary Committee to review and recommend price increases, including bus fare increases. Let me remind the Member that his proposal was debated in the House and it was rejected.”
“So the composition fine is to provide that flexibility so that, for fare evasion, you can exercise flexibility. A fine of $200 is in line with some of the composition fines that we have in other Acts. So it is not too low. In addition to that, in the amendment Bill, we also provide for the Council to make regulations and prescribe fines up to $1,000 for different offences. So the flexibility is also there. It is sufficient for this composition fine to be $200. Dr Vasoo talks about audits and competition. Yes, every year the Public Transport Council audits the service standards of the public transport operators. The PTC has specified the standard of service in terms of frequency and the length of bus route because it does not want the route to be too long. Every year, they do audits to make sure that the bus service standards are within those specified. As for competition, I would like to remind the House that our public transport market is a very small one and we lack the critical mass to allow free and unbridled competition in this sector, as we had experienced in the 1970s where we had 11 private bus companies competing with one another and the result was chaos and badly maintained buses and a poor level of service. But that is not to say we are not interested in competition. In fact, as I have said, the competition is there in terms of benchmarking. In addition to that, for peak hours where the existing bus companies have got problems in meeting the high demand, we allow the Scheme B service to compete with the bus operators. This has also worked well. If any Member or any company or member of the public feels that there is a need for such supplementary services in other routes and areas, he can put up a case and the PTC will be happy to consider them.”
“So the feedback is on-going and we also receive a lot of letters from members of the public, either to the Ministry or the PTC, and the Ministry will channel them to the PTC for their consideration. So this feedback mechanism is in place and it is an on-going process. Members commented that perhaps many of the PTC members are motorists and not bus commuters. Let me remind Members that, as far as possible, we will involve people who can contribute, but I do not think it is a prerequisite for PTC members to be commuters before they can become members. I would like to remind Members that all of us are motorists and yet we are here commenting on public transport. How is it? It is because we take the trouble to talk to our residents, our friends, our grassroots leaders, and we get feedback and we are genuinely concerned. We can put up a very credible argument. So I do not think Members can say that just because most of the PTC members are motorists they are therefore not doing their job. Let me inform Members that I know that PTC members, including the Chairman, take the trouble sometimes to go and test out the public transport system. In our review to expand more members and have a wider representation, we can try to include more people, as suggested by Members, but let me explain to Members that they have to bear in mind what I have said earlier. As for the suggestion that the handicapped be represented, we will look into it. Mr Rai commented that the composition fine of $200 is too low. If he looks at the current Act, there is no composition fine in the current Act. If a person commits an offence, the Act actually allows PTC to bring him to court and if the court fines him guilty, then he will be fined up to $1,000 or six months' jail or both.”
“Hence, the Council does not rely only on the inputs provided by the operators. The Council is also assisted by the Land Transport Authority, which provides independent analysis and technical advice to the Council. If Dr Lee were to look at its Annual Report, it does not say that LTA is an agent to implement operational details only. It says that it also provides technical advice to the PTC. In fact, if you look at the PTC Act, the PTC has the power to appoint agents, and that is a very wide power. An agent includes LTA and any consultant that they want to engage to provide inputs, technical advice and analysis for the Council's deliberations. I would therefore like to assure Members, and Dr Lee in particular, that the Council is given full authority in its deliberations and decisions independent of the Ministry. Dr Lee also suggested that the Council holds public forums to explain the rationale of its major decision, and other Members have also brought up a related point. I would like to explain that it is already a current practice of the Council to hold a press conference to announce major decisions, such as fare revisions, and explain the rationale. The media usually reports this extensively. To my mind, this is more important than holding a public forum involving a few hundred people to explain the policy, because once the new measures are announced and the press reported them widely, Singaporeans too will react and give feedback to the Council. The Council then monitors these public responses closely and provides further clarifications, if necessary. In addition to that, there is an on-going process whereby the Council receives and responds to feedback from the public through forums, like the Feedback Unit, and grassroots organisations.”
“In my view, we would have a future situation where we have a representation from the operators as a whole, and then we have representation from the rest of the Singapore population. So this is how it is going to evolve. And it is also our intention to continue having the majority of the Council members coming from the other sectors of the population. The GPC Chairman, Mr Chay Wai Chuen, brought up a very important point about the criteria that the PTC takes into account when they decide on approving fares. And in this amendment, we are putting in place, more specifically, the kind of information that the Council will ask from the operators, such as certified copies of balance sheets, profit and loss account, auditor's report and so on. I agree with the GPC Chairman that efficiency is a very important criterion and, indeed, over the years, when they consider applications for fare adjustments, track record, productivity and efficiency have always been taken into consideration. In fact, the reason why we have two instead of one major bus operator is to allow the PTC to also benchmark one against the other, so that the inefficiency of one operator will be shown up by the performance of the other. And, of course, we are always paying attention to overseas bus companies' performance and inefficiency, but, of course, it is not so easy because of the different systems, subsidies and so on and so forth. But the point is well taken and I assure the House that all these criteria are taken into consideration when the PTC approves fare adjustments. Dr Lee asked whether there is independent assessment. Dr Lee is right that a thorough understanding is required in order for the Council to properly assess applications for fare revisions and bus route changes.”
“As it is, you will find that the majority are from the other sectors of the population, like the grassroots organisations, unions, community leaders, academia, professionals and so on. So the public transport representatives are there, as I said, to represent their interests and to provide inputs to the PTC on their operations and financial situation, and to justify in front of the majority of the Council members who represent public interest any proposal for fare or route adjustment. Sir, the Council takes into account views from all interested parties. This arrangement promotes consensus building among its members, and has worked well over the years. In a way, it is not unlike our National Wages Council. I know what Members are thinking of. They are probably thinking that the NWC provides guidelines, whereas the PTC approves fares. But what I am trying to say here is that it allows the different parties to argue their case and then come out with a consensus. Let me inform Members that since the formation of the PTC until today, not a single vote needs to be taken at the PTC's deliberations. It is all by consensus, and I think that is a fantastic testimony of how we work in Singapore, ie, everybody looks at the overall interest of everyone and comes out with a consensus that will serve us well. I thank Dr Wang Kai Yuen for praising our public transport system. I think this is a good arrangement and we should continue with the current practice. I take note of Dr Wang Kai Yuen's point about the evolution of the public transport industry. Yes, we are going into a multi-modal public transport operation. In future, I think it is impossible to get all the public transport operators to be represented on the Council.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, first, I would like to thank all the Members for their support, comments and suggestions. Let me, first, take the question on representation. I think many Members expressed opinions on representation and asked whether there is a conflict of interest when we appoint representatives from the public transport companies on to the Council. Sir, I would like to draw Members' attention to the Act itself which we enacted in 1987. In section 21, we explicitly listed the objectives of the Council. Specifically, for fare adjustments, (a) the need for the applicant to remain financially viable; and (b) the need for public interest to be safeguarded. I believe the reason why we specifically included the two provisions in the Act is to send a very strong signal, because if a public transport operator is not viable, then we are going to have degradation of service and there would be very severe implications on the public transport service. Arising from that, in the First Schedule, we also listed the composition of members of the PTC. There are two provisions there. The first is the appointment of representatives from the public transport companies, and the second is from the other sectors of the population. The reason for appointing public transport representatives on the Council is to allow them to also voice their own interest. That is the intent of the Act when we first enacted it in 1987. This is the way for the PTC to balance the interest of commuters against the financial viability of the operators. And if Members look at the numbers on the Council, we have four representatives from the public transport companies at the moment. And we have nine members who represent the other sectors of the population.”
“Sir, the question, rightfully, must be answered by the Minister for Home Affairs. As far as I know, the Immigration Department has been trying to speed up clearance. This is what I have been told. I am not aware of the particular instance that Mr Chiam has encountered. But, certainly, I would ask my counterpart to look into it. SELECTIVE EN-BLOC REDEVELOPMENT SCHEME IN HILLVIEW ESTATE (Financial assistance and compensation to lessees) 10. Mr Ang Mong Seng asked the Minister for National Development whether his Ministry will consider assisting those affected under the Selective En-bloc Redevelopment Scheme (SERS), particularly those in Hillview Estate, by (a) granting a higher mortgage loan to them as they had purchased their present resale flats in the Estate from the open market at a high price and still have substantial outstanding loan; and (b) introducing alternative scheme(s) of paying the resale levy by those lessees affected by SERS. 11. Mr Chiam See Tong asked the Minister for National Development in regard to the compulsory acquisition of the Housing and Development Board flats at Bukit Gombak under the Selective En-bloc Redevelopment Scheme (a) when did the voting by the residents of each block take place; (b) what was the basis of the quantum of compensation; (c) what is the purpose of acquiring those flats; and (d) when did the HDB decide to acquire those flats.”
“With the new Checkpoint, the new road system, the new automated toll/VEP collection system, the traffic situation at Woodlands Road and BKE should improve significantly. However, should the traffic congestion persist despite these improvements, we may have to consider introducing congestion pricing to optimise the use of the roads leading to the Checkpoint.”
“Sir, the traffic congestion at the Woodlands Checkpoint is the result of the large number of vehicles leaving Singapore at the same time. On a typical weekday, about 44,000 vehicles pass through the Checkpoint, half of which pass through between 5 pm and 10 pm. As Bukit Timah Expressway (BKE) and Woodlands Road are the only two major access roads to the Checkpoint, the traffic queues at their junction are not surprising. In view of this and in anticipation of future increases in traffic, the Government has built a new Woodlands Checkpoint together with supporting road infrastructure. The new Checkpoint, which will be operational in the latter half of this year, will be linked to the BKE and Woodlands Road. Traffic to the Checkpoint will then be separated from traffic to Woodlands Centre Road. An electronic Traffic Monitoring System (TMS) will be implemented at the new Checkpoint. Variable Message Signs (VMS) will be placed along BKE, Woodlands Road and other nearby roads, to provide real-time information on the traffic condition surrounding the Checkpoint. Mr Ravindran suggested allowing motorists to pay tolls using cashcards. My Ministry has been planning this for some time and I am pleased to inform him that we will be automating the collection of tolls and the Vehicle Entry Permit (VEP) for foreign motorists with effect from January 2000. This system will be implemented at both the Causeway and the 2nd Crossing. With the new system, motorists will be able to pay VEP fees and/or toll charges using stored-value cards. The new automated system is a convenient method of payment that will also facilitate quicker clearance at the Checkpoint.”
“He reported to me his conclusion that no improprieties were involved in the purchases and that HPL had not contravened SES rules, and I informed the Prime Minister accordingly. Furthermore, this House had an extensive debate on the circumstances surrounding the Senior Minister and DPM Lee's purchases of the HPL properties over three days on 21st, 22nd and 23rd May 1996. At these sittings, both the Prime Minister and I gave statements to the House on the investigations carried out and our conclusions. Senior Minister and DPM Lee also made statements explaining their purchases. May I suggest that the NCMP carefully reads his Hansard.”
“Sir, at the moment, there are already two bus companies, SBS and TIBS. They cover the whole of Singapore quite adequately. These Scheme B buses are to supplement their services for some routes where there is demand. It is a different situation compared to the taxi industry in the earlier days where you had individual taxi drivers and in order to organise the industry there was a need then to help them to come together to form a cooperative. But here it is a different situation and there is really no need for us to do that because they are the niche service, so to speak. APARTMENTS IN NASSIM JADE AND SCOTTS 28 (Report of purchases by Senior Minister and Deputy Prime Minister) 4. Mr J B Jeyaretnam asked the Prime Minister whether he will make available to the House the report of the Minister for Finance on the purchases by the Senior Minister and by the Deputy Prime Minister BG Lee Hsien Loong of apartments in Nassim Jade and Scotts 28. The Minister for Finance (Dr Richard Hu Tsu Tau) (for the Prime Minister): Mr Speaker, Sir, with your permission, I would like to reply on behalf of the Prime Minister. The NCMP has asked the Prime Minister to make available to the House my report to the Prime Minister on the purchases by the Senior Minister and Deputy Prime Minister BG Lee Hsien Loong of properties in Nassim Jade and Scotts 28. Firstly, I would like to clarify that there is no single report as such. On 21st March 1996, the Prime Minister instructed me to investigate market talk suggesting that improprieties may have been involved in the purchases and that HPL may have violated SES rules in the transactions. I instructed Mr Koh Beng Seng of MAS to conduct the investigations.”
“I do not have the figures with me, but I would imagine that the accidents were caused by probably run-away cars and carelessness of bus drivers.”
“It will be expanded so that all the venues would be housed on one campus and the needs of the courts for the next 10 years, at least, will be served.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, as I said, this happened in the 1960s and early 1970s. I do not know whether Mr Jeyaretnam remembers that in 1982 he asked the same question, and he is repeating the same question today. At that time we have already told him. At that time, probably his memory was better and he could remember there was this problem of syndicates exploiting taxi-drivers. SUBORDINATE COURTS' COMPLEX (Relocating to vicinity of Supreme Court) 7. Mr Shriniwas Rai asked the Minister for Law if the Government will consider relocating the Subordinate Courts' Complex to the vicinity of the Supreme Court. The Minister of State for Law (Assoc. Prof. Ho Peng Kee) (for the Minister for Law): Sir, this matter was indeed being considered in consultation with the Judiciary. For some time, we had weighed the relative merits of the single site option where both Subordinate Courts and the Supreme Court are housed in one location. It is clear that there would be insufficient space at the Supreme Court/Colombo Court site or in the vicinity to accommodate the existing courtrooms of the Subordinate Courts. We also have to bear in mind projected future caseloads of the Subordinate Courts. The Subordinate Courts presently have 56 courtrooms and operate from two separate locations, namely, the Havelock Square campus and the Paterson Road campus. The Subordinate Courts' venue at Havelock Road will therefore be expanded to accommodate the increased caseload. Mr Shriniwas Rai (Nominated Member): May I ask the Minister whether the needs for the next 10 years will be met if we transfer from Paterson Road to Havelock Road? Would it be sufficient to meet the Subordinate Courts' needs? Assoc. Prof. Ho Peng Kee: The Havelock Road campus is in fact ideal.”
“During good times, they work less hours and may even be able to earn more. But during an economic downturn, we hear that taxi-drivers are now driving longer hours. From the latest information, the earning is about $1,800. For a single shift, they can work 8-10 hours. It is up to them. They are either hirers or owner operators and if they decide to work longer hours, they will earn more money.”
“I believe they provide training, recreational facilities and opportunities to earn a better living. For example, Comfort spent $30 million for a satellite system to enable phone booking. They actually give the booking fee to the taxi-drivers. In other words, if you call a Comfort taxi-driver, and you have to pay a booking fee, Comfort lets the taxi-driver keep a large part of the booking fee to encourage him to take phone booking. Companies can give these benefits but syndicates cannot .”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I think Mr Jeyaretnam is repeating the question about why we would not allow individual taxi-drivers to own their licence and operate their business. As I said, if you were to compare the scenario that he proposed with what is present today, there is no comparison because we have seen that once you allow individuals to do that, there would be people who say, "You cannot afford the taxi, right? Because you need to pay upfront all the costs, I will finance you". Or, in fact, anybody could say, "Look, I will become the boss and take the taxi licence, and I will rent it to the taxi-drivers." The whole problem will re-emerge. Now, it is different, as we make sure that only the bona fide companies with a track record or with ability to run a good taxi service will be given the taxi licence. That is the difference. On his second question, the taxi company would have to manage its pool of taxi-drivers according to the company's policy. I cannot comment on that.”
“When I say "bona fide organisations and companies", it means that we assess the level of their quality of service and their ability to provide these services before we issue a licence to these companies. If we issue licences to individuals, as I mentioned, you open up all these possible abuses. We have done that in the past and I am telling the Member that if we do that, we are going back to those old days, and that is not acceptable.”
“Yes. In fact, not just on ERP but on many issues that are of interest and relevance to the taxi-drivers.”
“Indeed, Sir. The Ministry supports the formation of the Taxi Operators Association and after its formation, we have had a number of dialogue sessions with them. We listen to their views and we continuously do our utmost to improve their working conditions and the services to commuters.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the first question is about comparison between the syndicates and the public listed companies. There is no comparison. How can you compare them? The syndicates were out there to make profit and they did not care about the welfare of the drivers and the services that the commuters would get. It is precisely because of the experience that we have seen in the past that we have done away with individual licence as it will result in malpractices. But the companies are different. The companies today provide investments. For instance, they have spent a lot of money on the satellite system to enable radio booking and the taxi drivers actually receive the booking fee. Let me just give the Member an illustration of how taxi-drivers are being looked after by the companies. I take Comfort as an example. Today, Comfort has about 18,000 drivers, including relief drivers, and the average income of these drivers is about $1,800 per month. That means $32 million per month, and over a year it is $380 million. Do you know how much the company earns for its shareholders? $20 million over a year. That is about 7% of what the taxi-drivers are getting, not to mention all the services that they put in place to benefit the commuters and also the drivers, so that they can earn an easier living. Can a syndicate do such things? Obviously, it is out of the question. On his second question about taxi-drivers, they are responsible citizens. Of course, we have heard some of them, from personal experience, commenting on Government policies, but this is part and parcel of their right.”
“That is why we have a choice of a wide range of services and after all, Sir, I do not see the relevance of this question to the Question that he is asking about taxis. CABLE TV NETWORK (Progress of installation) 5. Mr Harun A Ghani asked the Minister for Information and the Arts what is the progress of installing cable TV network in Singapore for public and private buildings and when the exercise will be completed. The Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Information and the Arts (Encik Yatiman Yusof) (for the Minister for Information and the Arts): Sir, as at 31st October 1998, the Singapore Cable Vision (SCV) has cabled up 90% of HDB flats, 57% of private high-rise and 33% of landed households in Singapore. This means that 82% of all households in Singapore have now been cabled up. The Singapore Cable Vision expects to complete the cable roll-out to all HDB, private high-rise and landed homes by September 1999. Mr Harun A Ghani (Hong Kah): As 90% of HDB flats and 57% of private high-rise households have already been cabled up, when will cabling of Hong Kah or the Jurong area be completed?”
“We will let the commuters decide what kind of service they want, what price they want to pay, and if you look at our public transport fares, whether it is MRT, bus or even taxis, and compare them to other countries, I think Singapore's public transport fares are very, very affordable.”
“Sir, it is true that we want to encourage commuters to take public transport and we have spent a lot of resources and efforts in promoting public transport. But we must also recognise that public transport vehicles do compete for road space and contribute to traffic congestion. As ERP is a traffic management tool, it is not appropriate to exempt them or reduce the ERP rates for taxis relative to other vehicles. In fact, the buses are also paying the ERP charges depending on the size of the bus. It has a pcu (passenger car unit) of two, so the bus is actually paying two times the charges compared to private cars. But of course, we are phasing in over four years. And bus is a more efficient transport. Therefore, the cost per commuter will actually be very, very small. For taxis, it is different. Taxis provide a point-to-point personalised form of transport service with comfort levels comparable to that of cars and occupy the same road space as cars. So taxi commuters would therefore pay the same ERP rates as if they were using their cars. Nonetheless, in recognition of the role of taxis as a form of public transport, albeit a personalised one, the full ERP charges for taxis will be phased in over three years to help taxi drivers and commuters to adjust.”
“This is to prevent the offender from driving after the fatal accident and putting other road users at risk during the period before he is charged in court. ROAD ACCIDENTS CAUSED BY DRIVERS USING HANDPHONES (Review of existing penalties) 25. Dr Yaacob Ibrahim asked the Minister for Home Affairs whether there has been an increasing trend of road accidents caused by drivers who were using their handphones while driving and, if so, whether he will review the existing penalties for such cases. Assoc. Prof. Ho Peng Kee (for the Minister for Home Affairs): Sir, no accident case has yet been directly attributed to handphone driving. But it certainly poses a serious hazard. Police issued an average of 179 handphone driving summonses each month in 1997. The average went up 23% to 221 in the first four months of this year. Hence, from 18th May 1998, Police have begun seizing handphones when they issue summonses for handphone driving. Traffic Police will apply to the Courts to have these phones confiscated. Sir, the offence can be compounded with a fine of $170 and nine demerit points. Traffic Police will monitor the handphone driving situation closely. If motorists persist in this dangerous practice, Traffic Police will consider charging such motorists in court. If convicted, they can be fined up to $1,000 and/or up to six months' jail, plus nine demerit points. A repeat offender can be fined up to $2,000 or be jailed up to one year or both.”