Ker Sin Tze
Singapore
“In this connection, I would like to declare my interest that some companies, within the group which I am associated with, are involved in the development of industrial properties. I would still appeal to URA to consider allowing more space within each industrial unit to be used as offices.”
“The traffic volume has increased significantly and congestion is quite bad now. If a new road or road extension can be built, the congestion can be substantially alleviated. I must acknowledge that it is not easy to find suitable space to build road extensions or new roads in mature estates to join with main roads.”
“We must recognize and confirm the contributions by MPs in the past, and we hope that our present and future MPs will emulate the spirit of our predecessors in this House to carry out their duties outstandingly, as representatives of the people. Mr Speaker, Sir, I support the Prime Minister's motion. 5.02 pm”
“In 1997, it had increased to 4,888 cases, an increase of 80.5%. This has caused much misery and harm to the parties. On the other hand, there are many young people who have reached a marriageable age but they are unable to find suitable partners, particularly the ladies.”
“Although the residents are aware that SCV is a private company and so the laying of SCV cable is a private project, they take it that it is part of the Government's efforts in achieving the national objective of promoting multi-media communications in future. As such, their request is not totally without justification.”
“I agree with the previous speaker, the Member of Parliament, Dr Ker, that this need not be in terms of dollar aid only but our assistance should be tangible and sufficient.”
The complete record
Every one of 194 lines we hold for Ker Sin Tze, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 4.
“I thank the Senior Parliamentary Secretary for his reply. Sir, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.”
“All right, Sir. As a fine tuning to satisfy the long-term need, the Minister may wish to consider replacing the existing category of light industry use by a new category of a combined light industry and office use.”
“In this connection, I would like to declare my interest that some companies, within the group which I am associated with, are involved in the development of industrial properties. I would still appeal to URA to consider allowing more space within each industrial unit to be used as offices. It should also consider allowing certain floors within existing light industrial buildings to be used as offices. The reason is that some of the activities, which are classified as light industry, such as research and training, are fairly similar to office activities. In fact, the inclusion of offices in light industrial buildings will not cause inconvenience to the existing industrial users. It will alleviate the pressure on the demand for office space in the town area, and enable small and medium-sized companies to reduce their business costs. This is essential for their survival in the years of economic uncertainty ahead.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head U of the Main Estimates be reduced by $10 in respect of Code UA 1500. Sir, URA has designated the use of each plot of land and enforced it strictly. As a result, we have built Singapore into a cosmopolitan city with vibrant activities in an orderly manner. With the emergence of the electronic age, the time has come to take a review of the existing planning rules and regulations to see whether some of these rules can be modified to suit the needs of the new era. It is heartening to note that URA has now designated more white sites which allow flexibility in the land use. URA has also allowed residences to be used as home offices for specific trades, such as electronic and Internet-related business. There are however some other areas which warrant our attention. I note from the recent trend that the vacancy ratio of office space in the town area has declined and the office rental has risen. It is difficult for small and medium-sized companies to pay high rentals, and there are not many office buildings in the fringe areas. Many have, therefore, moved into industrial buildings in various industrial estates. However, there are restrictions on the maximum area within an industrial building which can be used as an office. Even within each unit in an industrial building, there is a restriction that the area used as an office cannot exceed 40%. These restrictions make it difficult for small and medium-sized companies to be housed in industrial buildings. 3.15 pm In the same spirit that URA allows home offices to be set up in residence, I would like to appeal to URA to relax its restrictions and allow industrial space, particularly light industrial space, to be used as offices.”
“My parliamentary colleague, Mr Leong Horn Kee, mentioned during the debate on MTI's budget, that the owners of the shops along Upper Thomson Road applied to convert the second storey of their shops into offices or other commercial purposes, but their applications were refused and the reason was that it would cause traffic congestion. As for HDB, they refused to allow the shopowners to convert the upper floor into a warehouse because the floor was not strong enough to withstand the extra weight of the goods to be stored there. So, using the upper floor for storage would pose problems. But if there are people just working there as an office, would there be additional weight as compared to people living there? I hope that URA could reconsider these applications for conversion of use and give them more sympathetic consideration. In fact, URA has approved applications for the change of use by some of these premises. However, the approval is valid only for one year. So if they want to carry on using the premises for the changed purpose, they would have to resubmit their application every year. This is time and energy wasting. As a result, the shopowners would not dare to spend money on renovation, because of the uncertainties. So we should allow them to convert the upper floors into offices. This will put the premises to optimum use and allow the owners to save their business cost so as to cope with the uncertainties in the next couple of years.”
“Only then can the shops in the HDB estates be re-packaged to serve the residents under a new and fresh look. Next, I would like to talk about change of use. URA specifies that the neighbourhood shops in HDB estates could only be used for retail business and not for other purposes. This is understandable. However, in some out-of-the-way localities, there are too many shops, resulting in a surplus, and many of the shops could not attract tenants and they are closed throughout the year. If URA could permit these shops to change their use and allow the tenants to use them as showrooms or offices, then at least these shops could be fully utilised and it could also bring more life to the housing estates. The Government has already allowed those who are involved in the Internet-driven companies to use their residence as an office. Why is it that we cannot allow the vacant shops to be converted to offices and allow the start-up companies to start their business at a lower rent to cut their overhead expenses? Another related question is the request of the residents to convert the upper floor of the shops for other purposes. According to the original design, the upper floor of the shops was meant for the shopowners and their families to stay in. By staying on the upper floor, the shopowners will enjoy great convenience in looking after their business downstairs. This was a good conception, but this was 20 years ago. Now, with the changes of time, most of the shopowners have their own flats elsewhere and they use the premises upstairs as warehouse or offices. According to the rules, they would have to apply to the URA for change of use and, very often, it would be very difficult for them to get the approval.”
“Sir, the poor business of HDB neighbourhood shops is a problem which has been in existence for a long time. Part of the reason is that their trades, as specified by the HDB, are not relevant to the demands of the market in the present day and the shopowners are not allowed to change their trade. As such, they just had to carry on doing their business in very difficult circumstances. I think the solutions to this problem are: (1) Greater flexibility on the part of the HDB to allow the shopowners or tenants to change their trades; and (2) Permission by the Urban Redevelopment Authority to allow those neighbourhood shops in the out-of-the-way localities to change the use of their shops. In places where there are too many shops, resulting in many shops being left vacant, URA should allow them to be used for other activities. In any estate, the HDB specifies what trade the shops should be engaged in. It is, of course, good to have a proper trade mix, for the convenience of the residents. However, when the convenience shops, like 7-Eleven and Cheers, come into the neighbourhood, the traditional provision shops could not compete with them. On the other hand, the HDB does not allow the provision shops to change their trade, so they have to just carry on with the same trade, even when there is no longer any demand for such a trade. So, to solve this problem, the HDB should have greater flexibility to allow the shopowners and tenants to change their trade and let market conditions decide the number of various types of business in the neighbourhood shops. The HDB should also help those who cannot carry on, eg, the ageing shopowners, and let them exit by giving them some form of compensation.”
“Allocated with such a large sum of $12 billion for the next five years for R&D, I am concerned that if we did not pay sufficient attention, it might become an area overwhelmingly dominated by Asian expatriates. We should take sufficient action to encourage more of our young people to take part in this significant R&D programme which will have a very strong impact on the manufacturing sector in future. We might have to change our people's perception in the career development, reward system and the social status of R&D personnel. Generally, people may have problems in recognising that there is a career in R&D in Singapore. There are no obvious scientific and technological research posts in the public and private sectors. This is particularly true for the positions of top scientists and research engineers. The people who are employed for research and development work either call themselves as "engineer" or "scientist". And it is time that we should generously use the job title of research or development engineer or research scientist. This will help to establish in the people's mind that scientific research work is a very specific career that one could pursue. The present reward system of offering scholarships in the university could only attract students from the PRC and India. It has almost completely failed to attract Singaporeans to do research work. If we see university research training as the entry point into the chain of research manpower development, we must study how we could attract Singapore researchers. The aggressive science and technology plan given in this Budget could only be considered to be a complete success if we could mobilise and attract more young scientists and engineers to take part and contribute in this programme. Sir, I support the motion. 4.”
“The retail business in the traditional HDB estates is lagging behind the modern shopping centres and is facing strong competition. The assistance from the Government comes at the right time. I hope PSB Retail 21 will help the small retail business to identify and overcome their weaknesses, reorganise the small retailers and strengthen their competitive edge to meet the challenges from the modern retail business in the future. I note that the Budget pays particular attention to the restructuring of our economy. The fund for the second 5-year Plan allocated to NSTB was doubled to $4 billion and an additional $7 billion Science and Technology Plan for the R&D activities for the next five years. In the case of life sciences, another $1 billion for R&D and $1 billion for the start-up fund were allocated. The size of the funds shows a strong commitment by the Government in restructuring our economy by moving upwards in the value-added chain. The success of Singapore's manufacturing sector must depend on the continuous innovation of new products and development of capabilities at the pinnacle of science and technology. The success will help to place Singapore ahead of other countries in the region of growth and high value-added areas. It gives Singapore a chance of success in certain areas while competing with the products from the developed countries. While emphasising so much on the development of new areas, like life sciences, we should also not forget other niche areas, like the micro-electronics and environmental engineering. They should continue to receive their assistance like before, to continuously sharpen their competitive edge. From my experience, our fellow Singaporeans always shy away from the technical and scientific R&D activities.”
“This means that for Year of Assessment 2002, a land owner, property owner or developer will pay more tax in the form of property tax for Year of Assessment 2002, as compared with the previous year. I hope the Finance Minister will look into this again and see whether there is any error in the Budget announcement. Sir, the construction industry has been depressed for many years. Some of the big construction companies might be facing financial troubles. The consequence would be that we might weaken our construction industry which we had taken years to build up to the current stage. In future, if the demand should surge, we might find a similar competitive element, exercised in the past, which would not be there any more and the big foreign construction firms might dominate the market in the future. To help the industry create the construction volume is the only solution. On the one hand, we could consider increasing the public sector projects and, on the other hand, we could remove certain constraints that had artificially suppressed the demand. Sir, many of the anti-speculation policies in the property market were introduced in good times. In the post-Asian economic crisis, all these policies will go against us and suppress demand. We should either lift some of these unfavourable policies or take action to quickly let the property prices reflect its true values at the bottom of the V-shape curve and recover subsequently. The demand will continue to stay low if property prices do not bottom out. I would like to see more proactive measures by the Government to help the construction industry in its recovery. I am glad to note that there is a PSB Retail 21 10-year plan which is aimed at helping the retail industry in training, upgrading and modernisation.”
“To do a quick calculation, a typical family with an income of $1,500 per month, living in a four-room purchase flat, could save up to $730 from the goodies and the tax announced for Year of Assessment 2002. If the minimum $500 of CPF top-up is taken into consideration, the family will benefit $1,230. Sir, in a practical way, it is an amount good enough for the family to buy a low-end Pentium III computer. In this case, the household does not need to pay any income tax, and $1,230 is a direct contribution as income to the family. It is indeed a very generous move by the Government in looking after the people in the low-income group. Paying low income tax would mean that the people would have more disposable income. It would also help, in a small way, to boost the small retail and service industries which were not doing well in the past few years. Year 2000 economic performance was not uniform for all sectors. The construction industry and the small retail and service industries have still not picked up. The domestic industry involves quite a lot of people. In good times, the construction industry has a share of about 10% of our GDP. One could easily imagine that more than 10% of our people work in the construction industry because it is a labour-intensive industry. In this Budget, other than what has been mentioned about the possible upturn of the construction industry and the reduction of property tax by 2% from the original 12%, nothing great is being mentioned about how one could help in the recovery of the construction industry. In fact, the property tax reduction, as mentioned by my colleague, Dr Ker, was made after adjustment of the property tax rebate.”
“Reduce or exempt levies and the various charges, lower the cost of borrowing, and cut down business cost to help the suffering businesses pull through these difficult times. Mr Speaker, Sir, I support the motion standing in the name of the Minister for Finance. Assoc. Prof. Low Seow Chay (Chua Chu Kang): Mr Speaker, Sir, year 2001 to 2002 budget is a generous one. First, huge funds were given away in the form of year 2001 tax rebates, utilities, rentals and SC&CC charges rebates, CPF top-up and the Government's contributions to the various endowment funds. All this will cost the Government billions of dollars. This could only be possible because the previous year's budget had a surplus of $4.4 billion due to the exceptionally and unexpectedly good economic growth that led to $6.5 billion in additional tax revenue, as reported by Parliament's Estimates Committee. We have to thank the Government for its generosity in sharing the surplus and the fruits of economic success with the people. On the other hand, it is also what the people deserve for their sacrifices and contributions in turning the economy around from the Asian economic crisis. It has also established a good precedence by sharing the budgetary surplus with the people. I hope the Finance Minister will adopt sharing the budgetary surplus with the people as a standard feature for future budgets. Second, the new tax scheme for personal income tax for Year of Assessment 2002 offers as much as 30% tax reduction for an annual earned income less than $35,000 and a saving of 25% for an annual earned income of $50,000. For the high income earners, they will pay 22% less. The huge cut in personal income tax is very much more than the usual 10% tax rebate given out when there was a comfortable budget surplus in the past.”
“This is a timely measure. However, if the fiscal policies can be coordinated with the monetary policies, the effect will surely be better. At the moment, there are signs of the US economy declining. President Bush has already announced tax cuts and Mr Greenspan of the Federal Reserves Bureau has also taken steps to lower the interest rates. Such coordination between the fiscal policy and the monetary policy will surely achieve better results in supporting the US economy. In this year's Budget, I do not see any sign of the monetary policies being deployed. In the next couple of years, if the regional economies do not recover and the US economy heads for a decline, Singapore's situation may not be too optimistic. Lowering of interest rates to encourage investments and stimulate consumption can be very useful in sustaining the economic growth. Although it is said that interest rates are determined by the commercial banks according to market situation, the Minister for Finance can make some adjustments to the discount rates and bank capital reserve ratio through the Monetary Authority of Singapore, to avail the banks of more liquidity and cause the whole interest rate structure to be adjusted downwards, thereby lowering the cost of borrowing of the individuals and corporations. On the one hand, it will stimulate personal consumption, and on the other hand, it can lower the operational cost of businesses. In this way, both consumption and investment can flourish, and economic growth can be sustained. This year's Budget can be said to be a Budget which "adds a flower to the brocade". The higher your income, the greater tax reduction benefits you will enjoy. I hope that it would simultaneously be a Budget which "sends burning charcoal in a snowy weather".”
“Even the many shops in modern shopping complexes are having a hard time, with high rentals, high overhead expenses and low sales volume. Although the retail sector is said to have picked up last year, many small and middle retailers are moaning and groaning. Apart from retailers, many other sectors are similarly affected by poor business. Property sector aside, the related sectors such as the renovation contractors and the general traditional industries are also facing the problem of very poor business. In fact, apart from electronics and telecommunications sectors, all the other sectors are not doing well. Business may be poor but the cost of doing business remains on the high side with no sign of going down. Electricity tariffs are rising all the time. CPF contribution rates have been adjusted up by 4%. Petrol prices have also shot up. Although in this year's Budget, property tax will be reduced from 12% to 10% in July this year, the property tax rebate which was granted earlier would be revoked. As a result, property tax has in fact increased from 9% to 10%. It would appear that this year's Budget does not help to reduce the operating cost of those businesses which are not doing well, nor does it assist in solving their problem. If we want to effectively assist them, I think the Minister for Finance should consider lowering all the charges relating to the industrial and commercial sectors, for example, property tax should be reduced to 9%, and there should be some form of restraint on the raising of utilities tariffs. The Government should also exempt or lower the various charges levied on the small and middle enterprises. The Minister for Finance has used the tax-cutting measures to stimulate our economy and to bring about economic expansion and growth.”
“In addition, the small companies with a profit of less than $10,000 enjoy tax relief on 75% of their chargeable income, and 50% of the subsequent $90,000. This will help the start-up companies to have more capital for further development. These are conducive to Singapore's strive to become an investment, commercial and trading centre, enhancing our competitiveness in attracting foreign investments. However, to those small businesses which are slumped into predicament because of the regional economies and economic restructure, the cut in corporate tax does not benefit them nor help them to solve their problems at all. Many SMEs have no business or are finding it difficult to operate their business. Many of them are running their business at a loss. If the companies do not make any profit, income tax cut or exemption is simply irrelevant to them. Among the struggling businesses are the retailers in the HDB estates. Because of their outdated mode of operation, they are unable to attract the younger consumers. Moreover, with the modern shopping complexes luring away the customers, these poor neighbourhood shops have been keeping their business going by painstaking efforts without much success. To these retailers in the HDB estates, this year's Budget does not bring any benefit. The benefit of tax reduction does not apply to them. There is no reduction in their rent. For those who have bought over the shop premises, the monthly instalment remains a heavy burden. There is no utilities subsidy for them. But, fortunately, the Minister for Finance has already announced that the Minister for National Development will introduce a series of measures to help them to tide over the difficult period. As a matter of fact, hardship cases are not confined to the retailers in HDB estates.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the Budget presented by the Finance Minister this year is undoubtedly a widely welcomed Budget. The main focus of this Budget is on the cuts or exemptions on corporate and personal income tax and property tax. Tax cuts and exemption are means in the use of fiscal policy to stimulate economic expansion. In the next one or two years, we will be facing economic uncertainty. This move will positively support our economic activities so that our economy will not turn from substantive growth to recession. To the middle and higher income people, reduction of personal income tax rates is like "adding a flower to the brocade". Their incomes are already in the middle and high brackets. Now, with this tax cut, they will have even more after-tax disposable income. To the lower income people, the tax cut is of not much help. Some may even receive no benefit at all. The lower income people are faced with escalating cost of living such as the rising utility rates, high medical cost, increasing education cost, etc. We should also think of a hardship-relieving way to approach the issue like "sending burning charcoal in a snowy weather". Of course, the $250 to $350 utilities rebate, exemption or reduction in the payment of service and conservancy charges and HDB rents is a form of help. But this is trying to "put out a big fire on a cart-load of firewood with a small cup of water". It could at most wet your throat but hardly enough to quench your thirst. Compared to the benefits enjoyed by the middle and higher income people, these benefits to the lower income people are just pittance. The reduction of corporate tax rate from 25.5% to 24.5% will attract more foreign investments to Singapore.”
“Our economy is growing rapidly and talents are easily attracted to other sectors because of their market value. Nowadays, when the young people choose their courses of study, they always think in terms of how much they can earn in the future. This is inevitably the criterion for their choice of studies. In future, whether or not they are prepared to be civil servants or political leaders, one of the major considerations will be how much they can get in terms of salaries. If we compare the salaries of our Ministers to the top earners in the private sector, they are still one-third less. This is a sacrifice that they have to make. So, in future, will the top talents be prepared to make this sacrifice to be in the public service? It is still a doubtful point. If we do not have good salaries for the Ministers, it would be very difficult to attract top talents to form the Government, and it would be a great loss to our nation. The proposal raised by DPM Lee is not just for the salary increase for the present batch of political leaders - the Prime Minister, Deputy Prime Ministers and the Cabinet Ministers - it is, more importantly, a preparation for the future. To the present lot of Ministers and public servants, they have a stable and adequate pay. A pay rise of 10% or 20% is not that critical to them. In economic terms, the "marginal utility" of money is getting lesser and lesser. Sir, the important point is that we want to set up a mechanism to ensure that we have generation after generation of high quality people in the Government to promote the progress and development of the economy of Singapore. I support the Deputy Prime Minister's statement. ADJOURNMENT OF DEBATE Resolved, "That the Debate be now adjourned." - [BG Lee Hsien Loong].”
“Under the development of information technology, we are becoming globalised and our talents would easily be attracted by other countries, so long as they offer better terms of employment and better pay. Many of our top talents would be attracted by the overseas employers, and go over there. So we have to pay them good salaries in order to retain them. This is a reality which we cannot run away from. At the same time, the salary in the public sector must also be competitive so that we can retain the top talents in our public service. Therefore, an appropriate adjustment is necessary and cannot be avoided. If we do not adjust their salaries, many talents and top brains will be lost to the private sector. If we do not have first-class talents who can make decisions correctly and resolve all the difficulties to lead the Government, particularly in a time of crisis, it will certainly lead to disaster. For example, in 1985 and 1986, when we faced such a grave economic crisis, if it were not because of the Government's prompt action, we would not be able to get out of the crisis so quickly and emerged stronger than before. So I think a high quality government is very essential. Only with a good government, could we have good economic growth and a good standard of living for our people. Of course, some people may argue that our first and second generations of political leaders had sacrificed themselves to serve the people without insisting on good pay. It is because of their sacrifices that we are able to enjoy what we have today. Then why is it that we must now pay relatively high salaries to attract and retain talents in the Government? I think the answer is that we are now living in a different era. Our society is peaceful and stable.”
“The pegging of salaries between the public and private sectors is something which we have debated and accepted many years ago. It is a very creative measure. Singapore is the only country in the world with such a formulation. The Government has pegged the public sector's pay to the 6 top earning professions in the private sector. The public sector has been responsible for policies that govern the nation and to lead us in our economic development. In the meantime, our Ministers' pay is pegged at only two-thirds of the top earners in the private sector. This is very reasonable. With the economic recovery, the earnings in the private sector have gone up. So it is only fair and reasonable that we make adjustment to the public sector's salaries at this point of time. However, the gap between the public sector and the private sector could even be widened because at this time, everyone is fighting for talent. In order to retain the top talents in the public sector, we have to increase their salaries. But in the private sector, they would also take the public sector's salary as a benchmark as well. They would also increase the salaries for their own staff in order to retain their talents. This would bring about a chain reaction and, in the long run, the wage cost in Singapore would go up and this would affect our competitiveness. The only solution is that we have to improve our productivity to offset the adverse effects brought about by higher wage costs. The economic recovery is not across-the-board. There are some sectors in our economy, particularly in the SMEs, which have not fully recovered, and the higher wage cost would be an added burden to them. However, if we do not increase the salaries of our talented professionals, what would have happened?”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, Deputy Prime Minister BG Lee Hsien Loong has made a Ministerial Statement on the increase of salaries for the Ministers and public servants, and he has used the mechanism deployed in the previous exercise with some improvements, such as increasing the pool of top earners from 24 to 48 and using the median point, instead of the average. These are good improvements. Perhaps some people may question whether this is an appropriate time to propose such a substantial increment to the salaries of the Ministers and civil servants given the present economic situation. Since 1999, our economy has come out from the rock bottom situation. Our exports have grown strongly, particularly in the exports of electronic parts. Last year, our economic growth was 5.4% and the income of the professionals had increased substantially. Since the civil servants' salaries were pegged to the private sector, I think it is only fair that we look into increasing the salaries of the Ministers and public servants according to the current market trend. But now we are moving into a new economy whereby the economic structure has transformed in such a way that many traditional industries are unable to pick up, and some workers are unable to cope with the demand of the new economy. Many SMEs are not doing well, and many workers have lost their jobs. These are the people who suffer losses in income and they find it difficult to accept the substantial increase in the salaries for the Ministers at this point of time. As for those who are lucky enough to stay employed, the cut in their employers' CPF contribution has yet to be fully restored and they cannot help feeling unhappy about this increment of salaries to the Ministers and public servants.”
“The traffic volume has increased significantly and congestion is quite bad now. If a new road or road extension can be built, the congestion can be substantially alleviated. I must acknowledge that it is not easy to find suitable space to build road extensions or new roads in mature estates to join with main roads. However, it will be an improvement highly desired by the older estate residents if suitable space can be found. And I urge the Ministry to work with the Land Transport Authority to identify similar problems in other older estates and to incorporate it as an item of upgrading in private estates.”
“Sir, we discussed a number of ways to improve the areas in private estates last year. I would like now to identify another possibility for upgrading in private estates, ie, to build a new road or road extension as an additional outlet in older estates if the required space is available. Sir, with the growth in the last 20 years, private estates have undergone many structural changes. Many single storey houses have been demolished and replaced by two or three storey houses. Where planning regulations are allowed, a site for a single house has been split into two or three terrace houses. As a result, many new houses have been built even in older estates. Consequently, the density of residence has increased. Also, many families now own two cars instead of one. There are more and more cars. As a consequence, roads in older estates are congested during peak hours, in particular, the artery connecting the estate and the main road outside of the estate. A way to solve this problem is to open up a new road linking it to the main road to alleviate the traffic congestion wherever possible. And this will be an improvement which is badly needed in private estates. Two estates in my constituency, namely, Charlton Park and Tai Keng Gardens, will illustrate the above point. There are 600 units of terrace and semi-detached houses in Charlton Park and the only major link road to the Upper Serangoon Road is Charlton Road. During peak hours motorists have to form a long queue at the junction of Charlton Road and Upper Serangoon Road. Tai Keng Gardens also has a similar problem. The only linkage from the estate to the main road, Upper Paya Lebar, is Jalan Kelichap. There were 29 houses along Jalan Kelichap and 73 new houses have been added recently.”
“Therefore, the only way is for Government to provide funding for these shops to upgrade their commercial areas. I would like to urge the HDB to accede to this request.”
“Apart from the shops in the town centres, HDB also built many shopping complexes, eg, Hong Lim Green, Bras Basah Complex and Rochore Centre, etc. All these shopping centres have flats on the upper floors and shops on the lower floors. They are far inferior to the private shopping centres in design. The common complaint is that the lighting is inadequate, the corridors are narrow, and open space is limited. These shopping centres certainly do not appeal to the young customers. However, these shops are located in important urban areas. If we leave them to fend for themselves, it would degenerate into a pit, and will be a waste of land resources. If these commercial centres are upgraded, although they are not comparable to the new private shopping centres, at least we can change their image to increase the trade volume, so that they can have a chance to survive. The shops at the Bras Basah Centre were sold under the Land Titles Act. Therefore, the maintenance comes from their monthly conservancy fees. There is no fund to carry out an upgrading programme. The shopkeepers plan to put a roof over the air well, so that they are sheltered from the elements, and it can be used for promotional activities. But they have to pay more than $700,000 as development charges, and the total amounts to $1.1 million, including construction cost. The shopowners are unable to afford such a big sum of money. Sir, as time changes, the shops in the HDB estates are not able to cope with the expectation and demand of the new generation customers. Therefore, we should upgrade them and inject them with life, so that these places are not wasted. But to expect them to pay for the amelioration of the surrounding areas, it is not possible and not realistic.”
“Sir, the upgrading of commercial areas in town centres and shopping precincts have met with many difficulties. The reason is that when these shops were sold to the shopowners, they were sold under the Land Titles Act. Under the Land Titles Act, the shopowners purchased only the space inside the shops. The space outside the shops, eg, corridors and other amenities, belongs to the HDB, and it is repaired by the Town Council on behalf of the HDB. Out of the monthly maintenance charges levied on the shopowners, only a small portion is used for renovation and repair work. Therefore, there is no surplus fund to use for upgrading the common area outside the shops. If they want to upgrade, then they have to co-pay for the cost of upgrading or to raise funds themselves. This has posed many difficulties for them. Even if the majority of the shopowners agree to upgrade, there is always a minority of them who are not willing to do so. When the shops were purchased, they were not given strata title. Therefore, the open space outside the shops does not belong to the shopowners. They cannot form a management corporation, and they cannot compel the shopowners to pay for the upgrading charges. Therefore, if they are not willing to pay and simply sit tight and wait for others to pay, they stand to benefit from whatever improvements that are made, or the upgrading programme cannot be carried out at all. When shops were sold, the intention was that more energetic young people would run the businesses, so that the commercial centres will be rejuvenated. However, many shop precincts and town centres have become shabby and old. There is no life or vibrancy apart from some coffeeshops and hawker centres.”
“Sir, I thank the Minister of State for his reply. Sir, may I now go on to my next cut.”
“Sir, can I respond to the Minister of State's answer just now before I go on to my cut?”
“If there is a problem the people upstairs should pay for the repair. Now, with this leak, the people downstairs are already inconvenienced and yet you want them to pay for the repair. It does seem to be very unfair. Let me quote you an analogy - the forest fire in Indonesia. This issue which we discussed in Parliament earlier today and the haze resulting from this forest fire has caused some problems to us. Just imagine, if Indonesia says that since we share this air space and in order to get rid of this haze, you will have to share the cost with us. This explanation is apparently farfetched and very unconvincing. Of course, if the family upstairs has just moved in not too long ago and there is a leakage from the ceiling, then the problem must lie with the construction. The contractor should be responsible and residents should not be asked to pay for it. Of course, the leak from the floor is not a very major problem. But with these flats getting older, the problem would get more and more common. I hope that the HDB can give them a very clear explanation as to which part of the repair should be borne by the residents, otherwise, there will be a lot of quarrels among the residents.”
“Sir, the two main problems faced by HDB dwellers are spalling concrete from the ceiling and the leaking floor from the toilets and kitchen. The issue of spalling concrete has been extensively discussed in the newspapers and I shall not dwell upon it here. The leaking from the floor concerns the family upstairs and the family downstairs. If it is not properly dealt with, it will certainly affect the relationship between the two families. HDB's common practice is to ask the two families, the one upstairs and the one downstairs, to co-pay for the repair. The family downstairs felt that it is very unfair because they have to endure the inconvenience of having water leaking through their ceiling and falling on their heads. Yet, they are asked to pay part of the repair cost despite the fact that this is in no way due to any fault of theirs. If the people upstairs have changed the floor tiles and, in the process, damaged the water-proof layer, then of course they are liable to pay for it. But if they have not done anything to the flooring, yet water is leaking from the floor, then who is responsible? HDB's explanation is that the floor is a party-structure belonging to both the people upstairs and the people downstairs and, of course, they have to co-pay for the repair. But this explanation is just overly simplistic. The question is whether this water-proof layer belongs to the people upstairs, or the people upstairs and downstairs share the water-proof layer. Of course, the people living upstairs have to wash the floor in the bathroom and water will leak downstairs if the floor is not waterproof. In order to prevent leaking, normally waterproof chemicals are used. So apparently, this water-proof layer should belong to the people upstairs.”
“However, I have found no reference on this topic by the Minister in the Budget Statement. I would therefore be very much obliged if the Minister could share with us his thoughts on these issues. Sir, I support the motion.”
“In fact, we support greater rewards to individuals who work harder and contribute more to economic growth. Furthermore, in Singapore, there are not too many large estates which warrant their being broken into smaller estates. In the few cases which we may have had, the natural process of inheriting estates by a number of children will break large estates into smaller ones. This, to some extent, fulfills the aim of the estate duty legislation without the agony of a complicated administrative process. On the revenue side, the collection amount is small and relatively insignificant. In Singapore, the revenue collected from estate duty was $45 million, out of the total revenue of $15,628 million in 1998, which was only 0.28% and was the smallest tax item. In addition, estate planning will further minimise the collectable amount of estate duty. This includes the setting up of trusts and holding companies which are effective in avoiding tax payments. But the setting up of trusts and holding companies itself is a tedious process and it involves large amounts of legal costs. Perhaps, it is timely to review the estate duty ordinance to see whether the Act should be revised further, or whether estate duty should be exempted for residential properties, irrespective of their values. The Minister may argue that most people are not liable to pay estate duty as the exemption amount of $9 million for a residence is high. But the agony of assets being frozen for investigation and valuation is an unnecessary burden to bear. In his reply in the old Parliament Chamber on 26th November 1998, the Minister promised to consider introducing legislation to exempt small estates, and to give an answer to requests for abolishing estate duty in the present Budget.”
“Under this heading, the Minister has proposed removing the restrictions that residential properties must not be used for any form of business activities, which is a qualifying condition for estate duty exemption up to $9 million. The purpose is to encourage entrepreneurs who may want to work from home and to support the Technopreneur Home Office Scheme. I have, however, doubts on the effectiveness of the proposed removal of these restrictions. Technopreneurs are mostly young risk-takers who have new ideas but limited financial means. They want to work from home in order to reduce the initial start-up costs. The notion of disqualifying them for estate duty exemption as a result of using their residence as home office is probably least of their concern. The reason is that they are young and paying estate duty upon death is something very remote to them. As such, the removal of the qualifying condition is equally least of their concern and will likely fail to excite them. I therefore do not see how the proposed relaxation would support the would-be technopreneurs. As a matter of fact, estate duty itself has long been regarded as a disincentive for greater wealth creation by individuals in today's world. The purpose of the original estate duty, which was known as death and gift taxes, was to reduce inequalities in the distribution of wealth and to prevent large estates passing from one generation to the next generation. The rationale behind is therefore social and not for revenue generation. However, the social reason to retain estate duty may no longer be valid in our present context. We do not subscribe to the philosophy that income and wealth distribution should be completely equal for individuals.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, thank you for allowing me to participate in the Budget debate. Sir, the Budget tabled by the Minister for Finance is a carefully crafted Budget, with emphasis placed on the welfare of the ageing citizens and the low-income families, the need to encourage innovation, creativity and enterprise and the continued liberalisation of the financial sector. The business sector welcomes the corporate income tax rate reduction from 26% to 25.5% and the retention of employers' CPF contribution rate at 10% until 1st April this year. The Minister has obviously shared the concern of businessmen that, as the economic recovery has just begun and not evenly spread, it is still important to keep business costs at a competitive level. Workers, recognising that it is crucial to help keep business costs low, continue to accept the lower employers' CPF contribution. They are somewhat compensated by rebates on HDB service and conservancy charges and rental rebates. It is therefore a Budget of balanced consideration in the sense that it tries to take care of the welfare and benefits of the low-income earners, businessmen, as well as enterprising young entrepreneurs. In terms of revenue and expenditure, it is projected to produce a surplus of $2.45 billion. As both operating and development expenditures are greater than those of the last Budget, it is relatively expansionary, which is necessary to support the recovery of the economy. [Mr Deputy Speaker in the Chair] 4.48 pm One emphasis of the Budget is to encourage innovation, creativity and enterprise.”
“This is almost equivalent to finding a partner to live together for the rest of their life. Secondly, even if they have found a joint purchaser, problems may arise later if one of the joint buyers decides to withdraw from the partnership and sell his or her flat. I have come across a case in which two sisters shared a flat, and when the younger sister found a man to get married to, the older sister reacted angrily and refused to sell their common flat. This has created great difficulties for the people involved. I would therefore urge the Government to review the policy of eligibility for single citizens, and allow them to purchase a small flat. Perhaps HDB should consider building some 1-room flats or studio flats for these single persons. If these smaller flats for single persons can be built and mixed with bigger flats in the same block or in their vicinity, single flat occupiers can stay close to their parents or relatives. This will retain the family bonding and promote community stability. I therefore request the Government to review the policy concerning single person's eligibility for purchasing a flat directly from HDB. Mr Speaker, Sir, I support the motion expressing thanks to the President for his Address.”
“But public amenity in private estates, such as parks, playgrounds, roads and other facilities, can be improved more expeditiously. This will alleviate the anxiety of private estate residents and give them some sense of sharing the success of our development, even though the share could be small. As I have stated earlier, the heavy subsidy of public housing by the State is consistent with our national policy of helping the majority and the less successful. It is also necessary to satisfy the basic housing needs of our people. We have been very successful in our public housing programme that about 86% of our population are living in HDB estates. However, there are some who are singles and are not eligible to purchase a flat directly from HDB. And their numbers, both males and females, are increasing. Although they are allowed to purchase a flat if they jointly purchase one with another single when they reach the age of 35, their individual's right to purchase a flat of their own directly from HDB has been denied. The rationale is well understood -that it has been the Government's policy to encourage family formation, and possibly that it is not economical for a single to occupy a 3-room or a 4-room flat. But a person has remained single is actually not his choice in many cases. But rather it is due to a number of factors which are beyond his or her control. While most Singaporeans are sharing the fruits of our success, it is unfortunate that the singles are almost left out in housing benefit. Although they are allowed to purchase a flat jointly when they are 35 years old, they always encounter enormous difficulties in practice. First of all, it is difficult to find a suitable unrelated party to share a life-long asset.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker, Sir, for allowing me to participate in the debate on the President's Address. Sir, the President has placed great emphasis on people development in his Speech. He has pointed out the importance of lifelong learning, the need for foreign talent, the care for older people, and the assistance to the less successful. The Government will also implement many people-development programmes to enable Singaporeans to take the new opportunities in the next stage of development. This blueprint for our development certainly holds great allure of a fast growing and caring nation. The President has also pledged to give all Singaporeans tangible shares in Singapore's success. Through HDB home ownership and upgrading schemes, the majority of Singaporeans have benefited from the Government's very generous housing subsidy. They also benefit from the public transportation system, including public buses and MRT. Most of them enjoy greater subsidy in health care if they opt for class "B" or "C' hospitalisation. All HDB residents do not pay for the installation of cable TV reception. The total subsidies given to the residents of public housing sector have been substantial. This is justifiable as the majority of our population, which is about 86%, are residents of public flats. However, private property residents, who account for the remaining 14%, enjoy very little Government subsidy. Although this is consistent with Government's policy of caring more for the majority, it does not seem to be perfectly equitable to deny the share of success and subsidy to the non-HDB residents. Of course, the scope of public assistance in private housing estate is limited. Obviously, the Government cannot share the upgrading cost of private properties.”
“We must recognize and confirm the contributions by MPs in the past, and we hope that our present and future MPs will emulate the spirit of our predecessors in this House to carry out their duties outstandingly, as representatives of the people. Mr Speaker, Sir, I support the Prime Minister's motion. 5.02 pm”
“Led by Dr Lee Siew Choh, eight PAP MPs announced on 14th July that they disagreed with the party policy and decided to leave the party. In the Anson by-election, David Marshall defeated the PAP candidate. The circumstances then were certainly unfavourable to the PAP. On 20th July 1961, the then Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew, moved a motion of confidence in the House. The debate started at half past two in the afternoon and went on till 4 o'clock the following morning. The motion was won by the PAP Government with a very small margin. The confidence motion was passed. If the House had not passed the confidence motion then, the PAP Government would have to resign and hold another election. Perhaps the history of Singapore would have completely been re-written. Although the history of parliamentary democracy in Singapore was still very short, it played its effective role at the critical moment and resolved a very serious political crisis, enabling the Government to give full play to its moral authority and power, thereby bringing Singapore to the track of rapid development and progress. It is because of this that Singapore has arrived where we are. This is a very important contribution by parliamentary democracy to the development of Singapore. Sir, we will soon leave this Chamber to move to the new Chamber in the modern Parliament House, and continue our debate there. In the last 45 years, this Chamber has witnessed the Prime Minister, the Ministers and the MPs engaging in many debates. It has enabled the public to have a better understanding of the process of legislation.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, thank you for giving me the opportunity to participate in this debate on the Prime Minister's motion. Our House and its predecessor, the Legislative Assembly, have been sitting here for the past 45 years, since 1955. In this period of nearly half a century, Singapore has evolved from a British colony to self-government, into Malaysia, out of Malaysia and as an independent country. Socially, we have developed from a loose, migrant society into a tightly-knit multi-racial, multi-religious and multi-lingual society. Economically, we have developed from a port dependent on entrepot trade to an industrialized economy, dependent on exports and then further developed into an open economy characterised by services and high technology. Changes in our policies have been decided during the debates in this august Chamber before they are implemented. Our Parliament has witnessed all the important decision-making on the policies of our country. It is an important source of the history of Singapore. Our House has fully demonstrated the decision-making process of democracy, whether you are a Member of the Government party or a Member of the Opposition party, in the cut and thrust of parliamentary debates. The beauty is, even after heated arguments, we have abided by the decision of the majority. Unlike parliaments elsewhere, where physical violence takes place regularly, our Members, under the able guidance of you, Mr Speaker, have fully participated in the process and demonstrated the spirit of parliamentary democracy. Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to mention a historical incident which could have changed the development of our history. In 1961, when the Government proposed the motion to merge with Malaysia, heated debates took place. There were many different views.”
“In 1997, it had increased to 4,888 cases, an increase of 80.5%. This has caused much misery and harm to the parties. On the other hand, there are many young people who have reached a marriageable age but they are unable to find suitable partners, particularly the ladies. They are unable to find suitable partners and once they have grown out of the marriageable age they will have to remain single for the rest of their life. This high divorce rate and the fact that many people are not getting married are very important problems that we have to look into. The report should discuss how the Government or society would educate and help these people to resolve this matter. Although we know that there is no easy solution to this issue, this problem has to be resolved one way or another. We want the family to be the foundation for our future. We must look into how to resolve this problem. Then with other favourable factors, we would be able to sustain our growth and prosperity. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I support the motion.”
“We should let Singaporeans develop their talents in every field so that we can become a more vibrant country. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, we have to make full use of our talents and we must also recognise that individual wisdom and capabilities are different from one another. The Government should educate them according to their abilities and make use of the various types of materials to mould them into successful products. Our primary school streaming, technical stream or academic stream in the secondary schools or the vocational training are examples of teaching according to the abilities of the students. The wisdom or capabilities may be inborn. We should not over-emphasise inborn wisdom so as not to discourage people from wanting to upgrade themselves. We should emphasise acquired knowledge and training and the positive effect of this acquired knowledge. As it is said, diligence can compensate for the slowness in learning. In any society, the highly intelligent people are always in the minority. To reform our society, we need the efforts of everyone. Therefore, it is important that we must encourage and motivate the majority to participate in the development of Singapore in the 21st century. Secondly, I like to talk about the family. The report has emphasised on the importance of family ties. The younger generation should understand and look after the older people and the Government and society should also help the older people to adjust to the new environment so that they can enjoy life in their autumn years. The report has also mentioned that in our society, family is the foundation for our future. But in recent years, we have noticed that the divorce rates have gone up from year to year. In 1987, there were only 2,708 divorce cases.”
“The other is after graduating, either from the secondary schools or from the university, they work hard in the business world and then given the good opportunity they strike gold, become very wealthy, make a lot of money, just like Mr Peh Chin Hua. He is a typical example of such success stories. In recent years, we have some entrepreneurs who have made their fortune through technology and this is what we call the technopreneurs. There are also some very outstanding performers in the field of arts or culture, but it is just a flash in the pan. They are not deemed to be "success" in the context of our society. There may be some very successful teachers, some very successful tailors, but they are hardly recognised as successful Singaporeans. Although we give rewards to the best teachers in Singapore, how do we say which teacher is the most successful or which journalist is the most successful journalist, or which tailor is the best tailor? Are we generally very respectful of them? In the 21st century we must expand the criteria of success to cover a larger area. Of course, Singapore is a small country with a small population. The market is small and there are a lot of restrictions. If you write a story based on local scenes, how many readers can you get? If you produce a local film of strong local flavour, how many audience can you get? If you want to study nuclear physics, do we have enough facilities, and even after you have completed your studies, will your talent be put to optimum use in Singapore? The Government should help these people so that they can develop their talent to the fullest and become a model of success. So success should not be confined to only those who become senior officials or big-time businessmen.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I would like to speak on two of the recommendations by the Singapore 21 Committee. First, Every Singaporean Matters, and, secondly, Strong Families: Our Foundation and Our Future. First, on Every Singaporean Matters. It is recommended in the S21 report that on the personal side everyone should make full use of his strong points and develop his potential to the fullest. On the society side we should respect the professional skills of the individuals, reward the successful ones, encourage those who are yet to succeed and give those who have failed a second chance. The Government should take the lead in changing the mindset of our people so that everyone would recognise the fact that everybody has his or her own talent. So long as we do our work well we can be outstanding talents in our respective trades or industries. In this connection, we must understand that success should not be measured only in terms of economic or materialistic success. We should also take into consideration performances in the fields of culture, arts and sports. The Committee recognises that our human resource is very precious. It urges everyone to work hard and with the assistance of the society, we will be able to give full play to our potential and to develop our talents to the fullest. This is very important for our development in the 21st century. As it was pointed out by the Committee, the criteria of success are not only in terms of economic and materialistic success. In Singapore, most people feel that there are two avenues to success. One is for individuals to go to the top schools, get good results, get a scholarship and a first class honours, and then become senior officials in the Government or political leaders.”
“Although the residents are aware that SCV is a private company and so the laying of SCV cable is a private project, they take it that it is part of the Government's efforts in achieving the national objective of promoting multi-media communications in future. As such, their request is not totally without justification. As I said earlier, the Ministry's expenditure on improvement works in HDB estates is extremely high vis-a-vis improvement expenditure in private estates. This is probably due to the limited scope of improvement works which can be carried out by the Government. For instance, the Government cannot spend money to improve any item within the boundary of a private property. If this is so, then the laying of SCV cable up to the front gate of private houses can be considered as an infrastructure improvement item, just like connecting SCV cable to HDB blocks. I would therefore urge the Minister to coordinate with the other relevant Ministries to see whether the laying of SCV cable can be taken as an infrastructure item.”
“Sir, the Government announced a few years ago that they would implement an improvement scheme to upgrade private housing estates. However, no concrete plans had been implemented to-date. In comparison to HDB estates where a lot of resources have been devoted to MUP, IUP and general improvement works, private housing estates have been grossly neglected. In the current budget, the Ministry's development budget is about $2.61 billion of which $2.26 billion, that is, about 86.3% has been allocated to public housing. Infrastructure development in HDB estate alone accounts for $113 million. In order to correct the bias and shift the emphasis to a more balanced position, improvement works in private housing estates should be carried out as soon as possible. These will include road widening, more parks and improved sewage system, etc. Out of the many problems raised by land property owners, the cost of sharing the laying of Singapore Cable Vision cable to private housing estates is a common concern. In the case of HDB estates, the laying of SCV cable is taken as infrastructure work and the cost is subsidised by the Government. HDB residents need only to pay for internal connections within their flats. However, private landed property owners have to share the laying cost. In general, owners of terrace and semi-detached houses will have to pay about $2,000 and bungalow owners have to pay about $6,000. During my house visit to residents in Charlton Park and Tai Keng Gardens, many residents asked whether the laying of SCV cable could be taken as infrastructure work, just like the laying of electrical cables, water and gas pipes.”
“Since 1992, HDB has been selling shops to sitting tenants, and has sold about 7,600 shop units hitherto. In 1997, HDB also began to sell some 30-year lease shops at a lower price because the lease was shorter. These cheaper shops were welcomed by the sitting tenants. Up till now, some 444 units of 30-year lease shops have been sold under the scheme to the sitting tenants. But in April 1998, HDB stopped selling its shop units. Many shopkeepers want to know when will HDB sell the shops to them. I believe HDB is holding back the sale because of the poor sentiments in the property market today, and to sell shop units at this moment will further lower the value of the shops, and people who bought the shops earlier would feel they have suffered a book loss as they had bought their shops earlier at higher prices. On the other hand, those who have yet to buy over the shops which they are renting at the moment desire to buy the shops now because the prices are low at this moment and it is the right time for them to buy their shops. If HDB holds back the sale of these shops to them, they will harbour the feeling that HDB is waiting for prices to go up before they sell the shops with the aim of making more profits. Actually, HDB has already sold about 7,600 units of shops. The remaining number of shops to be sold will not be very large. That being the case, as long as the number of units offered for sale is not too large, the effect of lowering the existing price will not be very significant. So I would suggest that the Minister consider the request of the shop tenants to resume the sale of shops to them, especially the 30-year lease shops which are very popular among the residents.”
“I agree with the previous speaker, the Member of Parliament, Dr Ker, that this need not be in terms of dollar aid only but our assistance should be tangible and sufficient. Additionally, we should offer cooperation and engagement to others outside our region, such as the USA and international agencies, whose help and attention can assist the region's recovery and, therefore, our own. Asia has been struck by a contagion. But because we have kept ourselves fiscally, not physically, fit over these years, we are less affected. Among the stricken economies, therefore, we should be among those assisting in the process of recovery. I shall propose specific policies in the cuts in the Committee of Supply. I hope the Minister will respond to my comments and suggestions.”
“Rather, I call on the State to encourage members of our community to help each other. This will increase our social cohesion and grow our heartware. Let me turn finally to Singapore and the region. The Budget reacts to the regional economic crisis. For it is the crisis, and not our own internal factors, that is affecting our performance. Conversely, I believe that we must consider and respond to the crisis. In so doing, our foreign and our foreign economic policy is not a distraction from the economic situation but an important task that is linked to possible routes to recovery. The region's financial crisis has led to social and political changes in our region, among our neighbours. There is a sense of autarky and a narrow nationalism rising in the countries around us. There are inclinations to close borders to foreign capital. There are great social dislocations, especially among the poor, the young and the women. A UNICEF report has warned of a lost generation in our region - children who drop out of school with little or no education. Neither of these developments - the autarky or this lost generation - would be in Singapore's interest, or our neighbours'. What can we do? Our role in this may be very difficult. There have been unwarranted and unfounded criticisms of us by our neighbours. These may anger our own citizens. But we should not over-react. People will say things in desperate times that they would not normally. We should look to the longer term. We should re-emphasise the win-win nature of cooperation in the region to seek engagement with those who welcome it to provide useful forms of assistance to those who most need it. We should offer cooperation and assistance to our neighbours in ASEAN.”
“Areas such as housing, the cost of their children's education, re-training and the creation and match-making to casual or part-time work should be considered. A second area is in jobs and discrimination. This is an issue that has arisen recently, especially as regards private sector hiring. If this is not addressed, the economic crisis will test our social cohesion. The Government has responded to that by saying that it will discourage discrimination and encourage meritocracy. I support this. I would also call on the Government to monitor the situation closely and continue to set a moral leadership in its own hiring. We sometimes take meritocracy and rights against discrimination for granted when times are good. But especially in these bad times, meritocracy and human rights must be a shield to protect our citizens. A third way in which I think we should innovate in our spending is to encourage giving among the citizens themselves. Our Government has moved away from a welfare state, dependent on the Government and its spending, to a policy of many helping hands. This requires private sector help and giving. In this time of crisis, there is a pressure on these private hands. When companies are showing bad results or losses, it becomes very difficult to sustain the giving to charities and other good causes. If companies, families and individuals still give, I think they should receive greater support from Government. I call on the Government to double tax exemptions for companies and individuals who continue to give to charities, arts groups and other causes, and to give tax incentives to families who support their own members who are dependants or who have lost their jobs. This approach does not, I want to emphasise, create a dependency on the State.”
“Our expenditure has remained quite constant, if not increased, and this is a stark comparison with reductions among many of our neighbours in this time of crisis. Of course, we should be well defended, and I am not encouraging us to downgrade our expenditure according to our neighbours. We should not beggar ourselves because they are poor. But my concern is that our defence spending should not by itself be a source of misunderstanding and concern in the region. I would encourage dialogue and transparency to allay any suspicion that we are taking an aggressive posture and not simply an investment in a sound defence. Let me turn next to another area of expenditure - social assistance. There have been many calls to assist Singaporeans in this time of crisis. I do not wish to add to the various wish lists. This crisis should not see the overnight creation of a welfare state in Singapore. I do however wish to call on the Government to consider ways of innovating the ways in which it will spend money. We too should, between a suffocating welfare state and often harsh local marketplace, look for a "third way". One clear area for innovation is to specifically target those who have lost their jobs. The Budget has given a 10% rebate to all individuals. Some may consider this insufficient. But I understand that Government cannot help everyone all that more, given the current deficit already. But there should be special targeting in Government assistance. I think in particular of those who have lost their jobs and have been unable to find employment again for extended periods. For these people, I hope the Government will consider temporary measures to assist them further.”