Koh Lam Son
Singapore
“(7) To provide more theatrettes or curtains in the classrooms with the increased use of audio-visual equipment such as overhead projectors and slide projectors. These would help prevent unnecessary strain on the eyesight of the students.”
“Sir, this debate can go on, but I would withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The sum of $521,224,880 for Head P ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. The sum of $466,063,100 for Head P ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. Head R -”
“He should not, in my view, be a civil servant or ex-civil servant, but someone who has an understanding of the civil service, in tune with the hopes and expectations of the public and a grasp of the needs of the business community and financial institutions.”
“Sir, I believe that upgrading the facilities should be the first step, and a better way for the stallholders and for the community at large. 12.45 pm I also wish to state that complaints that customers are shortchanged with poor quality food and badly prepared food is a fact, but it is a separate issue.”
“No one else would do it for us. We have to do it all ourselves. So unless litterbugs clean up the act, we must make sure that they do not dirty our environment. I would like to ask the Minister whether he would consider increasing its own manpower to keep our city clean and green.”
“Mr Speaker, I do not think the Minister has answered the question whether unleaded petrol has any adverse effect on car engines. I believe that if unleaded petrol is of a certain grade - I think they use the term "RON" - if it is below 92, there can be an adverse effect on the valves of the engines.”
The complete record
Every one of 302 lines we hold for Koh Lam Son, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 7.
“It seems to me that a long Presidential election period is both costly and wasteful to the nation. It would divert resources and attention from development as well as undermine economic confidence. Our past parliamentary elections involving many candidates have had a nine day duration. A Presidential election involving only a handful of candidates would do equally well with a short duration. This is also partly because the Presidential election candidates have already been certified by the Presidential Elections Committee. The short duration is really just meant for campaigning, the necessary preparation should have been carried out before and there are always ample signals for preparation time. The passing of this Bill itself is the signal. Sir, I would like to ask the Minister this question. Since the Presidential Elections Committee is there to certify the Presidential candidate, is it then necessary to provide for a deposit that is three times the amount payable by a candidate in a parliamentary election? Finally, would the Minister assure the House that all measures have been taken to prevent an accidental breakage of the seals of the ballot boxes by people handling them? For example, will wax seals instead of perforated paper seals be used, since the latter is more liable to accidental breakage?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise to support this Bill, and I would like to comment on some aspects of it. Since independence, election in Singapore has always been clean and fair. This is recognised by Singaporeans and they have come to expect this of a good Government. I believe one key reason for this is the Government's deliberate effort to keep money politics out by strict regulations and by placing a cap on the election expenditure. Similar to the Parliamentary Elections Act, the Presidential Elections Bill stipulates the maximum allowable election expenditure of $600,000, or 30 cents per elector on the registers, whichever is the greater. At the last parlia- mentary sitting, Mr Chiam See Tong has correctly referred to the dangers of money politics. However, he is mistaken by suggesting that the Government is encouraging it. Far from it. The Government has consistently placed a strict limit on election expenditure. Look at the present provision. Can 30 cents buy a vote? In fact, the provision of 30 cents per elector is computed on the cost of basic election expenses without trimmings. This is the maximum sum. If Presidential candidates can do with less, good for them. This may well be the case with well-known public figures that Singaporeans have trusted. It is very clear that money politics is not allowed and the offences are specifically spelt out in clauses 39, 41, 42 and 50. In this House Mr Chiam has claimed that he won the last election on a shoe-string budget. I think perhaps this is the best illustration of the absence of money politics in Singapore. Sir, clause 16(5) stipulates that the election campaign period should not be less than nine days or more than eight weeks.”
“Mr Speaker, I think it is also important to have a phone at a place where there is an urgent need for it, and not just on how well utilised it is, or how many calls are being made on that phone.”
“Is it not true that in the first place the payphones in HDB void decks are for the convenience and accessibility of residents, especially in times of urgency, and they are not just based on whether they are well utilised or not?”
“Sir, this debate can go on, but I would withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The sum of $521,224,880 for Head P ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. The sum of $466,063,100 for Head P ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. Head R -”
“The Minister of State has not answered my suggestion of having a senior health service, like the maternal and child health service, in the polyclinics.”
“(7) To provide more theatrettes or curtains in the classrooms with the increased use of audio-visual equipment such as overhead projectors and slide projectors. These would help prevent unnecessary strain on the eyesight of the students. I therefore hope the Ministry of Health would implement an eye-care programme in addition to the existing dental care programme in order to correct this unhealthy trend of poor vision among our students.”
“I hope that the Ministry of Health and the Ministry of Education will set up a special committee to look into the causes of this increase, find out the root of this problem and put forward remedial measures to correct such abnormal trends. I am aware that the Ministry of Health has implemented a dental care programme in all primary schools. Under the programme, students are taught correct techniques in tooth brushing and "hands on" sessions are conducted for students in the lower primary levels. As a result, our students have acquired the correct techniques for tooth brushing and the standard of dental care of students has been raised. If the Minister for Health could also adopt a similar programme for eye care, I am sure it would greatly help to alleviate the problem of poor vision among students. I hope the Minister for Health as well as the Minister for Education would also take into consideration the following factors which affect the students' vision adversely: (1) The growth of surrounding trees and shrubs around the school could cause present lighting in the classrooms to become insufficient. (2) To consider the installation of light sensor system in the classrooms which would signify automatically when the light level is insufficient. (3) As an aid to eye care, tables and chairs with adjustable height to suit students of different stature and build should be provided in the classrooms. (4) Educating our students to acquire good habits while watching TV or reading. (5) Consider the standard of print size used in school texts and supplementary materials. (6) It is also important to conduct regular check-ups on the eyesight of students and ensure that they are wearing spectacles with the appropriate power.”
“They should also collect and collate information on the aged, conduct epidemiological studies on geriatric diseases, coordinate health education, train and reorientate medical students and medical practitioners and promote preventive geriatric medicine. There must also be an aggressive public programme for the elderly where the primary aims must be to get the elderly to understand that ageing is not a disease, promote healthy lifestyles and recognise the importance of periodic health screening. The elderly must also be in a position to recognise disability and symptoms of diseases and ask for help. Sir, a screening programme for the aged is vital, but it will be difficult to implement because of the cost factor. One way would be for the MOH to allow the use of Medisave from which GPs can get payment for treating geriatric patients. The GPs would have to maintain a register of patients assigned to them and provide follow ups periodically. Unless there is such a scheme, MOH will not be able to get GPs involved or committed to treating geriatrics, and that would be a shame for we all recognise that Singapore has a greying population. Mr Peh Chin Hua (Jalan Besar GRC)( In Mandarin): Sir, I would like to bring to your attention a problem which has caused concern among many people, ie, the increasing number of students wearing spectacles. I remember when I was in primary school, if one wore spectacles he would be the butt of ridicule and teased as "4-eyed" or "Doctor of Philosophy". Today, the wearing of glasses is so common that even Primary 1 students are bespectacled. I also note that many of our MPs are wearing spectacles and I myself have been wearing glasses for more than 30 years.”
“We must of course provide incentives and the care be subsidised. Sir, it is well and good that MOH has upgraded the polyclinics, but they reach only 30% of the population. The remaining 70% go to the GPs who, like the Minister has pointed out to me once, are too busy even to hand out leaflets on preventive health care. Upgrading of the polyclinics will pose a challenge to the GPs sooner or later. And here the MOH can consider a scheme for the GPs to upgrade their own facilities in return for ensuring that GPs actively promote preventive health care. Perhaps even the Skills Development Fund can play a role by retraining staff and provide such facilities as video terminals and other computer aids in GP clinics. The biggest problem, of course, is to get the GPs to be involved and one way perhaps will be to allow the use of Medisave for visits to GP clinics. Sir, the other equally important concern which I have is that so far very little attention is given to geriatric medicine. The aged as a whole must be regarded as a handicapped group or "at risk" group. There are many facets to their problems, like loss of family, social contacts, isolation that breeds depression and even alcoholism. Then there is loss of income, leading to less nutritional food and even medical care. Often, the aged find that minor disabilities lead to an inability to carry out daily living activities. Added to all this, some GPs handle their elderly patients in a cursory manner, leading to the repeat prescription type consultation which simply means that the elderly do not get the attention they warrant. Sir, the MOH must formulate a national plan for geriatric service with a view to establishing, firstly, an "at risk" register.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head P be reduced by $10 in respect of Code PE 1500 of the Main Estimates. Sir, I am going to speak on the topic of preventive health care and I will not say anything that I have any personal interest in. But in the event of being wrongly implied, I will declare my pecuniary interest as a private medical specialist. Sir, the Ministry of Health has done well with its hospital care programme with restructured hospitals and better medical care in general. But I remain quite disappointed with its preventive health care programme. There has not been enough attention despite the Minister's statement some five years ago that preventive care was going to assume the highest priority. In that time, there has been no programme worthy of note. In as far as resources are concerned, the bulk is still being channelled for hospital services with only a small increase in preventive health care. I note too with disappointment that the Ministry of Health (MOH) does not think it sufficiently important to include preventive health care as among the areas that the Review Committee will look into. When MOH talks of its national education health campaigns and its immunisation programmes, they are not new programmes. They have been going on for many years. Even its screening programmes are not widespread enough and do not reach the target group. I think it is time that MOH became more innovative and devised schemes to reach a wider mass. For instance, why can it not introduce a scheme like the maternal and child care programme where all pregnant women are screened and new borns given immunisation? We can call it the senior health care service for people above the age of 50 to be given the opportunity for a regular health check.”
“Mr Chairman, I am happy to report to this House that the family service centre (FSC) is a good example of a new social service brought about by many helping hands - the official and the voluntary. The FSC is financially supported by the Ministry of Community Development and operated by willing hands as volunteers. The people also seem to have accepted the fact that some services need to be handed over. So even social services need not be provided by the Government only. In many ways, the FSC has turned out to be a very effective method of obtaining services for those in need. However, people who are involved in the setting up of voluntary organisations, such as the family service centre, want to be assured that the Government has not divested all interests in social service. The Government must continue to adopt a high profile in such activities. It must be seen as a joint venture between two equal partners, the Government and the volunteers, not only in funding but the official hand must be seen to provide leadership, guidance and backup. I am glad to hear the Minister say just now that the Ministry is implementing the new policy of a 50-50% funding and that $92 million has been set aside for this purpose. But it is also true, as Dr Vasoo has said, that in some welfare voluntary organisations, they found themselves in a state of flux because they are still very unclear of this new policy as to which social service qualifies for this 50-50% funding and whether there will be a periodic review and, for this uncertainty, many programmes may be put on the hold. Sir, I would like to ask the Minister for more details on this.”
“He should not, in my view, be a civil servant or ex-civil servant, but someone who has an understanding of the civil service, in tune with the hopes and expectations of the public and a grasp of the needs of the business community and financial institutions. In other words, someone who is an all-rounder, and perhaps that ideal person could be found in this House itself.”
“Sir, our civil service has proved to be efficient, honest and hardworking. It is a hallmark of our success and we owe much to the men and women in our civil service for the fruits that we enjoy today. Recently, the Ministry of Finance has introduced the block vote budget to provide the various Ministries with greater autonomy and flexibility. The Management Services Department and the National Computer Board have also done much to streamline and upgrade services. I understand there is also an on-going training programme to provide civil servants with communication skills. Indeed, after all this, we have seen some results. But the basic problems of the civil service lie unresolved. Many departments are still beset with cumbersome red tape and still function like a lumbering giant. Many civil servants are still unwilling to make or take decisions. They prefer instead to pass the buck upwards. The civil service guards very zealously its pecking order, a legacy of the post-colonial past. I observe that whenever a Government service is restructured or corporatised, it becomes more efficient, friendly and competitive. A case in point is the restructured Government hospital. Sir, what we need is a new order, new direction, new skills, greater openness and a willingness and commitment to provide quality service. How will the proposed Service Quality Improvement Unit play its role? I hope it will have more teeth to bite than the Feedback Unit, with due respect to Mr Chandra Das. Will it only play a watchdog role or will it also be actively involved in assisting Ministries to upgrade the quality of service? Sir, the person who heads the Service Quality Improvement Unit must be independent and impartial.”
“No one else would do it for us. We have to do it all ourselves. So unless litterbugs clean up the act, we must make sure that they do not dirty our environment. I would like to ask the Minister whether he would consider increasing its own manpower to keep our city clean and green. And, if not, maybe the increment of manpower can come about by way of using other uniformed groups, such as other environment officers who are not presently involved, and what about the Traffic Police, Volunteer Special Constabulary, or even the national servicemen?”
“Sir, a civilised society takes good care of its environment. Our Singapore society is edging towards that type of a civilised society. But in the meantime, we do face real but manageable problems in littering, spitting in public places and improper use of public toilets. While Singaporeans are proud of our city, I have noticed, like my GPC Chairman, that littering is still a problem in our housing estates. The housing estates are spick and span once our hardworking cleaners have done their job. But come late afternoon, litters begin to pile up. This problem gets worse when inconsiderate people spit in public places. Previously, HDB officers used to police our housing estates. Now town councils are called upon to do the job, but they do not have sufficient manpower to do the policing. So what can be done? There is a suggestion, as my GPC Chairman has stated, to get the volunteer enforcing officers to issue tickets to the litterbugs and the spitters. But is this desirable? If so, how do we go about getting and training the volunteers? I remember that some two years ago the Minister for the Environment made a call in this House to ask the public to give a helping hand by reporting spitting cases. May I humbly ask him how was the response thus far? I would like to second guess that unless there is a major disaster like, say, the East Coast beach is seriously polluted, it may be difficult to get volunteers to help. Most Singaporeans are reticent by nature. They would prefer others to do the summoning. But do we need people to enforce the law? How then do we do that? Somehow, manpower must be increased to ensure that the litterbugs and the spitters do not continue to dirty our clean city. We are one and only one city-state. We need to take good care of it.”
“Sir, I believe that upgrading the facilities should be the first step, and a better way for the stallholders and for the community at large. 12.45 pm I also wish to state that complaints that customers are shortchanged with poor quality food and badly prepared food is a fact, but it is a separate issue. Yes, I agree that people should not be subjected to this at all, but the answer is not to immediately privatise and leave the stallholders high and dry. We must solve that problem too. Give him a chance to improve, upgrade the facilities and then he will have no choice but to upgrade the quality of his food. I urge the Ministry to carefully study the matter and give due consideration to the plight of stallholders before going ahead with its plan to privatise. That hawker centres will one day be modern and managed in a commercial way is inevitable, but let us be extremely careful in its implementation.”
“Sir, I wish to raise the issue on the privatisation of hawker centres. It has now been more than two years since the Government decided that hawker centres be sold or leased to private groups to run on a commercial basis. My question to the Minister is simply this. Is the Government going ahead with its plans? Sir, there is concern from stallholders that this is going to cause some amount of hardship. After all, most of the stallholders have got there because of hardship problem and if in the beginning we were prepared to help them, it would appear that now, some years later, we are withdrawing our service to them. I think more important is to consider assisting existing stallholders to upgrade the older hawker centres which are not doing well, ensure the quality of food is good, it is nutritional and generally help the business of the centre. When all this is in place, then we can go ahead with the privatisation. If we go ahead with the programme, the high cost will naturally affect many stallholders. This programme can be implemented in new centres when everybody starts from square one and also in those that are doing extremely well like the Newton Hawker Centre, for example, where stallholders are definitely making quite a bit of money. For them to pay market rates and not enjoy the high subsidy will be no problem at all. But we certainly cannot say the same with some, say, in Telok Blangah and in some other parts of the country. We must also accept the fact that many of the stallholders are our senior citizens. We cannot expect them to relocate easily or find alternative employment. Even if we allow them to stay in the newly privatised centres, I do not believe they can cope with the introduction of high-tech methods that these centres would have.”
“I wish to withdraw the amendment, Sir. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The sum of $333,579,010 for Head U ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. The sum of $2,777,190,700 for Head U ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. Head L -”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head U be reduced by $10 in respect of Code UJ 3400 of the Main Estimates. Sir, I wish to bring two problems to the attention of the Ministry faced by the Town Councils in carrying out its bread-and-butter duties. First, I would like to point out that it appears there is an overlap of functions between the Town Councils and the HDB and this has caused a little confusion among the residents as to which functions the Town Councils have taken over and which functions are still run by HDB. Presently, Town Councils are taking a public relations drive to explain to the residents what its duties are and where the HDB comes into play. And I would like to seek more cooperation from HDB to help the Town Councils in this job. The second issue which I would like to raise is regarding the Community Improvement Project Committee (CIPC) fund. I would like to request the Ministry to increase the fund which, at the moment, stands at $10 million. I think this is not adequate for the Town Councils to carry out the interim upgrading programme. I hope that the Ministry will consider this and I would also like to request that the list of projects eligible for qualification for the CIPC fund should be extended to include other items such as the upgrading of lift lobbies, which many MPs will agree, is a very common request by residents, and also the inclusion of other common places, corridors, and even the facade of blocks.”
“Yet, we still face the problem of not having enough trained nurses and paramedical staff. With modern techniques available and better equipment, medical care has also become more expensive. At present, almost all Singaporeans have Medisave to fall back on. But a ceiling of $15,000 is grossly inadequate, and this sum can be eroded quite quickly in the case of long and complicated illnesses. I urge the authorities concerned to re-look into this ceiling level and increase it to an appropriate level. Sir, I would also like to see improved Class C wards in the restructured hospitals, so that the quality of medical care is not confined to only those patients who pay high fees in the other classes. Mr Speaker, we will never be able to prevent the determined from migrating. Many will still believe that the grass is greener somewhere else. But we must encourage the rest to consider Singapore as amongst the best place to be in. The next lap is crucial in ensuring that we are a vibrant society of caring individuals where redress is found, where opportunities are plentiful and where everyone has a say in national issues. That kind of Singapore is not utopia but a goal that we all can reach if we are determined to build on the successes of the Independence generation.”
“We have introduced new schemes, changed some in mid-stream, and continually attempted to find the right formula. In that, the Education Ministry must be patted on the back. But, Sir, I fear that the child may have inadvertently fallen prey to the very many adaptations. The slow learner has really been left behind as the normal stream is almost a neglected one. Too little attention is paid to the students in this stream. Sir, this must not be the case any more in the next lap. We must improve on the teacher-pupil ratio and the education system streamlined to bring out the full potential in each child, academic or otherwise. I welcome too the move to ensure that each child will receive at least 10 years of primary and secondary education. There is also merit in the full day school scheme which will relieve some of the pressures on parents who have difficulty in obtaining proper supervision for their children because both parents are working. The other issue that matters most to Singaporeans is housing. The Government has already announced its plans for the refurbishing of older HDB estates. In that respect, we see what the Government means by increasing the assets of Singaporeans. However, the refurbishing programme thus far has been slow to take off, and I urge the Government to speed up progress. On the other hand, I welcome the aim of making even the lower-income group home owners before the age of 45. This would be a mammoth task and one which this Government may well be judged for having been caring enough to make even the lower-income group home owners. Of equal importance is the quality of our medical care. Upgrading of hospitals has certainly improved all round medical and nursing care.”
“The GPC will also be able to get feedback in a less formal way than the Select Committee to allow more people to come forward with their representations. I laud the fact that the Service Quality Improvement Unit will be under the Prime Minister's Office. Far too often in the past have we seen the ugly head of the civil service mentality raised in the way some Government departments deal with the public. How does an MP explain to his constituents why an application, say, in a contract marriage, has been turned down after five years of repeated trying, when the replies come in the standard format: "After careful consideration, your application has been rejected.". There must be better human and public relations in dealing with these problems of the public. The Service Quality Improvement Unit should not only monitor but also play a substantial role in organising a formal training of all the front-line staff so that all public employees are fully conversant with Government policies, for explanation can be offered at the counter itself. Senior officers, perhaps even the Head of Department, should make themselves available at the shop floor to deal with public queries. Mr Speaker, if we are to assure all our citizens that they have a major stake in this country, attention must be focused on a number of issues. Once again, I can only commend the Government for paying a premium to education. It must be every parent's hope to see his child's potential be reached, even if it may not be in the academic manner. We must begin to tap the rich resource of the non-academic talents of our young, so that we can create a pool of professional designers, builders, carpenters, boat builders and even, say, footballers. Our education system has undergone many changes.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of the motion thanking the President for his Address at the Opening of the Third Session of this Parliament. Sir, the future Singapore has been clearly spelt out in the Presidential Address, and I welcome the fact that it seeks to make our citizens feel and care for the nation while addressing the needs of all Singaporeans. No nation can hope to achieve progress, be it economic, social, or even political, if its citizens do not have a stake in the country. And, Sir, I am convinced that most Singaporeans are aware of the share in this country, which perhaps explains why many who left are now returning to resume their stay and rebuild their careers here. Sir, if the next lap maps out the Government's vision of the future, I see wisdom in widening participation in policy making and in softening the hard edges of the meritocratic system. I welcome the more active participation of the Government Parliamentary Committees (GPCs) in the formulation of Bills. However, I would also like to ask what status would public hearings or forums conducted and the feedback collected on certain Bills by the GPCs have. Would it be equated to the status of the Select Committee? It is also important to clarify at what stage the GPC should begin its function - before a Bill is presented to Parliament, after its First Reading, or after its Second Reading? For the GPC to play this new role, it must also have access to information and the services of the secretariat. If this is what the Government has in mind, then the higher profile of the GPCs must be seen as a positive step in widening people participation in decision-making.”
“What is more important is that the Government embarks on a proper publicity exercise, highlighting the positive aspects of these Shared Values, using concrete, factual examples. For instance, Singaporeans' readiness to serve in the National Service and to tighten their belts in the last recession are evidence of their observance of the value "Nation before self". The magnanimity shown by Singaporeans in supporting the 25th Anniversary Charity Fund is evidence of community support for the less fortunate. Similarly, by practising moderation in the teaching and propagation of one's religion among different communities, we show our acceptance of the value "Racial and religious harmony". Thus, with wide publicity and systematic implementation, I am confident that the Shared Values will have the potential to gain acceptance by the people. Besides, there are already signs of increasing social cohesion within our society. Mr Deputy Speaker, Singapore has thus far succeeded economically. It is also enjoying political stability. The Shared Values now constitute a complementing element that will bring us to another level of success, ie, social well-being. When these three achievements, ie, political, economic and social, are gained, Singapore can take pride in having successfully built a three-dimensional society, manifested in a harmonious social existence, material wealth and high moral standards. And if this is achieved, Long Live Singapore.”
“I feel the English form is rather static, in that it fails to show how dynamic is the function of the family. The word "tunjang" used in the Malay translation aptly conveys the idea of support and strength-giving. I would like to suggest therefore that the English version be amended to "Family the pillar of society". The meaning remains, in essence, the same, ie, a strong family makes a strong society, and disintegration of the family means disintegration of society. Next, Regard and community support for the individual. I think the word "Regard" is redundant, since it only repeats and reiterates the point. "Support" alone should do, as by itself, it already conveys regard and respect for the individual. As for the other two values, I think they are cogent, precise and concise enough. Mr Deputy Speaker, with reference to proposals on the value "Belief in God", I personally would like to see it included in the Shared Values. In my view, the argument that the country is secular and therefore this value should not be included fails to convince. Indonesia is a secular country, yet this counts as one of the values in the Pancasila. In Singapore, the number of people who believe in God and profess a religion, and this includes many Members in this House, is greater than the number of those who do not. Incorporating this value, in my opinion, will not in any way weaken or reduce the soundness of our Shared Values, indeed this will only strengthen them. We might say that without this additional value, our Shared Values will be just a soulless set of sentiments and aspirations of the people. On their implementation and acceptance by the people, I think the Government should not rush into this. The successful application of these values will require a long time.”
“These are noble values drawn from the tri-cultural web of our society, which is why they are acceptable to all. Berita Harian of 12th January put it aptly when it said [in translation], "the Shared Values are appropriate, comprehensive and acceptable to all communities". Among the reasons why they are acceptable is that they can be identified with by every community. All of them reflect elements common to all communities. On this account, they can be a source of strength and unity, and not a source of weakness and disunity in the society. Properly practised, they can act as a barrier protecting us from negative Wes- tern influences. They can also help mould our own unique Singaporean spirit and identity. Mr Deputy Speaker, I do not wish to repeat all the arguments that have been put across regarding the contents of the Shared Values, because all the reasons given are convincing. I wish to comment just on the form and presentation. I feel the Shared Values, if they are to be easily remembered, absorbed and imbibed by all, must not only be cogent and precise, but concise too. To give an example, some feel that the value "Nation before community, society above self" is rather lengthy, while "community" and "society" are terms of varying interpretations among the different ethnic groups in Singapore. To overcome this, I would suggest that the statement be shortened to "Nation above self". The spirit and interpretation of the value will remain unchanged, ie, in the final analysis, we have to sacrifice in the interests of the nation, which must take precedence over individual and communal interests. In regard to the value "Family as the basic unit of society", I feel the Malay translation is more successful in conveying the true function of the family.”
“We must be gracious in our lifestyles, in our behaviour, in defeat, in victory, and the manner in which we treat neighbours, not just next door, but neighbours across the borders as well. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, the shared values have been spelt out to create the ideal Singaporean. How do we make him a reality? Sir, that debate has already started, and it must continue. Encik Wan Hussin bin Haji Zoohri (Aljunied)( In Malay): Mr Deputy Speaker, having attained Independence 25 years ago, our plural society is reaching maturity, though it still needs constant nurturing and tending before it fully matures. If we relate this maturing process with the Shared Values, we would find a close connection between the two, and I will try to illustrate this using the following personification. Our maturing, plural society is like a young man who has just set up family and settled down in a certain village. The values of the village require him to make sacrifices, putting the interests of the village above his own. At the same time, the young man has to provide for and look after his family well. The values of the village also require its inhabitants to assist the less fortunate and the poor in their midst. The young man also has to absorb and practise the consensual and "gotong royong" spirit of his village. And in the village, he joins everyone in preserving racial and religious harmony amongst inhabitants of different ethnic and religious backgrounds. Mr Deputy Speaker, the young man is the plural society of Singapore. The village where he lives is Singapore, the nation. Just as the young man practises the values of the village where he lives, so must we, the plural society of Singapore practise these Shared Values.”
“I feel that in a document as important as this where values are expressed to motivate Singaporeans, there is no need to use the word "Contention", which in this context means "disagreement or argument". Since the style of the Government is consultation where issues are discussed openly, views sought and changes are made to suit as wide a spectrum of our society as is possible, I feel that we should re-word this value, as has been mentioned by Mr Chandra Das and Dr Hong Hai, to read as "Consensus through consultation". I think this does not in any way rob this value of its true meaning, rather it brings it into focus. And I can think of no finer example of this consensus reached through consultation than by reminding Members of the recently passed Elected President Bill. The Prime Minister himself sought feedback from the public, civic groups, and by convening Select Committees to accommodate views. We cannot expect our fellow Singaporeans to agree with everything we do or say. But we do not have to argue about it, rather we should discuss it. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I may have appeared to have taken the extreme meaning of the word, "Contention", but I have done so because I believe Singaporeans are aware of the need to work for the common good, no matter what the private view may be. Sir, everything that we are trying to create and build could come to nought if these shared values are expounded on Singaporeans who are not civic conscious enough. The ugly Singaporean is still around. Our public toilets are still dirty. There is still the problem of littering and the jumping of queues. It is important how the individual treats other individuals. We must get rid off this kiasu attitude. We cannot progress if Singaporeans lack concern for each other.”
“If it were to read in that order, then there is an intrinsic and logical connection which is amplified in the society's individual matrix, and as evident in the statement found in the White Paper, not to promote one to the exclusion of the other. Another reason why I would suggest that the present third shared value moves up to the second is that it qualifies and safeguards both society and the individual. A just society is placed above the individual for a just society also recognises the rights of the individual. Therefore, both the society and the individual can exist viably. If a just society is placed above the individual and, furthermore, a just society recognizes the rights of individuals, then in this context one can affirm that consensus instead of contention logically should be the next shared value. I say this because we are still on the subject of society and individual and how they relate to each other. And still on this society's individual matrix, as families are made up of individuals in the society, then the family must be the basic unit of society. This shared value follows the above three. If the family is the basic unit of society, the well-being of all families is supremely significant. Then it makes sense to set up family service centres to right wrongs in families to ensure a balanced society. All concerned individuals and institutions should support family service centres and other such institutions to bring about healthy family units. At this point, Sir, I would also like to make a suggestion to amend the wording of "Consensus instead of contention".”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, the White Paper on Shared Values is a well-defined document that must find favour with all Singaporeans. Sir, I rise in full support of the five values the Government has spelt out. I can only hope to add to its fabric by suggesting a framework in which these values can be imbued in our society, and I propose to do that by seeking some clarifications. On the first shared value - "Nation before community and society above self" - looking specifically at the second part of this pronouncement, no one can find fault with the sentiments found here, for it is quite acceptable to place society above the individual. But this is on the presumption that there is a just society. I hasten to add that only a just society deserves to place itself above the individual. If society is just, you can expect individuals to subjugate themselves to this just society, and only in such a state can there be legitimacy in these shared values. On the other hand, if this society is corrupt in whatever manner or form, then it would be disastrous to put society above the individual. If indeed society is corrupt, the individual must be in a position to call that society corrupt and ask for an accounting. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I would also like to suggest a more orderly manner of expressing the shared values. To my mind, as it stands at the moment, there does not seem to be a smooth flow and, as BG Lee said a moment ago, there was no intended order of the five values. A more logical sequence could be obtained if it reads this way: Nation before community and society above self; Regard and community support for the individual; Consensus instead of contention; Family as the basic unit of society; Racial and religious harmony.”
“Therefore, it is necessary for us to gain experience in the actual implementation of the Act and make necessary adjustments thereafter. I would agree with this point entirely. The question really is one on the time limit. Just now, the Prime Minister had mentioned four years. But what is the basis? Perhaps a better limit should be the remaining term of office of the present President. In other words, we should complete all the necessary adjustments and amendments within the remaining term of office of the current President. We all agree that the present President is a patriotic President and he has the respect and love of our people. But he was elected as the Head of State under quite different circumstances. This very onerous duty is imposed on him in the midst of his term of office. Personally, I think it is not fair for us to do so, even though I believe he would accept the task to undertake this difficult job as best he can. Anyway, I feel that within the remaining term of office of the present President, we should have enough time to discover whatever problems and difficulties that we may come across in the actual implementation of the new Act and make the necessary adjustments and amendments. Then, the new Act will be fully implemented when a new Elected President has been elected into office.”
“We should not stick to 45. We can lower it to 40. The second point I wish to raise, Mr Speaker, Sir, is that once the Bill is passed in this House, there may be unexpected problems surfacing after the passing of the Bill. The Select Committee thinks that there may be some unforeseen difficulties and problems emerging after the passing of the Bill. Then adjustments or amendments will have to be made. Such amendments and adjustments will not be subject to new Article 5(2A). In other words, such amendments need not go through the process of a national referendum. So the Select Committee feels that the provisions should apply only after the Act has come into force and after the necessary amendment or adjustment has been made. But the Committee did not fix a time limit. There is some mention in the Report that perhaps there should be a grace period of two years. Just now, the Prime Minister said that we should have a grace period of at least four years. Whether it is two years or four years, which is better? What kind of standard should we adopt? Is there any objective norm or criteria on which we can decide on two years or four years? The Select Committee has not really dealt with this point and there is no clear definition of the time limit. I personally feel that the very cautious approach taken by the Government in introducing this Bill is correct. After the debate on the Bill in Parliament and all the hearings in the Select Committee, the contents have been examined very closely and the various clauses have been properly amended, so the present Bill has become more comprehensive. But as pointed out by the Select Committee, this is a very new arrangement for which there has been no precedent anywhere in the world for our reference.”
“Just now, the Prime Minister said that the main reason was that the qualifications for candidates for the Elected Presidency should be more stringent than those applicable to the candidates for the Prime Ministership. That I can agree. But why should it be fixed at 45 as the minimum age? If a person is below the age of 45, but he has all the capability to perform the duties of the Elected President, then he should not be denied the right to stand as a candidate. For example, if we impose the minimum age of 45 on the candidate for Prime Ministership, then our Senior Minister Mr Lee Kuan Yew who took the office of Prime Minister at the age of 35 would be affected. So if you had 45 as the minimum age, then we would have lost 10 years of the benefit of his service. The political scenario of Singapore could have been different. Of course, Mr Speaker, Sir, I would agree that it is difficult to have a very objective standard or norm for the minimum age limit. If at all, a minimum age must be fixed, then according to Confucius, he said that a man could stand on his own at the age of 30 (in other words, he can establish a family), he would be non-confused or not perplexed at the age of 40 (in other words, he can think for himself) and at the age of 50, he would know his destiny (in other words, he knows the limit of his life). At the age of 60, he would know that his hearing will fail and then there will be no point for him to argue. So he will be less argumentative at the age of 60. At the age of 70, he would be able to do whatever he likes. He has reached the peak of his life. So if at all we find that age 30 is too low, because that is just the beginning of his career, then perhaps we should fix it at 40, that is, the age at which he will not be perplexed.”
“The point, Mr Speaker, is that a man of great leadership abilities with no financial background can safeguard our reserves -- the reserves which we have slowly built up over the years. So let the very stringent restrictions be removed, and let us allow Singaporeans their democratic right to elect a person they have confidence in. As a final point, Sir, I would also like to add that the Chief Justice or even a High Court Judge should be included in the PEC. For if a judgment of candidate is to be made, surely a senior judicial officer will be in the best position to judge the worthiness or otherwise of a possible Elected President. Mr Goh Choon Kang (Braddell Heights)( In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, the Select Committee has adopted quite a number of recommendations made by representors from members of the public. In general, this adoption has made the Bill more comprehensive. This is a good phenomenon. It has also brought about the realisation of the consensus-style of the new Prime Minister. Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to raise two points on the Report of the Select Committee. Firstly, it is on the pre-qualifications of candidates for Elected President. One is the age limit. The Select Committee recommends that there should be no upper ceiling on the age limit. I would agree, because different people have different strengths in spite of age. But I do not agree that we set a minimum age of 45. Perhaps the age of 45 is the consensus opinion of the Members of the Select Committee. But there is no special reason or basis given in the Report that 45 is the best minimum age that we should accept. No special reason has been given.”
“This person can in fact be appointed by the PEC so as to give the CPA a well-balanced look. By this, I mean this fifth member is neither a President's man nor a government man, but truly an independent person who in fact would have in himself all the qualifications to be an Elected President. Mr Speaker, I would also prefer that the pre-qualifications be kept to a minimum so as to increase the pool of talented and capable men from which a President can be elected. I say this because it is the most democratic thing to do. This system has worked well for us, Members of Parlia- ment. The people must have the right and the choice to elect or reject a candidate. I also feel that as the Bill presently stands, there is far too much emphasis on this expertise on financial management before a person can qualify to be considered a candidate for the post of Elected President. This, to me, is too restrictive. I feel that we would be depriving ourselves of many talented, honest and, in some instances, internationally renowned Singaporeans from standing for the post because of this proviso of financial expertise. As an example, Mr Speaker, a person with the international stature of Prof Tommy Koh would be excluded because of his non-financial background. Mr Speaker, I am fully aware that among the prime reasons why the post of Elected President is being created is to help safeguard our financial reserves. But it is also true that in other countries, Presidents, Prime Ministers, and members of Cabinet routinely function to preserve their national coffers. And may I add, many Presidents who oversee their national reserves do not have financial background at all.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, first, let me commend the Members of the Select Committee for being diligent in its proceedings, adapting and even changing to accommodate a wide spectrum of public views on the subject of the Elected President. Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to give the Bill my fullest support, even though I feel compelled to raise some points on the Bill. I am going to confine my remarks to a few areas which I consider need further scrutiny. Let me begin by saying that this Government first mooted the idea of an Elected President and, as such, I believe it will not allow any misuse or abuse of power. That being the case, we can accept the fact that members of the Presidential Elections Committee (PEC) and the Council of Presidential Advisors (CPA) would not be open to "outside" pressures, even though they all have been appointed. They may on the surface appear to be biased towards the Government's point of view, but we can be assured that this present Government will not in any way force its views on members of the PEC or CPA. However, while this Government will not fall prey to such tactics, there is always the question: would some other government sometime in the future be tempted to cajole its appointees to make the Elected President unable to function? The CPA functions like a "mini-Senate". It not only advises the President but also has the power to veto Presidential decisions. In my view, it would have been ideal if all the members of the CPA are elected members themselves. But this is not to be so under the present Bill. Under the circumstances, with two members appointed by the President, two by the Prime Minister, the fifth and final member, in my view, should not be the Chairman of the PSC, but a neutral and highly respected Singaporean.”
“Mr Speaker, I do not think the Minister has answered the question whether unleaded petrol has any adverse effect on car engines. I believe that if unleaded petrol is of a certain grade - I think they use the term "RON" - if it is below 92, there can be an adverse effect on the valves of the engines. I would like the Minister to give some assurance on that?”
“It is also my contention that eligibility should not be too restrictive. It would seem almost undemocratic if eligibility is confined to a select few, and not thrown open to a wider mass of Singaporeans. I would like to suggest that some MPs of this House should be considered for the post of President. There are eminent Backbenchers who have been very involved in parliamentary affairs, Members like Dr Tan Cheng Bock, Mr Chandra Das and perhaps even Dr Hong Hai, after he has served a couple more terms in this House. Mr Speaker, after all, it is from the elected MPs that members of the Cabinet are selected and the Prime Minister is the one who commands the greatest support of the elected MPs. It seems therefore perfectly logical to me that anyone in this House should be eligible and qualified to hold the office of Elected President.”
“What puzzles me, however, is the fact that in the absence of the Elected President, the Chief Justice fills that role. How can the head of the Judiciary take on such a role? What happens if the Elected President is incapacitated for some period and the Acting President, in this case, the Chief Justice, has to decide on an important matter relating to the ISA? Does it not defeat the Government's original objective of removing the judiciary power to act on a political matter? If at all someone needs to fill the role of the President, I should think that it should be another elected person, and who is more qualified than you, Sir, the Speaker of the House? What Singaporeans can do without is a political stalemate where the President and the Prime Minister hold differing convictions. It is well and fine to state that the President acts on the advice of the Presidential Council. That body will not be made up of elected officers. They therefore do not have the people's mandate. I am reminded of the Australian episode when Gough Whitlam was removed from office by the Governor-General for poor management of the financial and economic affairs of the state. An almost similar situation existed in Pakistan a few months ago. True, Whitlam never again made it in Australian politics. But can you write off Miss Bhutto? Mr Speaker, I am not suggesting that anything like that will happen in this House. At least, it is my hope. I feel confident that Singaporeans would continue to elect honest men and women into office. I am all for checks and balances, but I think we need to fine-tune many aspects of the Bill before implementation. For instance, I firmly believe that the people themselves must judge and elect the President, not a Presidential Elections Committee.”
“Sir, I am not too sure that the answer to not having judicial review is to have a political body in the form of an Elected President to exercise judgment on security cases. It would appear that one institution, in this case the Elected President, has far too much discretionary powers. This is especially so when it comes to dealing with the ISA. I think we should debate if the President should be empowered with such sweeping powers as to override the Government on such a sensitive matter. I know the Bill states that the Elected President can only act if the Cabinet ignores the Advisory Board set up under the ISA. The Advisory Board is headed by a legal expert, a Supreme Court judge. As such, he is eminently qualified to make whatever recommendations. The Cabinet may choose to ignore that advice for a number of national and political reasons known to itself. That being the case, I firmly believe that the power should stay with the Cabinet and not pass on to another higher political body. I think this goes against the grain of the second generation's collective leadership style. We have heard that the cornerstone of the Government is continuity. Far too much power is being concentrated in one institution and I fear that this could eventually lead to a two-party system in that we would have the ruling party headed by the Prime Minister, on the one hand, and with the Elected President and his advisory board functioning as another party. At this juncture, I would like to ask the Government why it has dropped the idea of having a Vice-President as well. Does this mean that there is the realisation that the Vice-President would have no role to play and so not having such an office would make sense?”
“There is also this notion that Parliament is abdicating much of its authority and it will no longer be supreme once the institution of Elected President is established. This is furthest from the truth. I think it would be extremely naive to even suggest that the supremacy of Parliament is being surrendered to another institution. It is Parliament that gives the President his authority and Parliament can remove him from office, if need be, as spelt out under new Article 22K of the Bill and under new Article 148D it can also overturn a Presidential veto with a two-thirds majority. So where does Parliament abdicate its power? What really could happen is that a future Prime Minister will find his ability to function severely restricted if the President is of a different political persuasion. It could have then the French experience of cohabitation where the President was Socialist and the Prime Minister Gaullist. We all know that it was a short-lived marriage with very limited success. In the light of this, is the risk of creating such an institution of Elected President worth the while? Apparently it is, even though it would seem that the President would be granted far too much power to act on a whole range of issues. For instance, his approval must be obtained for senior civil service, judicial and other important Government appointments. Now, to add to those extensive powers, the Bill states the Government's acceptance of yet another role or function for the Elected President as a check against the Cabinet's wide discretionary powers to detain without trial under the Internal Security Act. The Government has explained this as addressing the concerns expressed by some Members of this House when the ISA was amended to exclude review by the courts.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I can find no reason to renege on my earlier support for the Elected President Bill when it was first introduced in this House as a White Paper in 1988. My support then was based on the grounds that there was a need for such an institu- tion to provide the checks and balances to ensure that this country enjoys good government and sound economic policies long after our time. Now, the second White Paper has introduced new elements to the Bill, some of which need close scrutiny. I believe Singaporeans generally support the institution of an Elected President. But they would like some clarifications regarding the powers that that office will be empowered with. There are questions that need answers immediately. Indeed, they would like to know why the need for an Elected President now when the present system has been working so well. Why is there this fear that the national reserves will be plundered and national security compromised by some government? After all, Singaporeans would like to think that they elect honourable men and women to office to run the country. If any government is bent on usurping the national treasures, then even the institution of President is not going to prevent the act. There appears to be thisassumption that good government is going to prevail for all the foreseeable future. Mr Speaker, I know it is not some paranoia that has led this Government to suggest the constitutional changes. Some would say this is one way in which the PAP is ensuring that it remains in power in perpetuity. Rather, I would like to think that, with an elected President, the national reserves are protected, good government is not just seen to take place but also does exist.”
“This renewal process has seen Singapore benefit from the infusion of new blood, great talents, and dedicated men and women. It has indeed been visionary of the leaders of the earlier generation to have themselves succeeded by the younger generation. While the top leadership has taken this renewal process seriously, it is my hope that fresh blood can be injected into the grassroots organisations as well. The cue must be taken from the Prime Minister and the First Deputy Prime Minister who have carefully over a number of years introduced younger leaders into Parliament. It would indeed be a shame if our grassroots organisations, like the CCCs, RCs and CCMCs, cannot find new faces to bolster their ranks. Let us not neglect or fail. The young must come forth and serve our nation.”
“While MCD grants a sum that is equivalent to 50% of the start-up and operational costs, this is too little. After all, the FSCs are part of an essential service to the poor and to those who need the specialized service provided by the centres. Without greater funding, there is too much pressure on the operators of FSCs. I accept the fact that community leaders must attempt to raise part of the fund to run the centres. But I think it places too much of a burden on them to first serve in their various capacities in the FSCs and then also to be expected to organize schemes to raise the necessary fund. I must also point out that not all corporate organisations are forthcoming in their pledges of financial support. My own experience has been somewhat disappointing in that our appeals to the various foundations and corporate citizens for such funds for the Telok Blangah FSC has met with little success. Perhaps it is because I am not too familiar with the big boys, but whatever happens, I am committed to setting up the FSC in Telok Blangah. I would like to thank the Minister for Community Development and his Ministry for the kind support he has shown us with the allocation of an additional grant. And the other two responses have come from the 25th Anniversary Fund Committee and the PAP Foundation. Under these circumstances, I urge MCD to consider providing more funds to the FSC scheme. One other subject of importance which I would like to touch upon relates to the transition of leadership. I can think of no better tribute to the Prime Minister, Mr Lee Kuan Yew, than to state that he has paved the way for his successor to take over the reins of Government.”
“Upgrading of HDB flats, in a manner, also increases the assets of the owners. However, it is of little consequence to the owner to realise that his property is now worth, say, $100,000. He would have to sell his property to claim this asset. A roof over his head is his prime consideration and not the intangible worth of his house. I concede that the Ministry of Community Development has recently increased its welfare payment scheme. It is appreciated, but it is only a small measure. I am not calling for more hand-outs but perhaps a proper study and evaluation to determine who falls into this extremely low income group. There must be a basket of measures to help them. This can include lesser rentals, no income tax, less PUB charges, grants for school fees, subsidized meals and hospitalisation. I think this will be among the challenges that we will have to face as Singapore heads towards the next century. We must not allow some of our citizens to be deprived of the overall growth and progress of the country. In that respect, I see the introduction of the family services centres (FSC) as an important element in uplifting the quality of life in our communities. MCD has again taken the lead in creating the conditions for such family service centres to be set up in the various parts of the country. I am happy to state that Telok Blangah expects to have such a centre in operation before the end of the year. We believe that the FSC will provide an extremely useful service, especially since it is community-orientated. We have planned and mapped our strategy so well. Let us not neglect this very small but significant group of Singaporeans. However, in setting up FSCs, there are numerous financial problems to be overcome.”
“Sir, before the end of this session we will have a new Prime Minister who has proclaimed his desire to prorogue Parliament yearly to take stock of his Government's progress. Do we need any further demonstration of commitment? Some of our critics who have labelled us as being over-governed may still mutter that this is not enough. But I do not believe that the majority of Singaporeans can ever question the sincerity and desire of this Government to create an even bigger cake for its citizens and to raise living standards for all. What more can we do? There are obviously new challenges in the horizon. Among the more pressing is that related to the poor in our communities. We cannot deny that there are some who find it difficult to make ends meet to pay for the education of their children and even to meet utility bills. I am glad to note that the Government gives attention to this aspect and pledges, as set out in the Presidential Address, to "lighten the burden of bringing up their children". I also think it is a bold step to commit the Government to "increase their assets". While the Government may already have a scheme worked out, may I, Mr Speaker, suggest that the Government consider a lower CPF rate for those earning $500 and below and less school fees for those children whose parents fall in this category. Statistics show that only a small percentage of our citizens falls into this category of the really low income group. For that reason, I do not believe that getting employers to pay the major portion of the CPF contribution is going to substantially increase the cost of doing business. In these exceptional cases, the employer should pay the present rate of 23% and the employee pays only 15%. That would be one way to "increase their assets".”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise to support the motion moved by the Member for Tanglin in thanking the President for his Speech delivered on 7th June, 1990. Mr Speaker, Sir, there can be only a few governments in the world with such an overwhelming majority of seats in Parliament that pay this much attention to the needs of its people. In Singapore, democracy has a history of only a quarter of a century but we have seen ample proof of the sincerity of this Government, its willingness to subject itself to scrutiny, to fire retro-rockets for mid-course corrections and even to admit publicly that not all of its policies have brought the desired benefits. I have over the years had the opportunity to meet and discuss with parliamentarians from other democracies their systems and ours. Often I have been asked if we, the PAP MPs, really represented in Parliament all the diverse views of our citizens considering that all but one seat belong to the ruling Party. I have never been at a loss to explain the duties and functions of the PAP Backbenchers. I could sincerely say that it was our duty to represent all citizens of our constituencies even those who voted against us. Sir, I can point to one other premise to explain how the ruling Party govern Singapore. The very fact that we are now debating the Presidential Address after Parliament was prorogued a few months ago is ample testimony of the Government's commitment to its people. Here is a Government that asks itself if its policies and directions are heading the right way. It asks if more could and can be done. It seeks clarification on a number of issues. It invites the widest possible discussion on national issues. It re-examines past policies and it checks if new ones are really all that beneficial.”
“Finally, I come to what must be considered the most crucial aspect of this Bill and I ask Members of this House to ponder over this very carefully. We are inviting those distinguished citizens who for some reason do not want to go through the election process and become Members of this House in the elected manner. But they are capable of serving the country and we welcome their contributions. The Special Select Committee invites such a person to be an NMP and he accepts. That is a privilege that we Members of this House accord him. And he has all the rights of Members, except those which are spelt out. As it stands, he might even be invited to hold high office. But we provide him one more privilege that we ourselves do not have. We allow him, once he has tasted the powers and privileges of Parliament, to stand for a by-election as an independent without having to give up his seat. He loses the by-election but tomorrow both victor and vanquished are in this House. Why? Because we have allowed this NMP to have the cake and eat it as well. Surely Members of this House must recognise this as a gross injustice to the whole parliamentary procedure. If an NMP wants to contest a by-election, he must accept the verdict of the people. If he wins as an independent, well and good. He is most welcome as a representative of the people. But if he loses, does he have a moral right to resume his seat in this House as an NMP? As it stands now, it will be perfectly within his right to return to this House the day after his defeat in a by-election. I strongly object to this in principle and I hope Members of this House will share my view.”
“But because I may not be a Member of the Special Select Committee or a Member approached by the Committee, does it mean that what I may have to say will go unheard? With regard to the Special Select Committee, which is going to be all powerful for it will decide who will take seats in this House, my hope is that it will be as representative as possible. I next move to the issue of who should be considered for NMPs. I think it is laudable that distinguished citizens be invited to sit in this House to express their views. But I am not so sure about those that are going to be non-partisan or those having non-partisan views. I believe the idea is to have people who are not bound by party positions or intentions. But the Select Committee then goes on to state that even if a person has political affiliations, he need not necessarily be influenced or lose his objectivity. I find this a little difficult to accept. Surely a person who has joined a party must be influenced to some extent, otherwise he would not have sought membership of that particular party. The point I want to make is, everyone of us is going to be partisan at some time in our lives. So to avoid confusion, leave out the term "non-partisan" and seek only distinguished citizens to be considered as NMPs. One further confusion. The Bill seeks to introduce NMPs who technically can hold office. For example, we might find a distinguished citizen from the world of finance who does so well during his tenure as an NMP that the government of the day invites him to become Minister for Finance. Again, laudable, we have a top brain. But how ironic, he will not be allowed to vote on the very Bills that he will be seeking to introduce into this House.”