Koo Tsai Kee
Singapore
“Sir, I will forward the suggestion from Dr Wan to JTC because the Chinese Garden and the Japanese Garden are currently managed by the Singapore Leisure Industries Pte Ltd, which is a subsidiary of JTC. The National Parks Board manages a wide variety of public parks to meet the recreational needs of all Singaporeans.”
“Over the years, BCD has made sure that planning approvals have been speeded up. On building defects, this is something that the management corporations must sort out with the developers. If we ask developers to deposit more money with the Government, then this cost will be passed on to the home buyers.”
“Anything that stands on HDB land belongs to HDB. You are not supposed to remove, paint or vandalise it. But it is a small incident. We have to enforce it legally. Otherwise, it will become a precedent. If he wants to put up any signboard, he can just write to HDB.”
“Unless I have not done so, he can seek clarification. Question put, and agreed to. Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House. The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. - [Mr Koo Tsai Kee]. Bill considered in Committee. [Mr Deputy Speaker in the Chair] Clause 1 -”
“Sir, if Mr Chiam has any suggestion, we will be happy to look at it. SENIOR CITIZENS' CONCESSIONARY TRAVEL ON PUBLIC TRANSPORT 13. Mr Yeo Guat Kwang asked the Minister for Communications if he will consider lengthening the period for senior citizens' concessionary travel on public transport which is 10 am to 4 pm in the day time to 9 am t…”
“Sir, I think we are going off tangent here. These are upgraders. Your sympathy should lie with the first-timers, should you not? If we encourage upgraders to upgrade all the time, then the first-timers will be left behind. So we are talking about people who have already taken the first bite of the subsidy cherry.”
The complete record
Every one of 314 lines we hold for Koo Tsai Kee, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 2 of 7.
“My Ministry has not received any formal submission. It could well be lobbying for support to put in a project. SECONDARY SCHOOLS (Building plans) 11. Mr Ang Mong Seng asked the Minister for Education, with the planned conversion to full-day school of secondary schools, (a) how many more secondary schools will be built by December 2001 and (b) whether there is any plan to build a secondary school in Bukit Gombak constituency in the near future.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, my Ministry has not received a formal submission from the Potong Pasir CCC. So I have no record of a submission on the walkway. But the Potong Pasir CCC was given CIPC funds in financial year 1995 for five estate landmarks in the signposts in Sennett Estate, which is a non-HDB common area. If the hon. Member for Potong Pasir is asking whether his CCC has applied for a walkway, I have no such record.”
“Mr Speaker, I did not catch the question clearly. Can he repeat the first part again?”
“CIVIL DEFENCE SHELTER BILL "to require new houses and flats and new buildings which are subdivided into flats to be provided with civil defence shelters for use during a state of emergency, to empower the Commissioner of the Singapore Civil Defence Force to require civil defence shelters to be provided in new buildings owned by statutory boards and to designate any part of any building as a civil defence shelter, for use by persons needing to take refuge therein during a state of emergency, to regulate the use of civil defence shelters and to provide for matters connected therewith, and to make a consequential amendment to the Building Control Act (Chapter 29 of the 1990 Revised Edition)", presented by the Minister for Home Affairs (Mr Wong Kan Seng); read the First time; to be read a Second time on the next available sitting of Parliament; and to be printed. STATUTES (MISCELLANEOUS AMENDMENTS) BILL Order for Second Reading read.”
“Sir, HDB reviews the sale of tenanted shops to sitting tenants throughout the island. When the plans for the sale of these shops in this region are more concrete, we will approach the Member of Parliament and get his feedback. 1.28 pm BILLS INTRODUCED COMMUNITY MEDIATION CENTRES BILL "to provide for the establishment and operation of Community Mediation Centres to provide mediation services connected with certain disputes", presented by the Minister of State for Law (Assoc. Prof. Ho Peng Kee); read the First time; to be read a Second time on the next available sitting of Parliament; and to be printed. CUSTOMS (AMENDMENT) BILL "to amend the Customs Act (Chapter 70 of the 1995 Revised Edition) and to make consequential amendments to the Free Trade Zones Act (Chapter 114 of the 1985 Revised Edition)", recommendation of President signified; presented by the Minister for Finance (Dr Richard Hu Tsu Tau); read the First time; to be read a Second time on the next available sitting of Parliament; and to be printed. TOURIST PROMOTION BOARD (AMENDMENT) BILL "to amend the Tourist Promotion Board Act (Chapter 328 of the 1985 Revised Edition) and to make consequential amendments to certain other Acts", presented by the Minister for Trade and Industry (Mr Lee Yock Suan); read the First time; to be read a Second time on the next available sitting of Parliament; and to be printed.”
“Sir, there are altogether 72 shops (including four eating establishments) at Blks 440 to 446 Pasir Ris Central. Of these, 25 shops (including two eating establishments) at Blks 442, 443 and 444 have been sold under the Sale of Tenanted Shops Scheme in May 1990. The remaining 47 shops (including two eating establishments) are under rental. HDB has no immediate plans to sell the rental shops at Blks 440 to 446 Pasir Ris Central. However, HDB will take note of the shopkeepers' interests and the Member of Parliament's concern in purchasing their shops. Mr Ahmad Mohd Magad (Pasir Ris): Sir, if there are no immediate plans, are there plans at all to sell those remaining shops at Pasir Ris Central?”
“Sir, that is one reason why the HDB is tightening up the transactions of resale flats. Just to give Dr Toh an idea, the CEHA examinations are conducted by IRAS, as I said earlier on, and administered jointly by the professional bodies of the Singapore Institute of Surveyors and Valuers (SISV), the Association of Realtors (ASR) and the Association of Real Estate Agents (ASREA). In fact, the Singapore Institute of Surveyors and Valuers is the Secretariat to the Board of Examiners. Sir, these examinations are overseen by professionals. SERANGOON GARDEN ESTATE (Provision of power supply from underground cables) 10. Mrs Lim Hwee Hua asked the Minister for Trade and Industry if there is any immediate plan to provide power supply to the homes of Serangoon Garden Estate from underground cables as presently most of the homes in the estate receive their power supply from overhead cables which are unsightly and, if not, when he intends to do so.”
“There are several points. The first point is that housing agents are professionals. So there must be a minimum qualification, because they are dealing with buying and selling of a commodity that runs into hundreds of thousands of dollars. In a professional hand, a buyer and seller will have the peace of mind. This is the number one point. The second point is that it is true that since January 1997, only agents 21 years and above and who possess at least 3 GCE `O' level passes are allowed to sit for the CEHA. But some time back, HDB did make a one-off exercise to exempt experienced housing agents from this examination. In order to be exempted from the CEHA, the housing agent must be at least 50 years old as at 31st December 1995; at least 10 years' experience in the transacting of properties in the industry; must have closed at least 20 transactions for HDB flats; must have enrolled for the CEHA and attended 80% of the classes but unfortunately failed the examination. But they must submit the exemption before 1st July 1997. So those who have submitted before 1st July and satisfied these requirements have been given a one-off exercise of being admitted to the LHAS. Those who have come to Mr Ang might have come after the closing date.”
“Sir, the Common Examination for House Agents (CEHA) is conducted by the Board of Examiners chaired by the Inland Revenue Authority of Singapore (IRAS) with representation from the associations representing the different housing agencies. Since December 1995, the HDB has implemented the Listed Housing Agents Scheme (LHAS) to encourage housing agents to conduct resale transactions in a professional and above-the-table manner. To be admitted into the LHAS, housing agencies must ensure that their agents possess the relevant qualifications recognised by IRAS. There are now 416 housing agencies in the HDB's LHAS list. The Common Examination for House Agents conducted by IRAS has served the purpose of raising the standard of professionalism among housing agents. There is therefore no need for HDB to conduct another examination for the housing agents.”
“I want to repeat that the Ministry of National Development publishes its land sales programme and the number of units HDB will build, and based on these figures, the market will react to it. It is not for HDB or the Government to influence prices. We cannot do it. It is beyond our control. He is asking whether HDB will help the sellers fetch a higher resale price. You tell me how? TRAINED HEALTHCARE WORKERS (Adequacy) 4. Mr Ang Mong Seng asked the Minister for Health whether there are adequate numbers of trained healthcare workers to look after our greying population and the subsidised transport needs of needy elderly citizens who have to attend regular medical check-ups at the hospitals; and whether the revised ambulance charges will affect them.”
“You cannot say that there is a speculative element. Resale prices of HDB flats go up and down according to demand and supply and the state of the economy. And HDB has never said that prices can only go up.”
“Property prices go up and down. The economy is on the way to recovery. I think in the long term property in Singapore will only go up. But in the short term, there could be fluctuations. But we should look at the long term. Property is something that is not movable and is held for posterity. Mr Chiam See Tong: Sir, HDB flats are public housing. The Parliamentary Secretary says that prices move up and down. So there is a speculative element in it. Does the Government allow this speculative element to continue in public housing?”
“The HDB's building programme has been announced and the information is there. The people who buy and sell HDB resale flats based on this information should understand that prices can go up and they can also come down. And over the last 30 years, prices have on the whole gone up quite significantly. Right now, it is consolidating itself. It has still gone up by quite a lot if you look at the base figures from 1992-1996 and even the first quarter of 1997.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, it is a hypothetical question. I will not dignify that with a reply. HDB flats have not fallen by 30%. It has consolidated itself and I think the volume of resale transactions proves that the market is adjusting quite nicely.”
“The answer is yes. The Government has increased the assets of the overwhelming majority of Singaporeans. I will give an example. The selling price of a 3-room flat, which formed the bulk of the flats sold in the early years, was between $8,000 and $15,000. My parents' flat, for example, was sold, if I remember correctly, at about $10,000. Today, those 3-room flats are now sold on the open market at about $200,000. If you do not call that an asset enhancement, what is that? Even if they drop a little bit, 5%, 7%, or 10% from $200,000, it is a significant increase from $10,000. Does he not agree? Does he not call that asset enhancement?”
“Sir, during the Budget debate, the Minister for National Development has given a very clear and concise assessment of the property market since the announcement of the two policies in April and May. In the case of Dr Wang, I understand that some of his residents have difficulty selling their HDB flats at or above the valuation prices. In fact, HDB allows a six-month period for the person who has taken possession of the new flat to sell his existing flat. So his resident has six months to sell the flat. If at the end of six months, he still cannot sell the flat HDB, on a case by case basis, does allow another six months for him to sell the flat provided attempts have been made by the seller to sell on the market seriously. In other words, such evidence could be newspaper advertisements or reports from housing agents. In all, it could be a one-year period. So within that year, a serious seller asking for a reasonable price should be able to sell his flat.”
“Sir, that is not the case. Valuation prices are valuation reports.”
“The buyer has the option of selecting a professional valuer from the HDB's list. So these valuation figures are not provided by HDB. They are provided by professional valuers unless he is questioning the judgment of these professional valuers. The market prices change from time to time. Over the last few months, prices of HDB resale flats have fallen slightly but not significantly. In the case of a falling market, the valuation prices will always lead the asking price. Just like in a rising market, valuation prices will usually lag the asking prices.”
“Sir, I think it is still consolidation. I will give him some numbers. In July 1997, ie, 2-3 months after the two announcements made in April and May, the number of resale transactions registered with valuation, that means resale transactions with valuation reports, totalled 1,855. 1.7% or 32 out of the 1,855 resale applications registered with valuations were sold at prices below valuation. In other words, only 1.7% of the 1,855 resale flats with valuation reports were sold below valuation. The majority of them, 98.3%, were sold at or above valuation prices. Of these few cases which were sold below valuation, the difference between the valuation price and the asking price was only about 5%. So the figure is not alarming. In any case, the valuations are only a guideline. They are not numbers tabulated in stone that cannot be changed. In fact, valuation reports are very much like topographic maps. Very often, when a map is published it is out of date. In the case of a valuation report, in many cases, when it is published it may also be out of date.”
“Sir, since 1992, prices of HDB flats have risen quite high. In fact, I recall, sitting on the other side of the Bench for the last five years, that Members have been screaming that HDB flat prices have shot through the roof. I just said that in the last two years, HDB resale flat prices went up by 35% alone. This adjustment downwards from a very high benchmark is a consolidation. It is not excessive. It is not significant.”
“The Town Council (Use of Common Property) Rules 1997 was published in the Government Gazette on 31st January this year. The Rules prescribed, Sir, the uses of parts of the common property in the town which the town council can impose charges from 1st February 1997. The installation and operation of public telephones and call zone bases are not, I repeat not, specified in the Rules. Therefore, he cannot issue TOLs for the operation of public phones and call zone bases.”
“Mr Chiam may want to take note that this is one case that I have rejected a PAP Advisor for CIPC funding. Sir, Mr Low raised two issues. HDB has received two sets of applications from both the Hougang Town Council and the Hougang CCC separately to install illuminated car park entrance signages at roughly the same location. To prevent wastage, HDB, as the land owner, informed both the Hougang Town Council and the Hougang CCC to submit a single application. However, up to now, both the Hougang Town Council and the Hougang CCC had failed to submit a single application. I have spoken to the Hougang CCC Advisor and he will have a closer review. From the Ministry's perspective, if both the CCC and the Hougang Town Council want to build the same project in the same location, I think it is advisable for these two parties to come to some kind of an agreement. The idea is not to block the town council's project. The idea is to save the town council money. You may remember that in October 1995, Nee Soon Town Council, at that time run by Mr Cheo Chai Chen, wanted to build a linkway. The Advisor to the Nee Soon Central CCC, Mr Ong Ah Heng, also wanted to do something like that, but there was some dispute. Finally, two of them sat down - I think over coffee, I do not know - and decided to put in a single submission and the project was funded by CIPC, thus saving the town council money, preventing wastage for the town council as well as the CCC. In this case, I have spoken to the CCC Chairman who will come back to the Member and, hopefully, there will be some agreement. Mr Low Thia Khiang also asked why is it that HDB has prevented him from collecting the fees from the TOLs issued for public telephones and call zone bases. The answer is a very legal one.”
“Sir, I thank the Members for raising these issues in the Committee of Supply so that it gives my Ministry an opportunity to clarify the policies. Mr Leong Horn Kee asked why is it that CIPC does not approve funding for projects in HUDC estates which have been announced for privatisation. The principle is very simple, because the CIPC funding is meant to benefit the most number of people within an estate. The completed CIPC project must also be accessible to the public. Hence, his application for a linkway in Shunfu HUDC estate was rejected. Because, based on his submission, the project would only benefit a small fraction of a select group of people. He stated in his project that the CIPC linkway will benefit 168 dwelling units. This is less than 2% of the households in his constituency and the proposed budget was 30% of the estimated funding for the entire constituency for the year 1996/97. 4.15 pm Mr Leong also mentioned that it is not fair because it takes about two years after the announcement of privatisation to the time when the estate is actually privatised. But the property market does not move like that. The moment the Ministry announces a particular HUDC estate for privatisation, the real estate agents will assume that the estate has been privatised and this is reflected immediately in the resale price. If you look at the newspapers, you will find that the price of Shunfu HUDC estate has shot up because of this announcement and usually, after privatisation, the HUDC estate will fence it up so that the facilities will be blocked off to the public at large. So I think it is not fair for CIPC to fund a project which only benefits a small fraction of the people.”
“Sir, I thank the Member for Cheng San on his question on land reclamation. He specifically asked whether we have reached the limits of our land reclamation programme. The answer is no. For example, the land reclamation project at Punggol is the fourth and last phase of the North Eastern Coast Reclamation Scheme which was approved by Parliament in the year 1984. Under this phase, about 155 hectares of land will be reclaimed from the shallow foreshore between Coney Island and Punggol, which is near Punggol Point. Coney Island will also be enlarged and a water channel between 100-200 metres will be created between Coney Island and Punggol. A tender for the reclamation project was called in February this year and was closed in May this year. HDB is currently evaluating all the tenders submitted. The reclamation work is expected to start towards the end of the year and will take about four years to complete. If we take another two years for settlement and consolidation of the reclaimed land, development of the reclaimed land can commence after the year 2003. The reclaimed land is earmarked mainly for private residential, commercial and recreational developments with some mix of public housing under the Punggol 21 plan.”
“I think over time, consumers will know which are the good eggs and which are the bad eggs. You cannot tell a foreign importer that you can only label it this way. We are in a new age now. WTO rules have come in. We cannot restrict them to different styles of branding. Assoc. Prof. Low Seow Chay( In Mandarin): Sir, this time the Ministry has given some positive answers and they are more friendly. We have good eggs and bad eggs and so, under this principle, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.”
“Sir, the MP for Chua Chu Kang is very persistent on the egg issue. He said that there are two kinds of eggs in Chinese, hao dan ( ), huai dan ( ). The Chinese also say, hun dan ( ). But jokes aside, Sir, the labelling of eggs, including date stamping, alluded to by the Member of Parliament comes under the purview of the Ministry of the Environment's Sale of Food Act, but nonetheless my Ministry will answer him. Since January 1997, the Primary Production Department (PPD) requires eggs to be labelled to indicate their source, in other words, which farm the eggs come from. This will enable the PPD to take the necessary action, such as blocking the import of the eggs if any particular consignment is found to be contaminated with harmful pathogens or residues. PPD monitors the egg farms very closely to ensure food safety. They are extremely vigilant, so you do not see any outbreak of disease. The Ministry of the Environment has also indicated that the freshness of eggs sold in Singapore is generally not a problem and therefore there is no necessity at this point to make it compulsory to date mark it. My Ministry's PPD, however, actually encourages all local farms to date stamp their eggs for better quality control. We leave it to the farmers to do so on a voluntary basis. It is part of their marketing strategy. The Member claims that we should restrict the Singapore poultry farms to a certain branding and foreign imports to another branding. I think it is not possible to do that. We leave it to the market. If the local farms want to sell a high quality product, they know how to do it. In fact, on television, I have seen one farm advertising their eggs. I think it is quite a new approach.”
“Sir, the Ministry is sympathetic towards Mr Goh Choon Kang's concern. But it makes good sense to maximise the use of land around MRT stations. After sinking large amounts of public investment in developing the stations, we want to ensure that as many people from all over Singapore, not just within his constituency, benefit from the use and tap into the convenience provided by the development around the MRT stations. This means, in planning terms, high density development should be located next to MRT stations. Sir, many of our existing community centres or community clubs are today stand-alone, low density developments that do not take advantage of existing land use, especially in land scarce Singapore. The People's Association is already looking into this problem and is intensifying the use of existing CCs by integrating them with other compatible uses, like libraries, etc. Community centres are thus not precluded from being located near MRT stations, if they are part of a high density development which makes optimal use of the land. The Braddell Heights CC, which the Member of Parliament was alluding to, is immediately next to the future Serangoon Station along the North-East line. The site has been proposed to be rezoned for high density residential use. This is to fully optimise the use of the site. Alternative sites, within the vicinity of Serangoon Town Centre, are being proposed for the CC to be co-located with a community library. The HDB, URA, NLB and PA will be meeting soon to consider the various locations for this integrated development and we will seek the feedback and advice of the Member of Parliament before a final site is confirmed.”
“First of all, you can ask him. Secondly, he has just proved you wrong. In fact, he applied for CIPC funding to do a project in Sennet Estate which, I understand, is politically in your favour, and not in his favour.”
“For that you have to work with the CCC Chairman. The CCC Chairman is the best person to recommend the project to the CIPC. 2.15 pm”
“The answer is no. The system, as it is, works well. There is no need to change the system for everybody. Mr Chiam assumes that every time, the Advisor of the CCC in the PAP ward applies for CIPC funding, the funds are released. In fact, it is not the case. Many CCC Chairmen are lobbying me to release funds. In fact, not all the projects will receive CIPC funding approval. That is the first thing. The second thing is that, in most cases, the town council, if it is an agent of the CCC, will have to fork out a substantial amount of co-funding. I have looked through his Town Council's Annual Financial Report. You are in the red, Mr Chiam. I do not see how, even if he applies for CIPC funds, he will be able to carry out some of the projects. In fact, what he should do now is to quickly cut away some of the improvement projects that he has in mind.”
“Sir, I think his clarification is slanderous. He claims that the Advisor to the CCC applied for CIPC funding for his own benefit. In fact, Sennett Estate is a non-common property area. It is outside his control actually because he is only in charge of the common property which is defined as the area owned by HDB. In fact, if I am not mistaken, his supporters are in Sennett Estate. So the Advisor to the CCCs had actually asked for CIPC funding to benefit him. In fact, it is also not true that CCC Advisors do not cooperate with the opposition MPs. He will remember, I do not know whether he does, that in October 1995, the CCC Advisor of Nee Soon Central worked together with the then MP for Nee Soon Central, Mr Cheo Chai Chen, to apply for CIPC funding costing something like $51,450 to build a linkway. So there are instances that the opposition MP has worked very effectively with the CCC Advisor to apply for CIPC funding and this is one case that I can quote to him.”
“Sir, there needs to be a clarification on the question raised by Mr Chiam See Tong, the Member for Potong Pasir. He said that no opposition town council has ever received CIPC funding. He did not also add that no PAP town council has also received any CIPC funding because he elaborated that CIPC funding is strictly for the CCCs. I want to point out to Mr Chiam See Tong that in October 1995, the defeated candidate, Mr Andy Gan, on the advice of the CCC Chairman, had applied for CIPC fund to build five estate landmarks and signages in Sennett Estate, which is a non-common property and that project cost the CIPC $7,755. So his CCC had indeed applied to the CIPC and successfully obtained funding. So it is not correct to say that his CCC will never cooperate with him. The present system has worked very well. It is the extension of the URSC since 1965. CIPC funding has always been released on the advice of the CCC Chairman. I do not see any reason why a system that has worked so well should be changed. In fact, the Minister, anticipating that he will come late and file this amendment, has decided to answer the items ending with Mr Sinnakaruppan so that we can enlighten him again. He has raised this issue six times in Parliament and he is very familiar with the procedures and principles, and these principles are open for investigation. The system is totally transparent, and I am here to answer any questions he might want to raise further.”
“Sir, over the years, HDB has introduced various measures to increase construction productivity and hence shorten the development time for its flats. These measures include promoting "buildable" designs, encouraging greater use of pre-cast concrete components and site mechanisation. Through these measures, HDB has successfully improved the overall construction productivity. In fact, according to the CIDB's report, HDB's labour productivity in the year 1994 was three times that of the private residential sector and two times that of Singapore's overall construction productivity. Besides increasing construction productivity, HDB is also working very closely with contractors to improve site management so as to achieve better coordination of various activities and to reduce abortive works. MONETARY AUTHORITY OF SINGAPORE (Aid given to help Thai currency) 4. Mr J. B. Jeyaretnam asked the Minister for Finance what was the aid given by the Monetary Authority of Singapore to help the Thai currency.”
“Sir, a consequential amendment will also be made to section 13 of the State Immunity Act (Chapter 313) via clause 18 to provide for foreign states to be subject to provisions relating to their liability for GST. Such an amendment will remove any doubt as to whether GST is payable by the investment and trading arms of foreign governments and state trading corporations. Sir, I beg to move. Question put, and agreed to. Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House. The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. -- [Mr Koo Tsai Kee]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment, read a Third time and passed. STAMP DUTIES (AMENDMENT) BILL Order for Second Reading read.”
“However, it is still possible for debtors to get away by putting their money in joint accounts. The GST Act will be amended to allow for the recovery of GST due from joint-interests, with the presumption of equal shares for the joint holders unless proven otherwise. This provision is similar to that provided for in the Income Tax Act. Clause 13 amends section 79 of the Act to effect this change. Technical Amendments Sir, the following technical amendments will also be made: (a) to specify that money held by an appointed agent on the day or within 90 days of receiving a notice of appointment as an agent from the Comptroller can be used to pay the outstanding GST. The 90-day time frame is currently not specified. Clause 13 of the Bill makes this effective; (b) to amend the definition of "taxable persons" to make it clear that a registered person who makes out-of-scope supplies can recover input tax. Clause 3 makes this effective; (c) to amend the electronic data interchange (EDI) provisions to be consistent with the latest EDI provisions in the Customs Act since both sets of provisions refer to the TradeNet system. Clauses 2, 8 and 15 make this effective; (d) to allow for the remission of GST on the local supply of services, in addition to importation and local supply of goods, with regard to international agreements or arrangements. Pending this amendment, the remission of GST on local supply of services to organisations like the diplomatic missions is currently being done under section 89(2). Clause 5 of this Bill makes the amendment. (e) other minor technical amendments to simplify or clarify the provisions of the Act, and to remove the anomalies. These are effected in clauses 2, 9, 10, 11, 16 and 17.”
“This should remove the competitive disadvantage in the form of irrecoverable import GST faced by the local agents as compared to their overseas counterparts. Pending this amendment, remission of GST has been given to the local agents under section 89(2). Clause 7 inserts a new section 33A to effect this change. Tourist Refund Scheme In the first tourist refund fraud case committed in April 1994, the Customs and Excise Department was unable to take action against the persons involved because the details and conditions of the Tourist Refund Scheme were not specified either in the GST Act or the Regulations. Goods for which a tourist refund had been claimed were found in Singapore, but it was difficult to prove that they were not meant to be exported subsequently. To tighten the Tourist Refund Scheme provisions, the Act will be amended to prohibit the handling of such goods under prescribed circumstances. Clause 6 amends section 25 of the Act to effect this. Forfeiture of goods involved in fraud Sir, the UK Value Added Tax Act and the UK Customs and Excise Management Act provide for the power of forfeiture of zero-rated exported goods found in the UK and goods in respect of which tourist refund had been claimed but were not brought out of the country. The GST Act will be amended to similarly provide for the power of forfeiture of such goods. This will serve as a further deterrence for the offence. Clause 14 inserts new sections 83A to 83D to provide for the forfeiture of goods involved in fraud. Recovery of GST due from joint-interests The GST Act currently allows the recovery of tax arrears from a debtor's bank account or other properties through an appointed agent, such as a bank.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." Sir, the GST (Amendment) Bill 1996 seeks to amend the GST Act: (a) to provide for zero-rating of international telecommunication services; (b) to allow refunds of input tax to local agents of overseas clients; (c) to tighten provisions for the Tourist Refund Scheme; (d) to forfeit goods involved in fraud; (e) to provide for the recovery of GST due from joint-interests; and (f) other technical amendments to facilitate the administration of the Act. Zero-rating of international telecommunication services The GST Act lists a number of international services which have been zero-rated in order to maintain our local companies' competitiveness vis-a-vis their overseas competitors. International telecommunication services will be added to this list. Besides the fact that the services provided are international in nature, the international communication market is also very competitive. As such, the 3% GST would cause competitive disadvantage to our local service providers. This would erode Singapore's efforts to build itself up as a telecommunications centre. Pending this amendment, remission of GST has been given to our local service providers under section 89(2) which empowers the Minister to remit GST. Clause 4 amends section 21 of the Act to effect this. Refunds of input tax to local agents of overseas clients. Under the existing GST Act, local agents who import and re-export on their overseas clients' behalf are unable to claim back the GST paid at the point of import because of certain technicalities in the Act. The GST Act will be amended to allow for the refund of GST paid to the local agents since the goods concerned are actually re-exported.”
“The number of cigarette smuggling cases detected had surged from 36 in 1990 to 177 in 1995. The quantity of duty-unpaid cigarettes seized by the Customs and Excise Department had also increased from 300 kg in 1990 to 20,300 kg in 1995. To deter cigarette smuggling, the penalties for smuggling of cigarettes exceeding 2 kg would be enhanced by providing a higher fine and longer terms of imprisonment for both first time and repeat offenders. In addition, severe penalties have been provided for convicted financiers who are masterminds of smuggling syndicates. Clauses 12, 14 and 15 amend sections 119, 130 and 130(B) of the Act to effect these changes. To help the Customs and Excise Department trace offenders who are not caught red-handed in the commission of the offences, the Act has been amended to shift the burden of proof onto the owners/hirers of vehicles or lessees/tenants of premises used in smuggling attempts, to compel them to disclose their knowledge on the offenders concerned in order to exculpate themselves. Clause 11 inserts a new section 115(A) to provide for this change. Amendments to Facilitate Administration of the Act”
“Relevant agencies, including the Law Society of Singapore, the Law Faculty of NUS, Law Reform Committee, National Computer Board, the Trade Development Board, Singapore Network Services Pte Ltd, and the various trade associations and Chambers of Commerce were consulted. Their inputs have been incorporated into the Amendment Bill. Preservation of Records The Act has been amended to allow books of account, registers, stock books and other records to be preserved or kept by such means as the Director-General may approve. This would allow records to be kept in electronic or other forms. Such records, or documents forming part of the records, will be admissible as evidence only if in accordance with the Evidence Act. Clause 4 inserts a new section 90B to provide for this change. Prohibition Against Disclosure of Information Currently, there are no provisions in the Act to prohibit the disclosure of information which traders are required to furnish to the Customs and Excise Department under the Act. The Department had relied on the provisions in the Regulation of Imports and Export Act to reject requests for information. Nevertheless, it is desirable for the Department to have a non-disclosure provision under its own Act. In addition, certain information, such as duty payments made by traders or duty exemptions granted to traders made under the Customs Act, are not covered under the Regulation of Import and Export Act. The Minister has therefore introduced provisions in the Customs Act to prohibit the disclosure of information to protect traders' interest. Clause 4 inserts a new section 90(D) to provide for this. Combat Cigarette Smuggling Cigarette smuggling has been rising over the last few years.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." The Customs (Amendment) Bill 1996 seeks to amend the Customs Act to: (a) provide for the operations of TradeNet; (b) allow preservation of records in alternative forms (eg, in electronic form); (c) prohibit the disclosure of information declared by traders; (d) combat cigarette smuggling; and (e) facilitate the administration of the Act. Provide for Operations of TradeNet Sir, TradeNet is the electronic data interchange (EDI) system that is currently used for the submission, processing and approval of Customs permits. Using TradeNet, traders can apply for permits for their imports, transshipments, and exports, and pay their duties through electronic means. At present, 99.9% of Customs permits are processed through TradeNet. The Customs Act now needs to be amended to provide for: (a) the setting up and operation of TradeNet; (b) the transmission of documents required by the Customs Act through electronic means; (c) the admissibility and evidential value of documents generated through the computer service; (d) making the unauthorised modification of any data or program for the purpose of evading tax or duty an offence; (e) the appointment of any independent record keeper who will keep a record of all the electronic notices and transactions made through the computer service for a specified period of time. This period of time will be prescribed in the regulations; and (f) the periodic review of the operations of the computer service provider. Clauses 2, 4, 6, 8 and 15 amend sections 3, 90A, 92(1), 96 and 130(A) of the Act to effect these changes. The Ministry of Finance has adopted a consultative approach in drafting the TradeNet provisions.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That Parliament doth agree with the Committee on the said resolutions." Question put, and agreed to. Resolutions accordingly agreed to. CUSTOMS (AMENDMENT) BILL Order for Second Reading read.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to report that the Committee of Supply have come to certain resolutions. Resolutions reported -- "That the sum of $4,200,000,000 shall be supplied to the Government under the Head of Expenditure for the Public Services shown in the First Supplementary Main Estimates of Expenditure for the financial year 1st April 1996 to 31st March 1997, contained in Paper Cmd. 6 of 1996". "That the sum of $3,046,000,000 shall be supplied to the Government under the Head of Expenditure for the Public Services shown in the First Supplementary Development Estimates of Expenditure for the financial year 1st April 1996 to 31st March 1997, contained in Paper Cmd. 6 of 1996".”
“I think they have done great harm to the bilateral relationship between the Philippines and Singapore because they have provided (not to President Ramos who is our friend) the opportunistic politicians to burn down the relationship, to burn down the bridge between Singapore and the Philippines. Another point is that the hon. Member, Mr Low Thia Khiang, said that MFA had misread the political situation in the Philippines. I cannot understand. When the incident broke out in the Philippines, I think the President of the Philippines was not in the Philippines. He was, I think, at that time, in Denmark and at the height of it, he was in London. Is it our job to tell them that something is developing, is brewing and that they should do something? We believe in non-interference. It is their right to do what they like and it is our right to do what we like. Mr Speaker, Sir, there is no evidence that Singapore's international relationship with the world has been damaged because of remarks made by Senior Minister Lee or by Prime Minister Goh. Contrary to what Mr Ling How Doong and Mr Low Thia Khiang said, we are a respected nation worldwide. We are a small nation but we stand tall on the world's platform. In the United Nations, our voice is respected and the World Trade Organisation is hosting its first Ministerial Meeting in Singapore soon. It represents the high standing that we have in the international community. Mr Speaker, Sir, I support the Government's decision not to grant a stay of execution for the reasons that Prof. Jayakumar stated very clearly yesterday and I have full confidence in the criminal investigation and judicial system in Singapore.”
“I think they are inspired by the SDP who went to the Philippines to meet President Ramos. Mr Speaker, Sir, another point that Singaporeans must learn is that a foreign media, including the media in the Philippines, has said that Singapore is a police state. We cannot do this, we cannot do that. There are too many rules and regulations. We have rules and regulations. We do not pretend to be an unsweetened democratic state. But we do not stop our citizens from going anywhere. Singaporeans, like you and me, can travel anywhere we like, when we like. In fact, when we present our passports at the immigration counter in Changi or Woodlands, the immigration officers just wave us on. But I am told during the height of the Flor Contemplacion case, the Philippine Immigration Department stopped some of their maids from leaving the Philippines for Singapore. I cannot understand. This is a denial of the Filipinos' basic human right to choose what they want for themselves, the right to freedom, the right to travel, the right to free speech. And yet the Philippine media remained silent and also our Opposition remained silent. But at least, I think the Philippine media could have offered to donate the proceeds of their increased circulation to some of these poor maids who were trying to leave Philippines to look for a job in Singapore. Mr Speaker, Sir, it was quite clear that the whole episode was a political spectacle. It was regrettable that both the Workers' Party and SDP chose to join the media and this was what the Asian Wall Street Journal described as a judicial circus. I think they have betrayed Singapore's interest without even knowing it. Or maybe they did, but pretended not to know it.”
“" And incidentally, I read in yesterday's Straits Times that another Filipino maid, one of the many, had died in the Middle East, in the United Arab Emirates. This Filipino maid, by the name of Sarah Tabar, died because of induced abortion. But the Philippine authority, the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI), claimed otherwise. The NBI claimed that this maid, Sarah Tabar, died because of a premature delivery. And again, there was this scientific controversy. So Ramos suggested that the Gancayco Commission should take over and arbitrate. And do you know what the foster mother of the deceased, Ms Sarah Tabar, said? She said that she does not want the Gancayco Commission to have anything to do with her adopted daughter's case because her case would be politicised. In other words, the Gancayco Commission has very little credibility even to the parents and relatives of the deceased. And this is not the first time that foreign countries had executed Filipinos abroad. These incidents happen periodically in the Middle East but the Philippine media chose to remain silent. They picked on Singapore probably because their election time was near. But I think also probably because we are small and they know that the Singapore Opposition might join their side and apply pressure on us. If the SDP and Workers' Party were to remain united with Singaporeans on this cause, and if they just remained silent, I think the Gancayco Commission report might have been written a different way and the violence there would have taken on a different tone. But they chose to add fuel to fire. I think when all these factors come together they created this unfortunate incident. Mr Speaker, Sir, we have also read today that the Gancayco Commission is now on a 17-nation junket.”
“In short, what he is telling us (I hope Singaporeans learn something from it) is that it is okay for the editors there to run lies, day after day. It is okay for them to make all kinds of accusations in the press. In contrast, I take my hats off to our media. Our media published a fairly detailed account of the happenings in the Philippines and also the allegations and charges of the Gancayco Commission report. The media provided their version of the story, and we provided an objective, unemotional response, a point-by-point rebuttal. Unfortunately, my friend in the Philippines told me that there was a total blackout about what we said here in Singapore in the Philippines. Does democracy not give us the right to be heard in the Philippines? Basically, the Philippines had violated the most important charter in the First Amendment which is the right to be heard. And they denied us our right to be heard. They chose not to hear us because they were afraid that the truth might destroy them. At this point, I have to disagree with my friend and hon. colleague, the Nominated MP, Dr Kanwaljit Soin, when I read this morning's paper. She said that justice was done in the Flor Contemplacion case, but it was not seen to be done. I think she is wrong here. I think justice was done and it was seen to be done. Even an avid supporter of the First Amendment Bill like the Asian Wall Street Journal saw that the whole episode was a fiasco, as I said earlier on, and I quote again: `Manila's handling of the Flor Contemplacion matter has given up any pretense of legal impartiality and lurched into the realm of political cant.' The newspaper asked the Philippine Judge Emilio Gancayco, "Are you running for office? If you are not running for office, why are you creating all this hype?”
“Without the PAP Government, many of us would be perhaps too busy competing with the millions of Asians, some of them are Filipinos and some may be from other countries, as construction workers and maids around the world. But instead today, Dr Chee and I have the luxury of debating the merits of an alternative government. This is the triumph of the PAP Government versus the rhetoric of the SDP. And this is the reason why I equate the PAP with modern Singapore. Mr Speaker, Sir, the Flor Contemplacion case, unfortunate as it was, did have some salutary impact. First, it exposed the kind of leaders within the SDP and the Workers' Party. These people first of all are confused with the released press statements without knowing the implications of their remarks. And I think that if elected, they would deliver platitudes to whoever volunteers to be their audience. If Dr Chee Soon Juan were elected as Singapore's Prime Minister, I think he would go round the world and telling them the things they want to hear. If he were to go to the Philippines, he would tell them precisely the things that had kept them poor. In other words, he would condemn them to poverty for his own political gain. Mr Speaker, the second lesson from the Contemplacion episode is that it educated Singaporeans on the meaning of press freedom, on free speech. Press freedom gave the Philippine media the right to be wrong. In other words, it gave them the right to spread rumours, to seek malice and to provoke violence. I was shocked one day when I saw on Channel 5, 10.30 News, when one Filipino editor of a respectable press told our reporter that it was not their duty to check the truth of the story. It is only their duty to print it and allow the people to derive the right conclusions.”
“" I think because the PAP was doing a good job by pointing out what could happen to Singapore if we were not careful. And of course SDP is not happy. SDP would prefer that these examples not be cited so that Singapore could fall into the same trap. Because if the economy remains strong, then the SDP would have little chance of becoming an alternative government. Which incidentally brings me to the latest exchange between Dr Chee Soon Juan who wrote in the Forum page of the Straits Times and myself. He asked me to explain why I had equated the PAP with Singapore. He asked me to explain my remarks, suggesting preposterously that I should even apologise if I cannot explain. I will not write to the Straits Times' Forum page to give him space because he is really not interested in my reply. He is only interested in conducting a monologue. He wants space to continue his soliloquy. I do not intend to give him that space. But I am not running away from a political fight. I want the people in the press to know that I make no apologies for my statement to equate modern Singapore with the PAP. Rather, I wear my remarks as a badge of honour. The dark and impoverished days before 1959 (when the PAP assumed power) is something Singaporeans, like Dr Chee, would prefer to forget. But we should not. It is the PAP Government which lifted our spirits and well-being. It is the PAP Government which has given people, like Dr Chee, the time and space to oppose and criticise the Government. The time, because we have made Singapore rich so he can engage in this idle exchange. The space, because the PAP has created a democratic institution to allow him space in the Forum page of the Straits Times.”
“The Manila Chronicle said Senior Minister Lee's speech was done "without malice" and that the message was "not resented" by the Philippines. "Not resented" means they welcomed it. The Manila Bulletin in fact even went further and thanked Senior Minister Lee. And the Manila Bulletin said, and I quote: `... perhaps it takes a wise man from the East, a fellow Asian like ourselves, to remind us what is painfully obvious. One hopes that his visit will be the occasion for taking stock and, more important, for taking action.' From a summary of some of the leading newspapers in the Philippines, we gather that not only were they not insulted, in fact they welcomed Senior Minister Lee's speech. Mr Speaker, SDP's 10 examples - they quoted 10 - of how we had "chided, belittled, and poked fun" at our friends were all taken out of context. There was no evidence to suggest that our neighbours were offended. ASEAN is still one single united bloc. We are close to Malaysia, with Thailand. In fact, when Senior Minister Lee went to the Philippines to make his speech, he told the Filipinos that he hoped they will soon join the ranks of Malaysia and Thailand. In other words, we wish Philippines well and we want ASEAN to be strong, prosperous and be respected. When our leaders cited examples from other countries, the intention was not to put them down, or tell our neighbours how to behave, whether they should follow our practice. The intention was to educate Singaporeans on what lay ahead for Singaporeans if we were to ape some of these foreign practices. Who was offended? If you look at the press, only perhaps the SDP. So I asked myself, "Why was the SDP offended when our neighbours were not offended?”
“Prior to the two statements released by SDP, no press in the Philippines, and not because they are unimaginative, had linked Senior Minister's speech in the Philippines to the Contemplacion case. The SDP's mischief, however, met with widespread disapproval from Singaporeans across the political spectrum. Dr Chee Soon Juan's allegations - I hope he represents SDP, because from what I heard earlier on I am not quite sure who represents SDP now, Mr Ling or Dr Chee, and I do not see how come two separate statements were signed by two leaders; there should only be one leader and only one signature - that Filipinos took offence to SM Lee Kuan Yew's remarks were untrue. In fact, if Dr Chee had looked up the Philippine media on the day after Mr Lee Kuan Yew had made his speech to the Philippines Business Conference, he would have picked up the mood and sentiments of the Filipinos. What did the Filipino press say? I remember the Philippine media is always the accurate mirror of the popular opinion. The Manila Bulletin reported that the Senior Minister's remarks were especially "pertinent to the Philippines with its over-tendency to over-use the freedom of speech and to carry counterproductive speeches and investigations instead of enacting needed legislation speedily to get the country moving again." That was a direct quotation from the Manila Bulletin. The Malaya newspaper of the Philippines wrote the day after SM Lee's speech that Senior Minister Lee was too diplomatic, not at all rude, to tell the Filipinos off for all their democratic sins which made them and condemned them to poverty. Far from antagonising, far from insulting the Filipinos, they welcomed it. Mr Speaker, please let me carry on.”