Lau Teik Soon
Singapore
“So, in fact, you can have a situation where a new solicitor who has three years' practice can have one person who has not got three years' practice to be a partner, both of whom have of course not gone through the legal practice management course. I do not know whether or not that is desirable.”
“Sir, first, I would like to thank the Minister for his positive reply. May I ask the Minister that, in view of the unique structure of the food centre, his Ministry officials consult the Management Committee of the food centre with regard to the actual requirements concerning the roof?”
“Sir, in the event the Ministry concerned is not going to pull down the homes after full compensation has been paid and therefore the homes are left vacant, will the Ministry then consider allowing them to stay on at nominal rates? Because the homes are just being left vacant. Assoc. Prof.”
“And more than that, under the revised scheme in June 1996, owners of acquired shophouses who are doing business in the shophouse will also be entitled to ex-gratia payment. So I hope the Member will appreciate this.”
“Will the Minister review the situation in view of the fact that we are here discussing moneys which are rightfully that of the home owners and it is with a statutory board, not a commercial bank, and also that the home owners will return the money to the CPF after they have received the total compensation?”
“Sir, I agree with the Minister that if it is a charge by a commercial bank, the home owners will have no choice. But in view of the fact that this charge is by the CPF Board, which is a statutory board, and it is a matter of time that they will eventually return the moneys to the CPF Board, will the Minister reconsider his decision?”
The complete record
Every one of 491 lines we hold for Lau Teik Soon, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 5 of 10.
“Mr Speaker, Sir, can I ask the Minister, in view of the shortage of graduate teachers, that in the recruitment exercise they would give priority to the trained graduate teachers who are on relief teaching at the moment?”
“Sir, could the Minister of State inform the House whether there have been other such cases of impersonation and, if so, could he give details? BG Lee Hsien Loong: Mr Speaker, Sir, I do not have the figures with me. I do understand that this particular Lance Corporal in question had on previous occasions posed as an SAF officer and gained access to SAF camps. NORMANTON PARK HOUSING ESTATE (Resale policy) 3.”
“Here,l would like to put to the Minister that Singaporeans abroad must be given every opportunity to be warned of this provision, especially in terms of opportunities to renew their citizenship or travel documents. There are many Singaporeans who are staying abroad. They may have difficulties trying to renew their passports or whatever travel documents they have. So I hope that the Minister will ensure that every means is made available for these Singaporeans to maintain their citizenship status.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, may I join in the debate. I rise to support the Bill. Citizenship is not just a right, it is more than that. Especially for those who are naturalized citizens, citizenship is an expression of loyalty, of commitment, of dedication to the Constitution of Singapore and to the Republic of Singapore. When a person says that he is a Singaporean, what does he really mean? It is not just the legal status of being a citizen. It is also the emotional attachment to the country, to the Republic. When we say that Singapore is our homeland, there is an emotional attachment to think Singaporean. The Member for Anson confines himself to the question of rights, but here we are talking about provisions for deprivation of citizens who have for all practical purposes given up their rights. They have given up their rights because they have exercised the rights of nationals abroad, because they have stayed away for more than 10 years. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, there are various reasons why people want to leave Singapore. So be it. But for these people Singapore cannot be a convenient place for them to return when they face adversities abroad. I know of a particular family from Singapore who migrated to Canada. When they faced adversity, they went to Australia, and just recently they have expressed a desire to come back to Singapore. Certainly, although they were born in Singapore, we cannot ever consider returning citizenship to such exSingaporeans. Our only resource is manpower and aside from other qualities of the manpower we have, in my view what is most important is loyalty, commitment and total dedication. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, under the provision, citizens who have stayed abroad for more than 10 years may be deprived of their citizenship.”
“" All these defences, except the last, are traverses. Finally the confession and (hope) avoidance. So I feel that as the representatives of the people, we should have the credibility that has been demonstrated by our Prime Minister which enabled him to govern Singapore until today. Secondly, let us look at the Member's credibility. When he talked about defending ourselves - let us assume suddenly a Russian ship approached, if we were to follow his stance, we ought to surrender or something to that effect. We were only discussing the E-2C aircraft.”
“Or is it because some aspects of our policy, the public tone of the Government and its operational style has changed that has enabled him to enter Parliament, or perhaps by default, and only God knows best (wallahua'lam)? Nevertheless, I accept the two factors as facts. However, it was rather disgusting to me to note that on one occasion when the Speaker asked whether he was asking a question or making innuendoes after aving made the innuendoes, his reply was that he was only asking questions. So, we felt as though we on this side of the Bench are being enslaved. Or perhaps by his answer, he desires to enslave the Singapore society. Because we are all aware that in a defendant's defence, a lawyer has recourse to three ways. It may be inconsistent with each other but they will all be found to belong to one or other of three types. For example, he can resort to traverse, confession and avoidance, the third an objection in point of law. I think when we become the elected representatives of the people in this Chamber, we must maintain our credibility and conduct - be superior than the people, It is discomforting that such attitude or language could have been uttered by the Member concerned because it makes him inferior to the example that I intend to cite. Let me explain by giving an illustration which I gathered from a book entitled "Learning the Law" by Glanville Williams. When a boy commits an error, naturally he wants to defend himself. When his Headmaster said, "You broke the window of the classroom," the boy said, "In the first place, Sir, the school room has no window. In the second place, the school room's window is not broken. In the third place, if it is broken, I did not do it. In the fourth place, Sir, it was an accident.”
“There are also countries which need the services of the immigrant population, irrespective of whether they have become citizens or not, to help run these countries. However, for us, the foundation of our survival rests only on multi-lingualism, multi-culturalism and multi-religions. That is why if you take even an overview, you will find that the three major communities in Singapore, on every election, without fail, have been fielded by this Government. And, Praise be to God, until today we have been elected by the people, except for one or two seats over the last two to three years which the Opposition Members have been able to penetrate. So, basically, it is the credibility of the person that counts. Hence, over a period of three years, he succeeded in becoming the Prime Minister and continues to govern Singapore till now. Sir, I do not wish to be rude to the Member. He has also been occupying his seat for more or less three years now, but he is alone (from his Party) in this Chamber. I am sorry, I do not want to be arrogant, but it is a fact that he is so engrossed with this desire that I could feel it when he levelled his criticisms right from the debate on the President's Address until the Budget Debate. Since this aspect has already been dealt with by my colleague, the Member for Serangoon Gardens, Dr Lau Teik Soon, I see no need for me to cover the same ground. And what amazes me is that this is the person who has been elected by the Anson community, hoping that he could bring about some changes, some credibility, of course some form of respect could be accorded him.”
“So, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, may I suggest to the Member for Anson that if he aspires to develop the Opposition, he must fulfil these pre-requisites. And one of the first things that he has to do would be, of course, to have a thorough house cleaning of his Party and to inject new blood so that it may have some prospect of continued existence. 11.35 am The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Trade and Industry (Encik Sidek bin Saniff)( In Malay): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir,I am Sidek Saniff from Kolam Ayer. I wish to thank the Member for Anson for retracing history back to 1956 and quoting the speech made by our Prime Minister when he was in the Opposition in the then Legislative Assembly. I only wish that the Member had made a deep reflection as to why after only three years in the Opposition, he could become the Prime Minister, and since 1959 had continuously been the Prime Minister and carried on with the task of delivering the goods to the people of Singapore, although his comrades have been succeeded by new activists to shoulder the responsibilities of governing Singapore in the years ahead. To my mind, there is only one very important factor that has brought about the Prime Minister's success and the success of his colleagues and the Government. And that is, there is no other way for Singapore to survive other than to be governed on the basis of one fundamental factor, without compromising anything: that the government of the day must take cognizance of Singapore's plural mix, its multi-racial, multi-lingual and multireligious society. We are also aware that there are several countries whose security is ensured only if their politicians, their armies and religious groups are united.”
“We cannot allow for any employee who feels like it to down his tools and then to have the executives in the union to go on strike automatically, as can happen in the Western democracies. Here, we have a very regulated, due process of settling industrial disputes. So we have the Industrial Relations Act and the Employment Act. Does it mean then that we are not a democracy? This has to be so, the need to have industrial stability, because it is vital, imperative for political stability, for economic growth. And this leads to the other factor that we must always bear in mind, that Singapore has very limited resources, ie, land and manpower. And we have to be overly dependent on foreign countries for trade, for investments, and so on. We have to be concerned with the political systems in our neighbouring countries. So when we talk about parliamentary democracy and its practice, we must be aware that there have to be constraints because of the limitations of the kind of society we are. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, the Member for Anson in his motion talked about the growth of parliamentary Opposition. Any political Party that aspires to grow must have, among other things, effective leadership. Does his Party have effective leadership? The Party must have a good organization. Has his Party a good organization? The Party must be able to appeal to voters. Has his Party the appeal? And last but not least, it must have a good programme. Here, in this Chamber, Sir, Ministers of the Government have constantly asked the Opposition Member: What is your programme? What are your proposals? What suggestions can you give to enhance our economic growth, full employment, eradication of poverty? There was no response whatsoever. No programme. No effective organization. No effective leadership.”
“So, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, when we talk about parliamentary democracy in any country and, particularly, in our case, we have to look at the system which is most suitable to our social, our economic and our political conditions. There are certain factors inherent in our society which, if allowed free expression, could lead to political instability. Let me just mention some of these constraints. We are a multi-racial society. If we allow for freedom of expression without constraints as far as racial issues are concerned, then there could be considerable racial conflicts existing in the society. We have experiences of racial riots. Therefore, there has to be this constraint. No political Party, no politician can be allowed to champion racial or ethnic causes to the detriment of others existing in our society. Then there is the question of ideology. Those in the West would say we are not a democratic country because we do not allow the Marxist-Leninist Party to exist. So we are not a democracy. Clearly, if we allow such an ideology to exist in this country, then you create deep divisions because the brand of Marxism-Leninism in this part of the world is very akin to a major Asian power and that has racial overtones. So we cannot allow for that. Does it mean that we are not, therefore, a parliamentary democracy? Then there is the question of the trade unions and whether they have the automatic right to strike. These issues have been taken up in the Western press, and the Opposition Members, I am sure, are keen readers of the Western press. They are aware of the issues which are brought forward by the Western journalists. Industrial stability is crucial to our political development, to our nation-building, to our economic growth.”
“I do not say that there is complete freedom of the individual to do whatever he likes, to express his views and so on. There are constraints within those democracies as well. But the consequences of liberal democracies like those in the United States and the UK are evident for all to see. There are the positive aspects of their parliamentary system, but there are also the consequences which are evident. One can see the social dissent within those countries, the rampant strikes, the unemployment, the relatively low standard of living on the part of certain sectors in society. There are slums within those countries. Today, one can see, for example, the large unemployment in the United Kingdom and in the Western European countries. On social matters, in those countries, there is such liberalization that the people are beginning to react against those freedoms. For example, the question of freedom of the press or the dissemination of pornographic materials. The people are beginning to react against such rampant individualism which exists in those countries. That is not the type of democracy that we would want in Singapore. On the other hand, there are also those countries which call themselves democracies but are in fact authoritarian states, one-party states. Many of us, Sir, including you, have been involved in meetings of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association, the Inter-Parliamentary Union, and all those countries say they are parliamentary democracies. Look at those countries where they have one-party system. Are they democracies? But they call themselves parliamentary democracies. Again, that is not the sort of model that we want to look at.”
“Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker, for giving me this opportunity to participate in this debate. Sir, the Member for Anson, since his entry into this Chamber, has frequently talked about the lack of parliamentary democracy, the suppression of individual freedom, fundamental rights, freedom of organization, freedom of free expression and so on. I think most Singaporeans will not agree with his view that in Singapore there exists a form of totalitarian state where there is suppression of individual freedom, where there is no opportunity for people to express themselves. Over the years, since 1959 when the People's Action Party came to power, there have been considerable opportunities for the people at large to develop their participation in the political process. There have been elections since 1959, not just general elections but also by-elections. Anyone who has the qualifications can participate. Anyone can put out statements to the press. So there is no obstruction on the part of the Government to prevent the development of the political process in this country. Of course, the Opposition Member may be referring to the constraints which are imposed on the practice of what may be called liberal democracy in this country. I would accept that. There have to be certain constraints in the practice of parliamentary democracy. Before coming to that, Sir, may I just mention this very briefly. When one talks about parliamentary democracy, which model of parliamentary democracy are we talking about? I think that the Opposition Members have constantly in their minds the model of the United States or the United Kingdom or the Western democracies where you have considerable liberal democratic practices with very limited constraints.”
“Sir, is the Minister of State suggesting that the mass media, ie, the papers and the SBC, carry all the statements that Government departments put forward?”
“Sir, in view of the constraint of space on the part of the mass media, the mass media may not reflect accurately the Government's statements and explanation of policies. Can I ask the Minister of State whether he is satisfied that the mass media have, in fact, reflected effectively Government's explanation of policies?”
“Sir, I support the comments which have been made by my colleague from Ang Mo Kio concerning the problem of fires in high-rise buildings. Singaporeans are aware of the incidence of fire in high-rise buildings. They must have read of the fires which occurred in hotels and high-rise residential buildings in other countries and they must have read about the number of deaths and the amount of property damages to these buildings. Sir, I dread to think of what can happen if there is a serious fire in one of our highrise buildings. Thousands of people live in HDB flats. Thousands of shoppers go to shopping complexes and thousands of residents live in the residential complexes. Our citizens must be given maximum protection against such disaster. The questions I would like to raise with the Minister are whether the Singapore Fire Service is well equipped to deal with fires in highrise buildings, and whether the Department has the skilled manpower and the equipment to deal effectively with these fires. My colleague has mentioned the precautions that are necessary and should be taken by the property owners of high-rise buildings, and I support his suggestion that heavier penalties should be imposed in the event they are negligent in ensuring all these safety precautions. But with regard to HDB estates, I would like to propose that periodic fire drills be conducted for the residents in the HDB flats and that the civil defence organizations within the constituency be involved in a coordinated procedure with the residents and the Fire Service Department to deal with such possible fires. The Chairman: Prof. Jayakumar, you have 25 minutes to answer. Guillotine time is 4.00 pm.”
“Many people would like to have the Yearbook, especially the students in the pre-university and the tertiary institutions. So I ask the Ministry whether they have any plans to produce a paperback version of the book so that it can be made available to the public. Sir, at a time when the public should be better educated about Government policies, when the people are expected to participate in discussions and provide feedback to the Government, it is necessary that they are provided with up-to-date information. On this, Sir, I would like to suggest that the Ministry produce an 8-page weekly paper which will contain information about Government policies and programmes, about Government rationale for various policies, extracts of editorials of foreign newspapers, and articles of interest. These materials can be drawn from either The Mirror or the Singapore Bulletin. Such a material can be distributed to every household through various means, free of charge, of course. After all, the Singapore Bulletin and The Mirror are distributed free of charge. Every Sunday, many households receive, besides the usual newspapers, the Asia Magazine and until recently Today. Why not distribute such a publication through this means? In this way, Sir, the public can be better informed. They will have these current affairs materials in their homes as official reference materials. Then they can better understand the policies and programmes of the Government and thereby give the Government stronger support.”
“Sir, I would like to turn the discussion to the Information Division of the Ministry. The people need to have information about Government policies and programmes and the information should be given in a simple, clear and comprehensive form. Why is this necessary? It is necessary so that the people can understand the problems facing the country, so that they can appreciate what the Government is doing for them and so that they can realize that the Ministers have the interests of the people at heart when they make difficult decisions. Sir, nowadays, people are better educated. They want to be informed. The people are more interested in the decisionmaking process. They want to be involved. The people are deeply affected by various controversial policies. They want to be heard. The people are concerned with the various changes of policies. They want to know what is happening in Singapore. The role of the Information Division, Sir, is very clear - to provide information to the people and present to the people the Government's explanation for various policies and programmes. I ask myself: has the Division carried out its role effectively? The Division has at its disposal the various mass media - the television, the radio and the whole range of publicity materials. Sir, the Publications Unit produces a number of very useful publications and informational materials. For example, the Annual Yearbook, the bi-monthly Singapore Bulletin and the fortnightly The Mirror. But, unfortunately, these publications are not within-the reach of the people. Recently, there was publicity concerning the Yearbook 1984. The Straits Times calls it "a gold mine of information". But, Sir, it is very expensive. It costs $19.95. It is like what we call Bata price $19.95 instead of $20.”
“Thank you, Sir. We are here discussing the estimates of the Ministry of Communications and Information and we have not spent any time on the other half of his Ministry.”
“Sir, I have an amendment* standing in my name. Can I speak now, Sir?”
“Sir, can I ask the Minister of State how secure the water resources which are located outside of Singapore are, and what measures are being taken to guarantee a long-term supply of water from those sources? BG Lee Hsien Loong: Mr Speaker, Sir, the water sources in Johore are subject to the terms of the Johore Water Agreements, one of which runs for 50 years and the other one which runs for 100 years. They are not due to expire for 25 and 75 years respectively.”
“The reason why they were not able to realize the objective, in my view, is that in the schools they have had little, if any, education in the history of Singapore or in the nation building process. Sir, I think in the schools we should inculcate values of nationalism, of patriotism. And this is something that the schools should look into. I have often wondered why many young voters do not understand and appreciate the sacrifices of the early pioneers and the first generation of political leaders. I think it is imperative that in the schools, the young be taught our history and the principles of Government and values which are very necessary to maintain our stability and economic growth. The other point, Sir, which I would like to make relates to moral education. My colleagues have already mentioned moral education and the Minister of State has replied that moral education is being taught in the primary and lower secondary schools and that Religious Knowledge is being offered at the upper secondary. But I wonder whether social issues are included in the Moral Education syllabus. If not, I wonder whether the Minister will consider this. We mourn the fact that in our society today there are major problems of morality relating to the society - the breakdown of the family unit, too much materialism in our society, the permissiveness among the young, and so on. I wonder whether the Ministry would consider including a study of these issues in the moral education programme.”
“Sir, before I deal with the two points which I would like to bring to the attention of the Minister, I would like to refer to a point made by the Member for Potong Pasir. He mentioned that the NUS undergraduates were being muzzled and implied that they were not given the opportunity to express their views, comments and suggestions freely, particularly on political issues. Sir, we are all aware that in the NUS there are a number of associations and clubs. Aside from the Students' Union, there are the Political Association, the Democratic Socialists Club, the Political Science Society, and other clubs. In fact, Sir, the Members of the Opposition, including the Member for Potong Pasir, have been invited by the students' body to address them. And I am sure when he spoke his mouth was not muzzled. Sir, may I now turn to the two points which I would like to bring to the attention of the Minister, two points which have already been referred to but which I would like to elaborate. One refers to the curriculum in the schools and the lack of content in the school curriculum which can inculcate in our students a sense of political consciousness, awareness, of our history. Sir, I am not just referring to the teaching of History. I refer to the study of Singapore's overall development, how the early pioneers contributed to the development of this country, how the first genera- tion of leaders sacrificed to make Singapore what it is today. Sir, we know of the National Exhibition which was organized last year, but I am not too sure whether the objective of that particular exercise went home with those who visited the Exhibition.”
“In view of the Total Defence concept, will the Ministry consider coordinating the mobilization of not only the reserve units but also the civil defence units? BG Lee Hsien Loong: Yes, in answer to the Member for Serangoon Gardens, we will indeed consider that. We have practised mobilization of reservists. We shall be practising mobilization of civil potential of equipment, and the next step would be to practise both of them together.”
“Sir, I hope the review of the costing will be completed within the next few months. With that, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The sum of $64,449,350 for Head J ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. The sum of $19,292,000 for Head J ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head J be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead JH-01 of the Main Estimates*. Sir, this extension of time has given me this opportunity to raise just one question with the Minister. This relates to the desire of sportsmen and sportswomen in Singapore to have their dream materialized, that is, the construction of an indoor stadium. Sir, you are aware that at the moment we have an indoor stadium, the Gay World Stadium, but really it is a disgrace for us to have that kind of indoor stadium. So I would like to ask the Minister the state of progress of the plan to construct the indoor stadium and if he can inform the House when and where the site of the stadium will be?”
“So may I say now: Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head J be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead JA-01 Object Group 1100 of the Main Estimates. The Chairman: It is 1.00 o'clock now. We will hear the answer after the suspension. Thereupon Mr Speaker left the Chair of the Committee and took the Chair of the House.”
“If cultural development and economic development cannot match each other, then spiritual civilization cannot be balanced with material civilization. Then our future generation will become a people without cultural roots. Sir, in the past few days, from the debate I found that those Members who have raised the matter concerning culture were mainly Chinese educated. Perhaps these Members who have received Chinese education have thoroughly read the few thousand years of Chinese history and learnt about the rise and fall of Dynasties and about the vicissitudes of empires and the ephemeral ways of mundane affairs. Now they know even more that cultural achievements and spiritual civilization are things that surpass time and space, and surpass history and politics. They are eternal. Cultural civilization will exist forever whereas material civilization will fade away with the time. Whereas spiritual civilization is a rich heritage to us from our forefathers and it would give us the courage to face all difficulties, and it will give us the confidence to face a crisis and even enable us to build up from ashes and can stir up our hearts to look forward. The new leadership has proposed a culturally vibrant society which calls for the resolution and concerted effort of all of us to strive for and build. I do not know whether the Member for Potong Pasir has any suggestion to help us achieve this society, instead of just asking to be an adviser to RCs and CCC. He once called Residents' Committee members as rubbish collectors. I do not know whether he has asked these rubbish collectors to invite him to be an adviser to them? Just now I forgot to move the motion under my name.”
“" The day before, the Member for Nee Soon had said that although the Ministry of Science and Technology was abolished, the Government is still carrying on with the promotion and development of science and technology in our country. If after the Ministry of Culture was abolished and yet the Government is still continuing with the promotion of cultural activities, then it is a matter of joy. However, I am somewhat worried. Science and technology are regarded as conducive to our economic growth whereas Culture is deemed by some people as a waste of money. Maybe proper naming is a small matter to the Minister. But, does the Minister know that in the eyes of many people, the Ministry of Community Development is the sum total of the names for CCCs, RCs and other community organizations? Perhaps the Minister has heard what Confucius said that "If the name is not right, the saying would not be justified", ( ). The Minister for Community Development is also the Minister for Foreign Affairs. Among our neighbouring countries, other than Thailand, which country does not have a Ministry of Culture? Even the newly independent Brunei has a Ministry of Culture. Yet, we abolish what we already had. Whenever I had a talk with artists from these countries, I felt jittery. I was afraid that some would brazenly ask me why Singapore did not have a Ministry of Culture. I would not know how to defend the Government in answering them. I feel that if the new Ministry could be called "Ministry of Cul- ture and Community Development", at least it would give some spiritual encouragement to our artists. Other than about the justification of a name, I hope that other departments and Ministries could coordinate their efforts in the active promotion of culture.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I agree that ASEAN should stand firm on the principles for the solution of the Cambodian problem. But I hope that the ASEAN states will move towards the improvement of bilateral relations between each individual ASEAN state and Vietnam. With that comment, Sir, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The sum of $55,525,400 for Head 0 ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. The sum of $19,000,000 for Head O ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. Head J - Dr Ow Chin Hock (Leng Kee)( In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I do not know whether I should call you "Your Lordship" or "Mr Speaker" because the Member for Anson just said Parliament is a high court. Sir, under this amendment, I would like to lodge a protest to the Minister for Community Development regarding the abolition of the Ministry of Culture. Since the People's Action Party came into power 25 years ago in 1959, in every Cabinet there was a Ministry of Culture. The first one was headed by the present Senior Minister in the Prime Minister's Office. But this year after the change in the Cabinet, the Culture Ministry has "died" as it has been split into two parts, one part goes into Communications Ministry and the other part goes to the newly formed Community Development Ministry. This is a very serious matter. It is ironical that the abolition of the Ministry of Culture has taken place at a time when the new leadership has proposed that towards 1999 we have a vision of a new society which will be full of cultural vitality. Although the Minister may think that the name is not important and he may say "what is in a name?”
“So the trend of developments may be that the balance of power may become disadvantageous for Singapore and ASEAN. The situation, therefore, is not very promising. And if the trend continues, hen Singapore should be more prepared, should build up its defence forces and should strengthen its total defence strategy to meet any eventual threat. Mr Speaker, Sir, specifically I would like to ask the Minister what efforts the Government is taking to encourage a balance of power that would ensure our peace and security. What efforts are being made to move the Cambodian problem to an early resolution? And here I would like to ask the Minister to comment on the present status of the Cambodian problem, especially in the light of the recent Vietnamese incursions into Thailand. Finally, Sir, the diplomatic approach to the source of the problem in Indo-China should also be undertaken, ie, that we should try to reduce tension between Vietnam and the other ASEAN countries. And here, I would like to ask the Minister what efforts are being made to promote greater mutual understanding between Singapore and Vietnam.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 0 be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead OA-01 of the Main Estimates. Sir, I would like to ask the Minister for Foreign Affairs his assessment of the security situation in Southeast Asia. As we are all aware, regional security affects directly our peace, security and economic well-being. Sir, viewing the recent developments, one may conclude that the security situation has deteriorated from a year ago and there are certain facts to support that point of view. The Vietnamese have consolidated their position in Cambodia. They have recently wiped out the Cambodian Nationalist Forces near the Thai-Cambodian border. And more recently, Vietnamese incursions had occurred in Thailand. In my view, Vietnam today presents a greater threat to the security of the region. 12.30 pm At the same time, Mr Speaker, Sir, the Soviet Union is flexing its muscles more visibly than ever before. The Soviet Union has provided more military and economic aid to Vietnam, has built up its military presence in Vietnam and Soviet ships are plying the Southeast Asian waters more than before. In general, then, Vietnam and the Soviet Union, in my view, constitute the greater threat to the security of the region. How can we deter this? As we are all familiar, the Government's position is that one way of deterring this threat is to provide for an effective balance of power in the region, a balance of power between Soviet-led forces and US-led forces. But, unfortunately, this balance is being threatened: threatened by, in my view, the threat to US bases in the Philippines thereby weakening the US presence in the region, and by the US conflict with New Zealand, thereby weakening the ANZUS alliance.”
“Sir, I thank the Minister of State for his positive reply and I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The sum of $54,642,500 for Head U ordered to stand pan of the Main Estimates. The sum of $17,035,400 for Head U ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. Head F -”
“They have very effectively served the people at the grassroots. They have to a considerable extent satisfied the needs of the people, be they matters related to the physical environment, better transport system in the constituency, or better amenities. They have further effectively involved the people in various activities, be they National Day celebrations, campaigns and so forth. What I would like to speak on, Mr Speaker, is that the CCC, in view of the present effort on the part of the Government to get more effective feedback from the people, should be seen as the ideal channel of feedback from the grassroots level, and I would like to propose that the District Office and the Prime Minister's Office assist the CCC to play that role effectively. In view of the guillotine time at 12.25 pm I would like to merely enumerate my suggestions and to allow the Minister to have time for a brief reply. I would suggest the following: (i) That the District Office prepares papers on various subjects for the information of CCC members and for their discussion at their monthly meetings; (ii) That the District Office organizes briefings by civil servants, by experts on subjects on which the Government would like to have feedback; (iii) That the CCC should on a regular basis submit their views, their comments, their suggestions to the PMO through the District Office; and (iv) That the responses on the part of the Government be transmitted to the CCC through the District Office. The CCC has played a role in terms of feedback and I am sure the Government has appreciated that. But that role can be further strengthened. I hope that the Prime Minister's Office would strengthen the role of the CCC so that they be an effective channel of feedback for the Government.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head U be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead UD-01 of the Main Estimates. Sir, may I first pay special tribute to that group of men and women at the grassroots level who have made considerable sacrifices in terms of time and money to serve the people. I think I speak on behalf of my PAP parliamentary colleagues when I say that the people owe the CCC members in the constituencies a great debt. Some hon. Members: Hear, hear!”
“All these claims, Sir, which were filed in the Tribunals, were first processed by the Registrar or the Assistant Registrar of the Tribunals to see whether the claims could be settled through consultations between claimants and respondents without a hearing before the Referee. Of the 381 claims, 81 were settled through consultations led by the Assistant Registrar. Three cases were referred to the Referee, of which one has already been settled. The remaining cases are under consideration. Sir, it takes about three to four weeks from the time a claim is filed to the time the parties appear before the Registrar or Assistant Registrar for consultations, and four to five weeks from the time the case is filed to the time the parties appear before the Referee for hearing. Compared to the procedures in the Magistrates courts, the procedure in the Small Claims Tribunals is extremely simple. A claimant merely needs to fill a one-page form and service of the claim and other notices is done by the Tribunal. Staff of the Small Claims Tribunals Registry will assist, wherever necessary, and services of interpreters are also provided. The Small Claims Tribunals are presently functioning smoothly with the manpower provided. PASIR PANJANG ROAD/SOUTH BUONA VISTA ROAD (Plans for development) 3. Encik Abbas Abu Amin asked the Minister for National Development what are the details or plans to develop the villages/areas along Pasir Panjang Road and South Buona Vista Road.”
“Sir, can I ask the Minister of State whether the Ministry will consider granting scholarships to reservists who wish to study full-time at the National University of Singapore? BG Lee Hsien Loong: Mr Speaker, Sir, nearly every male citizen who studies in the National University of Singapore is a reservist. Our scholarships are limited, and our priorities are to grant scholarships to those reservists and also serving officers who will come back and serve with us as regulars and make a, contribution to the SAF. So if any reservist wishes to come back to the SAF and make it a career, and if we think that he is suitable, and he thinks that he is suitable for the SAF, we shall be very happy to take him and to award him a scholarship. SMALL CLAIMS TRIBUNALS (Progress) 2. Mr Goh Chee Wee asked the Minister for Law, since the inception of the Small Claims Tribunals, (a) how many cases have been brought to the Tribunals; (b) what are the nature of disputes; (c) how many cases have been settled by the Tribunals; (d) how long it takes to have a dispute heard and judgement made; (e) whether the procedures are simple enough for ordinary citizens to lodge their claims; and (f) whether there are manpower and other constraints that impede the smooth functioning of the tribunal services. The Minister for Home Affairs and Second Minister for Law (Prof. S. Jayakumar) (for the Minister for Law): Mr Speaker,Sir,as the Small Claims Tribunals came into operation only on 1st February this year, it is really too early to make any appraisal. Since its inception, 381 claims have been filed with the Tribunals. These claims comprise disputes in respect of the following: sale of goods cases, 139; provision of service, 235; others, 7.”
“Sir, can the Minister of State state whether land has been set aside by Mindef for other than non-military purposes, for example, growing of fruit trees and vegetables. BG Lee Hsien Loong: All land set aside by Mindef is for military purposes. Where we have an air base, a certain amount of land around the air base is sterilized because there are ammunition dumps and fuel dumps. These areas have to be set aside for safety reasons and for security reasons. You cannot build tall buildings on these areas, because they would get in the way of our aircraft. But rather than leave the land totally fallow, we plant trees, and if we are going to plant trees, where it is feasible, we plant fruit trees. SING-THAI FARM (Supply of pigs) 2. Mr Yeo Choo Kok asked the Minister for National Development (a) what is the future of the Sing-Thai Farm; (b) whether the supply of pigs will be affected if the farm is closed; and (c) whether alternative sources of supply of pigs from other countries have been secured.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, it is incredible that the two Opposition Members who are supposedly advocates of a democratic form of government should oppose this motion, We have in this country an Act which allows for opposition in Parliament. I do not know whether they are aware that there is no such Constitution existing anywhere else, where you allow for opposition in Parliament even if voters in the constituency vote against the Opposition. The real reason, I suspect, Mr Speaker, Sir, why they are opposing this resolution is that they think it will undermine their position. But whether or not the Opposition is going to gain strength or weaken depends on the calibre of the Opposition Members which, I must say, leaves very much to be desired at this stage. It depends on what programmes they have, it depends on whether or not they can provide alternatives. As far as the motion is concerned, Parliament is being asked to offer the seat to Mr Tan Chee Kien of the SUF. And I would say that we leave the SUF Member to speak for himself.”
“Is the Minister of State saying that the pregnant teenagers, with all the sophisticated facilities we have in our hospitals, will have medical and social consequences after giving birth to these babies?”
“In view of the tremendous increase in abortions as stated by the Minister of State, from 1,109 in 1979 and 1,787 in 1984, will the Minister or his Ministry consider abolishing the Abortion Act and allow the pregnant teenagers to have their babies and to realize the consequences of their act?”
“Then, if both parents work and if the family has no domestic help, there is no one to look after the children and property in their absence. For these and other reasons, in my view, there is the need for the presence of the police officers to reassure the residents, and hence, the necessity to extend the NPP system to the private housing estates. The establishment of a police post in the private housing estate will enhance the security of the neighbourhood. The residents will feel a lot safer with the post just a short distance away. The residents can assist and cooperate with the police officers in crime prevention activities, They can accompany the police officers as they go about their house to house visits or on their foot and bicycle patrols. The residents' association or area committee members of the private housing estate can discuss various crime prevention measures with the police officers. In general, the extension of the NPP system to the private housing estates will strengthen the bond between the lawmen and the community. Mr Speaker, Sir, after all that I have said, the Minister may respond by suggesting that the private housing estates set up neighbourhood watch groups in the estates. In fact, in Serangoon Gardens Constituency, there are neighbourhood watch groups but they are not effective. This is because it is difficult to keep constant watch over each other's houses. It would be better if there is a police post nearby and the police officers can patrol the streets in the private housing estates regularly and involve the residents in their activities. Mr Speaker, Sir, I hope that the Minister will consider seriously my suggestion and decide to extend the NPP system to the private housing estates as soon as possible. 3.46pm”
“An efficient policing system is needed for private housing estates as much as it is needed for HDB new towns. Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to ask the Minister why it has not been possible to extend the programme to private housing estates. Is the problem one of manpower, finance or space? If the problem is one of space, then I suggest that the Police Department discusses where to site the police posts with the members of the Citizens' Consultative Committee, area committee or residents' association. For example, in my constituency there are many housing estates - Serangoon Garden Estate, Tai Hwan Garden, Golden Hill Estate, Highland Garden, Richard's Park and Fortuna Garden. Surely, together with the community organizations, the Police Department can locate a convenient and strategic spot for the police post to be built. Mr Speaker, Sir, I hope the Minister would agree to the extension of the NPP system to the private housing estates because, in my view, these estates constitute in many ways a less secure environment than the HDB new towns. In a private housing estate, the housing units are spread out and many of them are located far away from the main roads, Street lighting is poor in many places and it is dangerous for young children, teenagers, senior citizens and others to walk the long distance from the main road to their houses, especially at night. In a private housing estate, you do not have a concentration of people living together. Furthermore, it is difficult for grandparents and relatives to stay close to the families, unlike the HDB estates where priority is given to multi-tier families to live adjacent to each other.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, thank you for allowing me to claim the right to speak on the Motion for the Adjournment and to bring to the attention of this House an issue which concerns a considerable number of citizens, ie citizens living in the private housing estates. I am not just speaking on behalf of Serangoon Gardens constituency. There are many private housing estates in Singapore. In fact, according to one figure, there are more than 250 private housing estates in over 150 locations in the country. Mr Speaker, Sir, last year, the Police Department made a fundamental change in its policing system and adopted the Neighbourhood Police Post (NPP) system. From June 1983, neighbourhood police posts were set up in the Toa Payoh Division. After a year of its operation, the NPP system has been evaluated and the result has been very encouraging. The success of the initial programme has led the Minister for Home Affairs to announce that the Government has decided to implement the NPP system throughout the country. From 1st December, a police post will be established in each of the 12 constituencies in the Jurong and Paya Lebar Divisions. According to the Police Life Annual, 1984, about 50 police posts will be established in existing major HDB estates in the present phase from 1984 to 1988, and that 30 more posts will be built in new towns, such as Woodlands and Nee Soon in the final phase from 1989 to 1991. Mr Speaker, Sir, a striking feature of the NPP system is that the neighbourhood police posts are to be built in HDB housing estates only. As far as I am aware, there is no plan to extend the NPP system to cover private housing estates. In my view, this is a very serious omission.”
“For having gained entry into Parliament and proved their worthiness, the way for them to return to Parliament in the 80s and 90s will mean a return with a real mandate from the people and they will be able to upgrade their performance in the days ahead. Finally, Mr Speaker, Sir, although regretfully I acknowledge the need for this amendment not because of my love for the Opposition for whom the way to Parliament now and the future will be made easier and quickened, but more out of my love for the political inclinations and aspirations of Singapore's younger generation. It is they who will create history for Singapore's future and not the existing political parties. 3.53 pm”
“We know that, as has been said earlier, there are still 25% of anti-PAP votes as evidenced by past general elections. Surely amongst this 25% can be found high calibre potential intellectuals who, if they do not contest as independent candidates, will have no obstacles in forming their own Opposition parties because the core of the problem is not the name of the Opposition party but rather their capability to prove their worth in Parliament. It is only in Parliament that the people can distinguish a gem from the stone. A glaring example is before us - that which we had originally hoped would shine like a gem turned out to be a worthless pebble. Mr Speaker, Sir, this amendment will therefore facilitate the entry into Parliament of Opposition Members. Opposition Members have a penchant for beating their breast outside Parliament claiming their worthiness; so if they avail themselves of this opportunity and can really prove their worth in Parliament, they will emerge as a respectable opposition. However, in spite of this amendment, if they still fail, I think they should seriously believe that all the big talk about their reputation which they have built up is mere fantasy and a figment of their imagination. Mr Speaker, Sir, the conclusion is very simple. I have stated my stand earlier that I am all for the Opposition entering Parliament via majority vote, but for the sake of Singapore's long-term interests and having regard to the winds of change and the political aspirations of the younger generation, let us give the amendment an opportunity to prove its utility. And if we read between the lines of the amendment, it would be likened to a stepping stone for the Opposition Members.”
“Concerning the second point which I raised, that is, whether the amendment will result in the level of maturity of both the Government and Opposition being enhanced, this will of course depend on the type of Opposition that will eventually enter Parliament. However, whilst we await the entry of Opposition parties of calibre into Parliament, let us, first of all, consider the contents of the amendment Bill. To my mind, this amendment is a departure from traditional democracy which is understood by many people. My stand is that I still favour the entry of the Opposition by majority vote in any general election in which they contest. But we must be alive to the changes that have occurred. Have normal conditions changed or are they no longer existent in Singapore? Focus our attention on these two factors. On the first factor, we know that the profile and appetites of the voters have changed. On the second factor, we also know that a proportion of the voters now want the voice of an Opposition of calibre as soon as possible. The spirit and form of the amendment have fulfilled the needs of the two factors. Mr Speaker, Sir, over the last 2 1/2 years we have witnessed the performance of the Member for Anson. It has been disappointing. He has let down all hopes of his supporters that he would emerge as an Opposition champion. By his own dismal performance, he has pulled down the Opposition castle which he hopes to build with the support of his supporters. In other words, by his own undoing, he has manoeuvred himself to bring about his own downfall. But this does not mean that the failure of the Member for Anson has negatived the need for the presence of other Opposition members.”
“In response to the first question, there is proverbial Malay saying, "With every flood, the sand is altered." (The laws and regulations change with every new setup). Just as the physical features of the beach change every time it is lashed by the waves, likewise our electoral registers have been inundated by the entry of large numbers of new voters totalling 250,000. However, included amongst these new voters are anti-government elements. There are people who support the Government and there are others who are against the Government because, as ordinary human beings, they aspire for progress in all fields of life, certainly including politics. And the change that is greatly felt is the inclinations and appetites, including the political aspirations of the young generation now emerging. They desire that the party in power should continue to look after their future. But they also want an Opposition of calibre, not just Opposition for the sake of opposition only. In other words, they want a change from the ordinary under which they have undergone a long experience. Under the circumstances, as the Government has all along been able to feel the pulse of the people, we have found it necessary to introduce this change. This is consonant with the saying that if we want to dance we must dance to the tune of the music. If the number of the dancers has increased with the increase in the number of voters, and if the tune of the music has changed political appetites and aspirations of the younger generation, it certainly follows that the new arrangements or the tune of the political dance must change. This, Mr Speaker, Sir, is the essence of the amendment which we are debating.”
“I hope the Opposition parties will live up to the expectation of the Government and the people. Parliament is the best forum for them to comment, criticize, oppose and, I hope, support Government policies. But more important, it is the forum for them to put forward their alternative policies and programmes to the people. If we have sensible and intelligent Opposition, then the people of Singapore will benefit much from the amendment; but if we have Opposition Members who oppose for the sake of opposition, who provide comic relief to the otherwise sober deliberations of the Parliament, then the Opposition MPs deserve the rejection by the people. Ultimately, it is the people who will judge the wisdom of this change which is aimed at improving our political condition for the betterment of our society. Mr Speaker, Sir, I support the motion standing in the name of the Prime Minister. 3.40pm The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Health and the Minister for Culture (Encik Wan Hussin Zoohri)( In Malay): Mr Speaker, Sir, within the framework of the debate on the Amendment to the Constitution of the Republic of Singapore, there are two fundamental questions which we should consider. First, what is the reason for tabling this amendment now, at a time when the political climate appears peaceful and stable? Or there may be people who ask whether there is an underlying motive in moving the amendment. Secondly, whether in moving this amendment, the debates in Parliament will become more lively and whether it will bring out changes to the wheel of local politics. But a more important question is whether this amendment will bring, in its train, political maturity to both the Opposition and the Government.”
“They understand that a strong and stable government is vital for continued peace and stability, economic progress, social cohesion and national unity. Today, we have reached a level of political maturity and sophistication, and con- fidence in the Government and people. In my view, the Prime Minister's move is a reflection of this. The Constitutional amendment to ensure that there will always be Opposition MPs in Parliament is a historic step forward towards a better society in Singapore. It is aimed at strengthening our parliamentary institutions. We are evolving a unique parliamentary democratic system whereby in Parliament henceforth, the people can be assured of both ruling party and Opposition party members, thereby catering for both the majority and minority viewpoints. The Parliament is assured of at least three Opposition Members after the next general elections. This number of Opposition MPs will be increased to six eventually. Mr Speaker, Sir, this amendment allowing for the best runners-up among the Opposition candidates to be elected as non-constituency MPs is unique, In Australia, for example, in their peculiar preferential voting system, even the second, third or fourth candidate in the constituency can be elected into Parliament. In our case, it is likely that only the second candidate or runner-up stands a chance of being elected. The approach of co-opting politicians into Parliament is not new. In some countries they have a system of co-option, that is, to invite people to come into Parliament in addition to those who have been directly elected into it. Such a system exists, for example, in Belgium and France. In my view, Mr Speaker, Sir, Singaporeans will welcome the prospect of a multi-party Parliament with at least three Opposition MPs.”
“It has provided the people with good government and effective leadership and, in turn, peace and stability, economic growth and a high standard of living, social harmony and national unity. In Singapore, there are 20 registered political parties. There have been free elections since 1959. From 1959 to 1965, there was a multi-party Parliament. Then at the end of 1965 the Opposition boycotted Parliament and since then until 1981 the voters have returned all PAP candidates into Parliament. Mr Speaker, Sir, during this period when there was no Opposition in Parliament, the PAP continued to work the parliamentary system. PAP Backbenchers were encouraged to speak up and to act the part of the Opposition. But Mr Speaker, Sir, you will appreciate that that was a difficult role to play. But although the PAP held all the seats in Parliament for nearly 16 years, the PAP had no desire whatsoever to establish a one-party state. This demonstrates the PAP's dedication to parliamentary democracy. I do not know what would have happened if any other party had been in the same position. Would it be tempted to establish a one-party state and abolish parliamentary democracy, elections and other political parties? The people of Singapore elected the PAP as the majority party in Parliament between 1959 and 1965, and the only party in Parliament between 1966 and 1981. Why? Generally, people are satisfied with the performance of the Government and with the benefits they have received as a result of PAP rule: full employment, adequate housing, good education, medical services, green and clean environment, sense of personal security and so on. The people of Singapore recognize the need for an effective government.”