Leong Horn Kee
Singapore
“My question is that, although at the point of purchase when the blocks were built, this may not be structural deficiency, as the Parliamentary Secretary said, but it is now because the demand or desire is for lift access.”
“Lastly, by centralising at MOM, I wish to urge the kind Minister to provide more funds and resources for job search programmes. Most feedback from residents is that they are not getting sufficient help and satisfaction on job search services at the CDC level.”
“At the same time, our SAF soldiers are better educated and trained to handle more sophisticated fighting system. Thus, the combination of both modern weapon systems and better trained soldiers will provide a good platform for our SAF to build a strong and capable integrated fighting force.”
“All right, "may" allow two months of disruption. But in terms of cohort, after the students have left school, they are no more in the same cohort. They actually enter enlistment at different times of the year. So this issue of relating cohort to enlistment period may not be valid. Therefore, why not just have a clarity of rule?”
“Sir, on this issue of early disruption of two months, we should actually look at it not from the two months' point of view of early disruption, but from the 10 months of waiting time. The servicemen will have to mope around waiting for 10 months for his tertiary education.”
“If the safety and personal security in Johor is not improved, no matter how excellent or scenic a bridge we build, Singaporeans will be hesitant to visit Johor and spend time and money there.”
The complete record
Every one of 876 lines we hold for Leong Horn Kee, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 3 of 18.
“As graphically depicted in a scene in the movie "Money No Enough", one loan shark in the movie proudly proclaimed that he was providing a much-needed service to the community of providing loans to the poor, which our banks would not do. I would like the Government to consider seriously how more forms of financial help and related assistance can be given to the poor and unemployed to tide them over their temporary troubles so that they would not get into more troubles by borrowing from loan sharks and the like. Honour the self-help groups and VWOs Could the self-help groups do more and reach out deeper into the community to target these desperately poor? I do not mean to lend them money like the loan sharks, but to give them aid in terms of food provisions, temporary job assistance, retraining, transport, schooling expenses, and such like. On this note, I truly wish to commend the NTUC Fairprice for recently giving out food vouchers to be distributed via the grassroots organisations to the poor and needy. We can encourage more to be done by social and community groups like the Lions Club, Rotary Club and other voluntary welfare organisations to step forward. Encourage more thrift and loan cooperatives to be formed to fill in the vacuum left by the banks and finance houses mergers. Those who give generous donations should be recognised, eg, VWOs and social volunteers as well as philanthropists may be considered for National Day Awards. Perhaps, it is time to review whether we should continue to assign the major and centralised fund-raising effort to Community Chest. This has a dilutive effect on the choice and target groups of each charity to source for its own donations. It also weakens the strength of each charitable body to go out and seek donations on its own.”
“This is an aspect that Mr Lim Hng Kiang and his study team have to consider when coming out with their recommendations. Land of opportunity In his Budget Speech, DPM Lee stated that he sensed palpable optimism in the market. This view, in the short term, may be correct. In fact, all of us wish it so. However, I am not sure whether the same can be said of the medium and long term. Is there palpable optimism in the medium and long term? I think we do not know yet. Look overseas for the land of gold? I like very much the heading of the third pillar as the "Land of Opportunity". How many Singaporeans truly feel Singapore is or will become a land of opportunity? In a land of opportunity, our streets should be paved with gold. In typical Singlish, some may retort: "Where got gold?" Nowadays, we hear many Singapore businessmen saying that doing business and making money in Singapore is difficult. Not really, as some are still making money, but many truly find the going difficult. Several have resorted to going overseas to China, India and other parts of Southeast Asia to find their fortunes. It is very ironical. In the olden days, our forefathers came from China and India to seek their opportunities here. After over 100 years, the tide is reversed. Singaporeans are going to India and China to seek their fortunes. Things do move in cycles. There is an apt Chinese saying: "feng shui lun lui zhuan". With the changing of times, the diminishing reliance on clan associations, tontine funds and trade associations, and the move to rationalise the banks and finance houses, there are increasingly fewer avenues for the people in temporary need of funds to get help. Many went to loan sharks as a result.”
“Many are not finding employers who are prepared to give them full-time employment. As a fall-back and to preserve their dignity and pride, they go around carrying a card saying they are consultants. I strongly urge the Government to think of some schemes or mechanism to help the people in this group. Perhaps, there can be a central agency. This agency can match their professional skills and experience against prospective clients. The clients may need certain of these professionals on an ad-hoc or contractual basis. These professionals can be tasked to lead or join in local and overseas assignments. This pool of senior executives is growing. We have to find means to ensure that this useful and substantial resource pool is not put to waste. Procreation policies A major part of the Budget Speech is devoted to the problem of procreation. Our Total Fertility Rate (TFR) has fallen to 1.26, below that of many foreign established nations. It is widely acknowledged that procreation and how to encourage young couples to marry earlier and have children earlier is a very complex and emotive issue. It requires a holistic approach. It is a big subject. I hear that many MPs will touch on this, especially our lady MPs. One report said that Dr Lily Neo has 28 ideas on how it could be done. Let us hear from her. Given such wide interest, I do not intend to dwell too deeply into this subject. Let this space be given to other more qualified persons, especially our female counterparts, to debate on it. I just wish to reflect on some concerns of employers that if we were to increase maternity leave to a longer period of six months, there is the worry of employers that besides heavier salary costs, there is the added problem of disruption to work schedules and of staff covering duties.”
“Raising these subjects imply lack of patriotism. It should not be. I personally do not support the idea of casino in Singapore, but I think the dual citizenship idea deserves a relook. Joining privileges of the Singapore Club We have to show to the PRs the plentiful benefits of being a Singaporean. It is quite a package of both tangible benefits and intangible attractions. These are so-called joining privileges. Being Singaporean should mean joining an "exclusive club". The target is to make it such that everybody is vying to join this "Singapore Club". Whilst we want to attract more people to become Singaporeans, we must be mindful not to alienate certain segments of the people. As our society progresses, it is inevitable that some groups may feel marginalised. These are the poor, aged and under-privileged. There should be adequate attention and resources allocated to help these groups. Remember my earlier point about the "Butterfly Effect"? Do make sure that the 2% cut in budgets does not result in some benefits going to these groups being curtailed. The butterfly effect may cause some down-trodden people to be axed, if we are not careful. Care for the marginalised segments In fact, besides the old, aged and underprivileged, I wish to voice my concern on a special group. These are the people in the 45-62 or so age group. They face an impact of treble whammies. First, those in this group will have their CPF reduced. Second, they may face pay cuts or retrenchments. Third, they will face higher medical and hospitalisation costs as they grow old. Many professionals in their 50s find that, because of changing circumstances, they are replaced or retrenched. Most of them are still able-bodied, with good minds and wide experience. They have some good years to run.”
“Besides the definable benefits, which I call the pull factors, we should also look at the intangible issues of "push factors". Why are many Singaporeans emigrating? Some people said that they find Singapore too stifling and cloistered up. Is it true? There are numerous jokes about Singaporeans who do not open their mouths. We must do some honest introspection. Does merely allowing bar top dancing and reverse bungee jumps open up the sense of restrictive environment? What more can be done? Dual citizenship Should we not revive the proposal to allow dual citizenship? Many countries which are open minded and progressive allow dual citizenship. Is there a genuine risk that allowing dual citizenship will facilitate the flight of good and capable Singaporeans, especially in time of crisis? Is that risk more of a function of how much we have ingrained into our young Singaporeans the sense of pride and love of the country? Would the benefit of dual citizenship outweigh the perceived risks? I think I have been hesitant in the past about allowing dual citizenship. But now, I am thinking otherwise. With the more mobile and mass communication in the new world, Singaporeans with ability and talent will always be the target of foreign countries. Therefore, allowing them dual citizenship will in fact allow them to retain ties with Singapore. Conversely, allowing dual citizenship will enable us to attract more foreigners to take up citizenship, particularly when we have only 1.26 fertility replacement rate. Dual citizenship should be a sacred cow that is worth taking a relook. In the past, matters such as dual citizenship and casinos in Singapore are spoken about in hush tones in quiet corners, as though it is a great heresy to voice such subjects.”
“If we want them to be proud Singaporeans, we should have a visible and definitive gap between the benefits of being citizens versus the benefits of being PRs. Better recognition and compensation for National Servicemen Currently, many Singaporeans said they do not feel any better than the PRs, who live here and enjoy equal benefits of a clean and well-run city. In fact, many Singaporeans feel that they are disadvantaged due to the fact that legally, they themselves and their children have to do full time national service. They also have to do the yearly obligatory reservist stints thereafter. NSF and reservists do affect young Singaporeans' career advancement. They fall behind non-Singaporean colleagues by 2 1/2 years of seniority, their yearly reservist disruptions are frowned upon by employers. These are major sacrifices of male Singaporeans. To compensate, I would like to suggest that the Government should do a review of the salaries and compensations of NSF and reservists. Currently, NSF servicemen are relatively poorly paid. At least, they are less paid than their regular counterparts. So, why not equalise or narrow the gap between the pay of the reservists and the regulars, or the NSF and the regulars? Secondly, an arrangement should be put in place to recognise the 2 1/2 years of NSF as a seniority and annual increment comparison with non-Singaporean staff, in both the civil service and in the private sector. I believe more could be done to demonstrate the benefits of Singapore citizens amply exceed those of PRs. The Government can set down the various benefits of Singaporeans, in terms of housing, medical, education, immigration and various other citizens' rights.”
“I am more concerned that down the line, some very small but important social projects for the community or the poor may get chopped as a result. Hence, I truly do not wish to see that the 2% cut for 2004 and another 2% for 2005 for each Ministry will result in numerous small cuts which are crucial in some meaningful and supportive projects for certain welfare organisations and programmes. "Hurry to Wait" Syndrome Next, I like to warn about the "Hurry to Wait" syndrome in the civil service. It might well happen if we do not watch closely. This is similar to the resultant phenomenon during each year's National Day Parade where most participants call it "Hurry to Wait". What it means is that while participants (some could be just young primary school children) are taking part in the 15-minute event in the Parade, say, at 7.00 pm, but because the commanders and the persons in charge want to be trebly sure that the participants are not late, each level of instruction adds 15 to 30 minutes of buffer time. By the time the designated time is given to the participants, they usually need to be at the Stadium by 3.00 pm in the afternoon. They are then "Hurried to Wait". It creates inefficiency and unnecessary inconvenience. Differentiate between citizens and PRs Moving on to strong society, one of the major tenets of a strong society is a strong citizenry. By strong citizenry, I mean Singaporeans who have a strong love for their country, they have deep-rooted sentiments to preserve and protect the country, they have the care and concern for their fellow Singaporeans. Naturally, such deep-rooted attachments cannot be fostered overnight. Singaporeans are very pragmatic people.”
“I think it bodes well for our civil service to have such an excellent crop of future recruits. Creating "Bureaupreneurs" out of current corps of civil servants However, I am not sure whether our current crop of middle and senior civil servants has gone through enough of such multi-faceted exposure. The world is fast changing and fast moving. If we want to remake Singapore, we have also got to remake the civil service. We need civil servants who are responsive, innovative and prepared to accept change. Perhaps, instead of calling them "bureaucrats", we can coin a new term for them to insert an "entrepreneurial" element in it. Maybe, we can call them "bureaupreneurs" - people who can turn the civil service into an enterprising and responsive organisation. Butterfly Effect Sir, I am supportive of DPM Lee's intention to permanently cut by 2% the budget caps of all Ministries, except MINDEF, in FY 2004 and another 2% in FY 2005. This is a very commendable move indeed. However, I just wish to forewarn DPM Lee of the "Butterfly Effect" of such a small 2% cut. There is now a popular movie in the cinemas by the same name "Butterfly Effect". The Effect propounds the chaos theory, that the fluttering of the wings of a butterfly in, say, Africa, could cause a chain effect a month later that affects a tornado in USA, in another part of the world. An interesting theory. By the Butterfly Effect in the Government budget, I mean to watch out for the rippling repercussions of the 2% cut through the Ministries. The small cut could end in very huge and some strange and diverse results. The 2% cut may look very innocuous, but this cut starting at one end of the Ministry's budget may result in multiple thousand cuts down the line in the operating agencies.”
“I recall that many years ago, when I was doing my MBA in Insead, France, my Japanese coursemate told me one day in elation that he had been assigned to take care of the Christmas tree decorations back in the office, when he returned for the Christmas holiday. I was surprised, as decorating the Christmas tree was a menial task. But my Japanese friend said: "No, our present Chairman had also been assigned to the task of taking care of the Christmas tree when he was a junior officer. Hence, being given this task is of great importance and significance!" Actually, by being involved in such a mundane task, he had the opportunity to understand ground sentiments of the company better. I think it is time for our top civil servants to come down from their high chairs and try their hand at decorating the Christmas tree! I suggest that it should be made an essential part of their training that civil servants should spend some time in an overseas assignment (for example, in India, China or elsewhere), as well as spend some time in an operational enterprise or even the private sector to enable them to have a more rounded experience and exposure. I am particularly heartened to read in the recent Straits Times series on "Recruit - Scholars' Choice 1 to 3". I read the Friday, 5th March 2004, report of the typical example of Mr Simon Ng, aged 26. He is a recipient of the Overseas Merit Scholarship awarded by the PSC. After three years at the Imperial College, London, and a year at Stanford University in USA, he went on to spend another year working in China. This wide experience had moved him up the intellectual, cultural and personal levels. There are numerous other examples of such scholars, like Mr Simon Ng, who are getting excellent all- rounded exposure.”
“headquarters of Ministries and statutory boards, have been built to heights of elegance more than what their functions require ... As I drive by these gleaming glass palaces, I often wonder whether the learning, teaching and research match the grandeur of the buildings ... in old Fullerton Building described as dark and dim. Its saving grace was that there were some bright minds working in it." I think we need to remake the civil service. There is a need for mindset change. In recent years, initiatives like the "Pro-enterprise Panel" and "Cut Waste Committee" have resulted in drawing the civil servants closer to the reality of the ground sentiments. Civil servants are rectifying some of the adverse results of Government rules and practices. However, I am still disappointed that often, when faced with a certain new idea or appeal for flexibility on the application of rules which they cannot handle, the civil servants would often fall back on a convenient refrain: "If I allow you this flexibility of rule, then I have to allow everybody else." My retort is that if the rule change is good for my case, what is then wrong for it to be made applicable for all cases? This will be met with a finality: "No, no, no. We cannot do that. It would be rather chaotic then." As a result, a great idea is killed. More interactions with the ground Sir, I think that what we need is to get the mighty civil servants to come down from their ivory tower and have more opportunity to mix with the ground. I believe the Government is already doing that. Perhaps just not enough.”
“Since this year's Budget not only touches on budget and tax matters, but covers societal issues and portrays Singapore as a land of opportunity, I shall therefore set out my comments in the same sequence as in the Budget, that is, in the order of (1) effective Government; (2) strong society; and (3) land of opportunity. With the stated plans on these three key pillars, the crux of the matter is how can the Government bring all the people along this path of well-being, wealth, and enlightenment in the land of opportunity. Carrying everybody along is going to be a monumental task to reach this fabulous promised land. The question is how to get there. First, on effective Government. On the first pillar on effective Government, DPM Lee has enunciated the means to attain effective Government, which is through sound public finance, living within our means and service delivery. However, I feel that the basic tenet of effective Government is mainly the people - people make the Government and the civil service. Therefore, we need to have both strong Government leaders as well as an effective civil service. All great plans and great schemes will come to nought if there is a weak or corrupt government and ineffective and bungling civil servants. I believe the next step is how to remake the civil service such that it is enterprising, innovative and ready to consider and accept new ideas and new approaches. Getting good people in the civil service is therefore of fundamental importance. Generally, we agree that Singapore has an enviable strong civil service. As Mr Ngiam Tong Dow, a respected retired top civil servant, said: "In our years of budgetary abundance, we have often mistaken form for substance ...”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, thank you for allowing me to start off this debate. After the Budget announcement by DPM Lee, our GPC for Finance, Trade and Industry conducted a dialogue session with the members of our Resource Panel and representatives from the chambers of commerce and trade associations. The participants gave us very valuable and pertinent feedback. My GPC colleagues and I shall be raising many issues and suggestions proffered by them during this Budget debate as well as during the Committee of Supply debate. Our GPC wishes to sincerely thank all the participants for their contributions in the dialogue. This year's Budget is said to be a continuation of past years' budgets. To some extent, this is true. As declared in past Budget announcements, the Government would implement the 2% cut of corporate tax by 2005, and it is implemented. In previous Budgets, the statements mainly covered the details of the Government's revenues and expenditures, before rounding up with the tax and fiscal policies and changes. However, what I find significantly different in this year's Budget is the extensive coverage of the non-budget topics, including the Government's long-term plans on the three main pillars of Singapore, which are effective Government, strong society and land of opportunity. In this regard, I view this year's Budget as a very important milestone document, and the plans of the Government in the medium and long term are outlined at some length. It is not a mere short-term annual Budget announcement. It therefore reads almost like the Presidential Address at the start of each session of Parliament. The subjects are wide ranging and have long-term implications.”
“Who will have access to this trade sensitive information? Are the data submitted in aggregate form to the FTA partner, or are separate details of individual companies being made available to our FTA partners? What is done to protect and ensure the confidentiality of this information? Mr Speaker, Sir, I understand that the Bill also provides for the traders a recourse for appeal against decisions in respect of customs matters. The appeal would be against, for example, the determination of eligibility for FTA preferential treatment or against certain trade procedural requirements. I would like to know whether the process of appeal is simple, fast and efficient. Often, when a trader makes a selling price offer for his products to a buyer in a foreign country, he would base it on whether he gets preferential tariff treatment. Therefore, he needs to know quickly whether he can enjoy preferential treatment so as not to miss out on a potential transaction. Moreover, he would have incurred or committed to incur substantial costs when he has to ship certain goods to buyers in the FTA partner countries. These goods could be in the process of being shipped or would have landed in the partner country's docks. The holding and handling costs being incurred could be quite high. If there is any delay in the determination of his appeal to the Minister, he may incur higher costs, and to a businessman, time is money. So I would like to seek the Minister's assurance that his Ministry would set up a process for application, as well as appeal, that is fast and efficient, that cuts through the red tape and bureaucracy. Sir, I support the Bill.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the new US-Singapore Free Trade Agreement and other FTAs will generate substantial benefits for Singapore traders and manufacturers. Therefore, I would like to express my support for this amendment Bill as this Bill is essentially to amend the Regulation of Imports and Exports Act (RIEA) so as to enable Singapore to implement our bilateral free trade agreements. The Bill will enable the Government to collect trade information for sharing with our FTA partners for the purpose of compliance with the terms under such FTAs. However, in setting down the regulations for the submission of trade information by the traders, I would like to voice some concerns. One concern is the possible high compliance costs. The second concern is the confidentiality of sensitive company information, which the Minister had touched on in his speech. I hope that the information required to be collected and submitted to the Singapore authorities would not be too onerous and voluminous. This will add to the cost for the traders. I understand that the regulation empowers the relevant authorities to have access to computers and other storage devices of the traders to enforce compliance. The question is how can the trader be assured that when he releases his computers and files to be inspected, other sensitive information of the company stored in his computers or files would not be accessed without proper authorisation of the inspection officers. Secondly, the information to be submitted is generally confidential company business data. Therefore, I would like to know how the authorities could ensure that such information is not used to the detrimental effect of the Singapore traders by third parties or companies in third countries, such as our FTA partners.”
“I would like to know whether this process can in fact be abused by traders to fight against their competitors through using deterrent trade tactics. For example, they can file a complaint, in the guise of an aggrieved consumer, thereby resulting in a voluntary compliance agreement or an injunction order being taken against another competitor. Sir, I like the idea of a 3-day cooling-off period for certain transactions that involve high pressure selling tactics, such as direct sales contracts and time share. I would like to ask the Minister whether he would consider to include this 3-day cooling-off period for other transactions, where although there is lesser pressure selling tactics the consumers do not have the opportunity to examine the goods closely at the time of the purchase. These are in cases of catalogue sales, Internet sales, telephone sales and such likes. I think it is fair that for such transactions, the consumers can be given three days after receipt of the actual goods before he decides whether he really wants to buy them or not. In this regard, I would urge the Minister to designate the 3-day cooling-off period from the date of receipt of the goods, instead of 3 days from the date of sale. In some cases, the delivery of the goods can take longer than 3 days, or the suppliers can intentionally deliver after 3 days, so as to extend beyond the mandatory 3-day cooling-off period. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I support the Bill.”
“In such cases, therefore, the value of the claim is equal to the value of the products. Moreover, there are also instances when the claim for redress goes beyond the value of the product, such as a claim against medical costs incurred due to aggravation, distress and additional costs incurred on recovery of transportation. To avoid the complications I have mentioned above, I suggest that the cap can be set against the total value of the product or service, instead of setting it against the value of the claim. This will remove the ambiguity of the concept of basing on the value of the claim. Perhaps a total value of a higher limit of, say, $100,000 can be set for the value of the products that are under dispute. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, my next point is to enquire about the role of CASE within this Bill. It is not clear what added roles or responsibility CASE will take on in this fight for consumer protection under this Bill. CASE has been doing a great job to publicise errant trade practices and take unscrupulous traders to task. Should we not take this opportunity to give more teeth and bite to CASE, as a watchdog for the consumers? Why not empower CASE to have the authority to hear and arbitrate minor cases, such as for claims that are below $5,000 or less? Could the Minister elaborate on the roles of CASE under this Bill? Under this Bill, a specified body such as CASE or the Singapore Tourism Board (STB) can apply to the courts for an injunction against a supplier. Prior to the filing of the injunction, the specified body has to refer the matter to an Injunction Proposals Review Panel. I presume that in this process, a consumer or group of consumers must first send a complaint to CASE or STB.”
“I wish, therefore, to enquire why the Minister has not considered the idea of having a FTO for aggrieved consumers to take their complaints to. The answer could be that there are more costs to be incurred by the Ministry to set up a FTO. But I would contend that, without an FTO, there are still costs being incurred, just that the costs being incurred are now transferred from the FTO to the courts. Consumers taking cases to court will also cause heavy costs to be incurred by the courts. There is the added cost to be passed on, which will also take up the time of our judges who are perhaps more preoccupied with serious cases. Therefore, would it not be less cumbersome and save much time of the courts if consumer protection cases are dealt with and resolved by a FTO? I would like to ask the Minister what is new and would make things easier for consumers under this new Bill that is different from the past. Apart from the stated schedule of 20 unfair practices, how has the process or manner of added protection for the consumer improved? Without this Bill, the consumer likewise could take the errant trader to court. Therefore, my greatest lament on the Bill is that there are no real teeth or bite in the Bill. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, my next question is why limit the claim to a cap of $20,000 on the value of a claim. I believe that this cap is a little low. We all know that consumer products can be very expensive nowadays, and items like electronic gadgets, furniture and jewellery can cost a lot of money. I note that the cap is on the value of the claim, that is, not on the entire value of the products or services. However, there could be many occasions when the consumer wants a total refund.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I wish to congratulate the Government and the Minister in charge for finally tabling in Parliament this Consumer Protection (Fair Trading) Bill. It has been long awaited. The Bill serves to regulate fair trading between traders and purchasers, and to protect the small buyers against cheating and intimidation, as the Minister of State has said. It also prohibits certain undesirable selling tactics. I would like to say that the Bill, besides giving protection to consumers, would also help to enhance Singapore's reputation as an excellent and enjoyable shopping place for tourists. With regard to various provisions in the Bill, I have some comments to seek clarifications from the Minister. [Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Chew Heng Ching) in the Chair] 4.57 pm First, the approach adopted by the Ministry is on the principle of "caveat emptor". There is no policing body to check on the merchants. The consumers, therefore, have to police the market themselves. It seems to place the onus on the consumer to seek redress for any unfair practice by going to court. Going to court is often an obstacle and a big step for an aggrieved consumer to take. To many people, they have a mental block about going to court. They could be hesitant to take the trouble, time and money to bring errant traders to court. This is one reason why so many people turn to CASE for assistance. The same applies to tourists who are here only for short stays. They generally do not have the time, patience or energy to take errant merchants to court. So, why not take a more pro-active approach? I wish to suggest that it would help consumers if the Ministry of Trade and Industry would set up a Fair Trading Office (FTO) to police and take action against errant merchants.”
“Sir, I would like to ask the Minister of State to consider two options. Perhaps in times of difficulty, like we are now facing an economic downturn, we have a short period of one or two years whereby we allow more flexibility, because during the downturn period the volume of transactions is actually very low and therefore the ability to sell the flat to the right ethnic group would be more difficult. Whereas, in a buoyant economic situation, the volume is higher and therefore the transaction can be easier and a sale can be achieved. The second option is that if a HDB flat seller cannot find a buyer over a certain period, would HDB be prepared to take back some of the units and resell them at a later period when the market is buoyant?”
“I would like to ask the Minister of State whether, for some very special cases, like very difficult hardship cases or even retrenchment cases, the HDB could allow some degree of flexibility, say, just 5% of such cases, whereby a person can be allowed to change?”
“Sir, I would like to say that I support the Prime Minister that we should have clarity on our longer-term CPF rates. The rate has been stated as between 10% and 16% for the employers, and 20% for the employees. I concur that the lower rate of 10% for the employers is appropriate. It will also give us more flexibility that in good years we can urge the employers and introduce higher rates for employers, so that employees themselves can benefit in good years. Sir, in conclusion, I would like to express my keen support for these CPF changes. I earnestly appeal to the Prime Minister to look into some of the suggestions that I have made.”
“But I do feel that those in the 50-55 age group have suffered a lot in the last few years and, therefore, a CPF cut on them would make it worse. In fact, as I said earlier, they are going to suffer three cuts, not just one. Let me elaborate a bit further on these people in the 50-55 age group. They have suffered a lot in recent years. Some have lost their jobs because of retrenchments or companies closing down. At the same time, they have to have heavier property mortgages, the increase in the cost of their children's education as they grow older. Some of them even have to sell their houses or their assets to support their children through university. Now, their employers' CPF contribution will be cut, especially when they go beyond 50 years old. So, these CPF cuts are eroding their savings, and there should be a need for us to look into how to help this particular group of older workers. On the other hand, while the 3% cut would have a saving of $1.3 billion for corporations, I would like to caution about the dampening effect of this $1.3 billion being taken away from the pockets of the people. It is a bit of a plus and minuses. So, if we could help in introducing some kind of stimulating measures, such that at least the $1.3 billion dampener effect on consumer spending could be lessened, it would be helpful. Perhaps, some kind of Government spending or pump-priming of projects would be of help. Further to the 3% cut, for those workers who are affected and cannot manage their housing mortgages, I would like to propose that workers be allowed to draw from the CPF Special Account to top up their mortgage payments, if they have insufficient money in their Ordinary Account. This is one measure which can help them to overcome their difficulties.”
“It is almost like an off-Budget measure, much like the stimulation measures that were introduced in the past when the domestic economy was in recession. On this occasion, I think not all companies are doing badly. In fact, some companies, such as those in the IT, electronics, banking and several other sectors, have been performing well. Speaking for workers in these companies, I would like to urge employers of such companies that have done well to share their savings, by giving back either in the form of variable pay or as year-end bonuses. Sir, the proposed CPF cut has the effect of taking about $1.3 billion per year away from the pockets of the people. This is not a puny sum. Naturally, many affected will feel the pain. I would like to suggest that besides putting the burden of economic recovery on the people, the load should be shared amongst the people, the Government and companies. What I mean is that, for the Government, there will be a need to look at the Government rates and fees so that there is a lowering of cost of doing business for companies. For companies themselves, they would also have to look at how to keep themselves lean and trim. So, they would also have to minimise their excesses and not call upon employees to share the burden of their inefficiencies. Sir, in this debate, I would like to focus a bit more on the impact of the CPF changes on older workers. I would like to speak for those in the age group of 50-55, because I am myself in this age group, ie, in my early 50s. I can feel for them. I empathise with them. Many of my friends and associates are in this age band. But this does not mean that I do not think that Singaporeans of other age groups, such as the younger workers, are not impacted or are of lesser concern to me.”
“It will be a great relief to the people, as a 6% cut would have a tremendous shocking effect on the need for people to adjust their housing mortgages and livelihood. This leads me to the next question. As the Prime Minister has said that the target is to lower the employers' CPF contribution to 10%, the question to ask is: when will be the next 3% cut, because there is in this Table 3 a mention of only one cut to 13%? I do hope that we would be able to survive the economic downturn to maintain the status that there would be no further cuts, if possible, that would affect the employees. The second question I would like to pose, Sir, is that looking at Table 3, for those aged between 50-55, there are actually proposed three cuts: (a) 3% in October 2003; (b) 3% in January 2005; and (c) 3% in January 2006. Therefore, I note that those in the older age group are probably worst affected. For age 50-55 group, they have to endure three cuts over the next four years. So, maybe the Government would like to look into how to help this group of older workers. What kind of reliefs and assistance could be given to them to relieve them of such burdens? According to the Prime Minister, there will be a saving of $1.3 billion, ie, savings earned by corporations, employers and the public sector. These are huge savings of $1.3 billion a year. In contrast with previous years, where the cuts are possibly one-time with a possibility of restoration, these are cuts forever - they stay with us. Therefore, in fact, the savings are not just $1.3 billion a year. If we take a 10-year timeframe and we multiply the $1.3 billion by 10, it is $13 billion savings for corporations and companies over the next 10 years. So, these hefty savings will definitely have a very stimulating effect on the economy.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, this debate on the retuning of CPF is obviously very important as the policy statement itself is presented by the Prime Minister, and the Prime Minister has said that we are now at the crossroads. Firstly, I think the House should thank the Prime Minister for his decision to take personal responsibility to carry this burden of presenting the painful CPF changes to the people, and to see through its passage on implementation. The topic of CPF changes is an emotional issue because they impinge on the livelihood of the individual. The pain is therefore felt at the personal level by almost every person and his family members, because every wage earner is affected. However, at the national level, we unanimously agree that it is a crucial policy change that has a deep and long-lasting impact on the survivability of the country, in the face of fast-changing competitive pressures from huge low-cost countries like China and India. I would like to state that I support the proposed changes, as they are much needed to ensure Singapore's survival. Fundamentally, what are these CPF changes about? They are about remaining competitive, they are about survival and, ultimately, it is about jobs - keeping our jobs. Yes, it is painful to cut CPF, but I think it would be more painful if we have to cut jobs. Sir, after listening to the Prime Minister, I am very relieved. As widely anticipated by the press and many corporations, it was thought that the Government would implement a hefty 6% CPF cut. The Prime Minister has announced that there is a target of reaching the 6% eventually. But according to the table that he has circulated, there will only be a 3% cut in October 2003.”
“Sir, I wish to thank the Minister for his very vibrant, animated and enriching discourse on the future strategies for Singapore. Notably, I hope that his idea that Singapore can become the London of Asia will arouse high public interest. Perhaps, the media will want to launch a great public debate on this idea. Can Singapore be the London of Asia? Sir, I also wish to thank the Senior Minister of State and the Minister of State for their very thorough and clear replies. On this note, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.”
“Sir, the other point I want to raise is with regard to MTI's responses to several of the good recommendations, stated in the ERC Report, to assist SMEs. Some of these worthwhile recommendations are: (a) to develop entrepreneurship programmes at all educational levels; (b) to impose sunset rule on all licences to cut red tape.; (c) to enact a competition law; and (d) to establish a private equity exchange. Sir, as I have said earlier, one of the problems of the SMEs is that there is no single agency to help them to champion their cause, to speak up for them and to solve their problems and to resolve red tape. Therefore, my idea of a single agency for SMEs would be able to help to champion the several recommendations of the Government in the ERC Report so as to help the SMEs. In summary, I would like to propose that Mr Raymond Lim be a patron of SMEs, and a one-stop agency called SPRING-IE Singapore be the single agency for SMEs.”
“Sir, SMEs will provide the future impetus for economic growth. The problem is: how to grow SMEs? How to assist them? How to help them transform from SMEs to become MSCs - Major Singapore Companies? This term is not coined by me. It appears in the ERC Report, and therefore, I am just using the same term. How to transform SMEs into MSCs, versus the MNCs? Sir, I think one of the starting points is that the SMEs need a patron. Perhaps Mr Raymond Lim, besides being designated as the Minister of State in charge of entrepreneurship, could also call himself the Minister for SMEs. He can then be the patron for SMEs. A high level, high profile patronage for the SMEs will help them to focus their efforts towards helping these small companies to grow. And being the patron, Mr Lim will definitely have all the sorrows of the SMEs poured onto his shoulders, and therefore he can better understand in-depth all the problems of the SMEs. Sir, I fully agree with my colleagues, Mr Inderjit Singh and Miss Penny Low, that unlike MNCs, which are well taken care of by the one-stop agency of EDB, there is currently no one-stop agency to help SMEs. I would like to suggest that MTI should designate an agency, like SPRING Singapore, to be the one-stop agency to help SMEs locally, and then IE Singapore can be the one-stop agency to help SMEs to venture overseas. Sir, for that matter, since both SPRING Singapore and IE Singapore claim to help local SMEs, why not revive the idea of merging the two agencies into one, that means, combining SPRING Singapore and IE Singapore. Then it will have a new name called SPRING-IE Singapore. I believe that this is a better approach which will have a single composite body to help the SMEs, both locally and venturing overseas.”
“What is the cost of compliance? And if every Bill that is presented comes along with a cost of compliance, we can basically make it a lot more business friendly. On the issue of EDB, I would like to clarify the points that some Members and I have made. And the Minister has raised this just now, on what EDB does for multi-nationals. I do not think that anyone has argued that EDB did wrong. In fact, they did an excellent job. Many, including myself, praised EDB for its success. They have really done well for Singapore. But, in the same breath, I say, let EDB continue to do what it does best, and, that is, to bring in the big accounts, as the Minister said, and to focus on multi-nationals. It is precisely because EDB was successful in what it did that I am advocating a similar approach - a one-stop agency for start-ups and local companies based in Singapore. We already have the making of such an agency. SPRING Singapore is an excellent example. But, in my own experience with them, they need a lot more clout, teeth and resources, the way EDB has resources to help multi-nationals. The third area which the Minister of State can focus on is in the area of financing of SMEs, and this is a topic that I will talk in my next cut.”
“The Government could, at least, allocate its resources, such that every company, whether large or small, will have equal access to these resources. As you can see, the private enterprises and the entrepreneurs have never asked for handouts. All they want are equal opportunities and for the obstacles to be cleared. So, in this respect, I congratulate Mr Raymond Lim for being appointed, and I am glad that the Government appointed him because it shows that they do realise that there is a need for a champion, and there is something that the Government can do about it. I would like to give him three suggestions on what he could do as his key priorities. The first one is on a conducive environment for the rules and regulations. I will not go through the details. We have talked a lot about these. I would like to take just one example that stifles entrepreneurship - the patent laws which will jail a person who first files his patent outside Singapore. This is not entrepreneurship friendly. In fact, it is negative when we try to attract entrepreneurs to be based in Singapore. I know that the Government is trying to develop Singapore's IP industry. But why do we think that we can do it by forcing people to do it down here? In fact, it has a negative impact on us. Some of the suggestions I would like to propose are these. We have the pro-enterprise panel - we all know the role - and I think this could be transformed to a pro-active agency that reviews the rules and regulations, in addition to reacting to them through feedback. To do this, they will need a much bigger secretariat because it is a part-time role for many people involved. Second, for every rule and regulation that is presented in Parliament, I suggest that we do a study of its impact on the cost of business.”
“The common argument we have heard is that true entrepreneurs should not wait for the Government and should know how to find their ways and they should stop expecting the Government to do things for them. Sir, speaking from experience and having done it myself, a few times over, I would like to say that all of these are academic arguments and they do seem logical. But I must also add that unless one has done it or gone through the trials and tribulations of becoming an entrepreneur, he will never understand why the likes of Ms Olivia Lum, Dr Gan and myself, still feel that the Government can indeed do many things to help. I must also add that the few of us in this House, who are advocating this suggestion that Government's involvement is indeed needed, did it without the Government's help in the first place. And, if you look at the background of every one, we did not wait for things to change. We struck out on our own, with or without Government's help. But having experienced the headaches and heartaches, and having had to resolve all of them by ourselves, we now want to help others avoid similar problems so that they can better focus on their businesses and have an easier chance of succeeding. If we indeed want a thousand flowers to bloom, then we will need many more thousands to try and fail, and this is precisely where the Government can help - making it easier for those few thousands to try. Some will never need Government's help, but many could do with a little support here and there. If nothing else, the Government could, at least, clear the obstacles which exist today and which stifle entrepreneurship. The Government could, at least, create a more level playing field as Singapore-based companies face the GLCs and MNCs.”
“Sir, this subject on entrepreneurship had been well debated by many Members in this House during the Budget Speech debate. I would like to make a few points. First, I would like to congratulate the Minister of State, Mr Raymond Lim, for being appointed the Minister of State in charge of promoting entrepreneurship. The process of creating an entrepreneurial nation needs a total approach, more so, a total mindset change, as said by many MPs and I in this House. Our people have become too rigid in thoughts and methods. How then can we encourage our people to take risk and start businesses? These are some of the points made by many Members as well as the Minister of State himself in his speech during the Budget debate. The Budget Statement actually mentioned that the MTI would set aside $500 million to grow Singapore companies and help them to venture abroad. It was mentioned at page 23, paragraph 2.22 of the Budget Statement. However, I have not found any detail on how this $500 million is going to be spent. I would like to hear from the Minister some details on how this sum will be used. Can the Minister of State also give us an insight into some of his initial thoughts on how he intends to fulfil his new role as the Minister of State in charge of Entrepreneurship? Has he any initial programme or course of action that he can enlighten this House? Would he get private sector input on his deliberations? If so, how? Has the Minister of State thought about the various measurable data, parameters and targets to track the progress and success of this entrepreneurship drive over the years to come? Mr Inderjit Singh: Sir, in the last few days, we have heard from a few Members in this House about the role of Government in promoting entrepreneurship.”
“Sir, on investment promotion, I would like to ask the Minister what is the outlook of investment promotion for Singapore in the next few years? We have heard, over and over again, that China is said to be a huge suction for foreign direct investments (FDIs). It is estimated that 20% of all FDIs in emerging markets around the world currently goes into China. In 2002, China attracted US$50 billion of FDIs. What is the impact of the attraction of China in terms of FDIs on Singapore? How much FDIs and what type of industries have we in Singapore to be able to attract so far? What are the new desirable industries that we wish to attract? Is the EDB facing increasing difficulty to attract MNCs to Singapore? I would also like to ask the Minister what is the estimated new employment creation from the investment commitments we have received so far. These new jobs would help to alleviate the employment situation. I would like to ask the Minister about the idea that ASEAN itself is a huge market of 500 million people and therefore could be a good region to attract MNCs. How can we cooperate on this concept amongst ASEAN countries so as to counter the attraction of China for FDIs? Another concept is to promote Singapore as an alternative location to China. Many MNCs often do not want to put all their eggs in one basket, ie, to invest only in China. Hence, many MNCs may want to have an alternative production or operating headquarters centre outside of China. Singapore can, indeed, be such a centre. 1.30 pm”
“Singapore is becoming an increasingly high-cost manufacturing centre. We are lacking in sufficient pool of people with gung-ho and enterprising spirit. Government is too dominant in the business sector. Faced-off against the growing mega-cities like Shanghai, how can we handle such threats? China and India are two potential growth areas. Are we doing enough to plug into these two countries? How much have we done to establish closer trading ties with these countries? The Government has identified the need to focus on nurturing the twin engines of growth, namely, manufacturing and services sectors. I wish to remind the Minister not to neglect other sectors as well. Every amount of contribution helps, eg, the smaller sectors like tourism, retail and logistics are also good sectors to earn foreign income. Sir, I am very fearful that a super-Asian nation like Japan and a dynamic and vibrant Asian economy like Hong Kong have seen their fortunes turned for the worse, literally overnight. Even in the US, President Bush has announced the roll-out of US$3 trillion, that means US$3,000 billion budget, with long term tax cuts to spur growth. Therefore, we must be perpetually watchful over Singapore's long term survival. Can the Minister gaze into his crystal ball and tell us if we are doing right? What can go wrong, and what we can do about them?”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the total sum to be allocated for Head V of the Main Estimates be reduced by $100. We are living in an uncertain world. Events and circumstances are shifting and changing fast. Sir, the issue I would like to raise with the Minister for Trade and Industry is what should be Singapore's fundamental economic policies in the light of a changing world. It was barely 10 years ago that Japan was considered the world's No. 1. That book of the same name by Harvard professor, Israel F Vogel, published in 1980, was a top seller then. Japanese companies were buying up everything in sight, including top US golf courses and the Rockerfeller Centre. Today, Japan has been languishing for over 10 years, laden with a mountain of domestic debts and a sickly economy. Nearer home, and a more comparable example, is Hong Kong. They are now in deep trouble, it seems. Hong Kong recently announced that they would incur deficits of HK$70 billion. The official reserves will drop from HK$303 billion to HK$185 billion, or about only S$41 billion, by year 2005/2006. Analysts have even predicted that Hong Kong would die. Hong Kong has touted itself as the gateway to China. This strategy backfired. Hong Kong becomes increasingly marginalised as MNCs seek direct entry into China with huge FDIs. Hong Kong faces hollowing out of its manufacturing industries to the cheaper Chinese cities nearby, such as Shenzhen, Zhuhai and Guangzhou. Their services sector faces the threat of Shanghai, which is fast eroding Hong Kong's position as a major financial centre. Shenzhen has a population of 7 million people and Shanghai has a population of over 14 million people, and still growing. Sir, how about Singapore? We are a small city with only 4 million people. Our domestic market is small.”
“Sir, I spoke earlier about the slow payments and I asked the Deputy Prime Minister whether it would be useful for the Ministry of Finance to issue a directive or reminder to Government agencies and GLCs to make prompt payment to the suppliers and contractors, as this would help them in their difficult financial time now; especially when the slow payment is due to some disagreement over a part of the contract but actually the Government agency can assess the value of the part under dispute, and pay for the other parts that have been completed. This would help the small SMEs in their cashflows. I have a case in my MPS where a contractor's payments were held back for nearly two years, because of some disagreement over a school building contract and an army camp contract. Payments were not made because part of the completed work has not been agreed upon. Could the Deputy Prime Minister consider whether the Government can issue a directive to all its agencies, and even to the GLCs, to make prompt payments as far as possible?”
“Sir, since we have time, can I make a small query with the Deputy Prime Minister?”
“My next cut is on the Report of the Economic Review Committee. Sir, the points I wish to make on this cut have been covered in my speech during the Budget debate. But since the Deputy Prime Minister has not replied to my queries, I shall repeat them briefly here. My main question is that now that the ERC has completed its Report, what is next? Will the existing Committee remain? How about annual reviews of the directions and recommendations made? We live in a fast changing and dynamic world. Who will be steering the future directions, or look ahead on whether there is any need to shift course due to the changing environment? Circumstances change rapidly. Some policies laid down now in the ERC Report may become irrelevant or, worse, counter-productive. Somebody must watch over these changes. Moreover, many recommendations in the Report involve numerous Ministries, and cut across Ministerial lines. I do not doubt the ability of the Ministry of Trade and Industry which can monitor the implementation of the numerous recommendations made, but I would like to suggest that a higher authority be appointed to supervise and oversee the implementation of the various recommendations, what I would call a supra-Ministerial person or group. Can I go on to my next cut, Sir?”
“The DPM may ask me to give him actual instances of slow payments and he will look into them. In fact, I would like to reverse the suggestion. The DPM could invite the public to write to his Ministry directly to report cases of slow payments. SMEs doing business with the Government may not want to report such instances, as they would be fearful of reprisals from the agencies affected, or they wish to preserve the good relationship with their paymasters. However, this invitation to report on the culprits could put our civil servants on their toes against any deliberate tardiness.”
“I have one last paragraph before I go on to my next cut.”
“I would suggest that the Ministry of Finance send out a directive or reminder to all Government agencies to be diligent and prompt in payments to suppliers and contractors. In fact, the same directive can be issued to Temasek Holdings and other Government-linked companies to be extra mindful of the need for prompt payments to their contractors and suppliers during this difficult period.”
“Now, the revised latest estimate is only a small $100 million deficit will be incurred, inclusive of transfers of $600 million. In fact, if we were to put back the transfers, an actual surplus of $500 million will be recorded. My point is that the effectiveness of the Government's yearly plans depends heavily on the accuracy of these figures. If the Government forecast a large deficit but ended the year actually with a small deficit or even a surplus, then the Government would have lost an entire year to achieve the intended result of the fiscal and financial plans for that year. On another matter relating to Government financial policy, I would like to ask the Minister for Finance whether the Government has a policy to pay its suppliers and contractors promptly. Similarly, is there a policy for Government agencies, like IRAS, CPF, Customs and Excise Department and other fee collecting agencies, to promptly repay deposits, refunds of overpayments and various sums due to the public? I ask this question because during this difficult financial period, where business is generally poor, most small-time suppliers, contractors and businessmen are very tight on cash flow. Therefore, if Government agencies are slow in making payments, then the tight cash flow problems may trigger the collapse of these small companies unnecessarily. I do not believe that civil servants will deliberately hold back payments. I do believe that civil servants are not so vicious or vindictive. They are supposed to be "civil servants". But slow payments could result because of lack of sense of urgency, misguided priority of work, over-prudency in checking and re-checking, mistrust, and many other reasons.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the total sum to be allocated for Head M of the Main Estimates be reduced by $100. Yesterday, this House heard the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance respond eloquently to the pleas of many MPs to use a higher budget deficit to stimulate the economy. I am pleased to hear from the Deputy Prime Minister that budgetary and financial prudence is the main objective of the Government. However, I wish to maintain that the current budget deficit is still very small, estimated to be only $0.9 billion, or 3% of the FY 2003 total operating revenue collection of S$29.6 billion or, in fact, a very minute 0.6% of the Year 2002 annual GDP of $156 billion. Sir, how is this small amount of deficit going to stimulate our flagging economy? The Minister for Finance may respond that, if need be, there will be off-Budget measures to be announced to help in case the economy worsens. Whilst I concede that off-Budget measures are helpful and a responsive manner to deal with a fast deteriorating economy, they should not be used too often to become a norm. The annual budget should be the main forum to announce the Government's financial and fiscal plans for the new financial year. And then businesses and the people can plan accordingly. I would like to suggest that off-Budget measures should be used sparingly, and only when in dire need. Sir, a point I wish to take up with the Minister is the accuracy and reliability of the yearly budget forecast. I contend that it is important to have accurate budget forecasts. It is the basis upon which the Government sets its financial plans for the year. FY 2002 is a case in point. The original forecast was estimated to be a deficit of $900 million.”
“It is time to get on with the business. Mr Speaker, Sir, whatever is happening around us currently in the world, Singapore has to find its place. We cannot foresee and plan ahead for everything. If we can be nimble and creative, we shall always be able to find our place in this world. The Government must show strong leadership in difficult times. The people must respond and shoulder its share of the burden. Let us put on our hard hats and boots and take up the changkol. Together, let us start ploughing, to re-build a better future for our children as best as we can.”
“The message must be made clear - the Government will help you today, but you must learn to take care of yourself tomorrow. Mr Speaker, Sir, we are living in very uncertain times. The sense of despondency is actually worse this year compared to last year. I recall that during the budget debate last year, my Backbench colleagues and I had already warned about this sense of doom and gloom prevailing in Singapore then. With higher unemployment, announcements of layoffs, and fear of the looming war in Iraq, the general sense of despondency is higher today. There is a general sense of haplessness as many factors are totally outside our control. We need to boost the confidence of the people. This is a priority task. Our people have to first understand and get used to a future where double digit growth and continuing tax cuts, more NSS and ERS shares will not be easy to come by. We have to re-orientate our expectations of growth. We have to accept that, henceforth, each incremental achievement requires greater effort. But, sometimes, I cannot help but have the feeling that we do tend to over-plan in Singapore. I recall that we had in the past the Vision 1999, The Next Lap and, more recently, the Singapore 21 Plan. We also had the Economic Committee in 1985. It seems like deja vu. No wonder there is muted enthusiasm to this ERC Report. However, I do wish to commend the Government for launching and completing the Economic Review Committee's Report. The people have been held in suspense, pending the release of the ERC Report. Now that the ERC Report, as well as the Budget, is announced, we should move on. The Government has laid down the clear long-term goals. The new fiscal and monetary policies have been spelt out. The new directions have been set.”
“To make matters worse, we understand that the Government has directed Ministries to cut down expenditures on projects and various spending. Would this instruction of the Ministry of Finance be counter-expansionary? We are beginning to hear feedback from the private sector companies that they are receiving fewer contracts from the Government. If this trend were to continue, would it not aggravate an already depressed economy? Sir, I would like to ask the Minister for Finance whether this year's Budget is indeed a stimulative budget. What are the measures to kick start the sputtering domestic economy? Where are the engine boosters? We do not have tax cuts, no pump priming was mentioned, and no announcement about additional infrastructure spending. So, how are we going to stimulate the economy to grow? Moving on to what I call the "crutch mentality", there is another dichotomy that I wish to raise. This is with regard to the continuation of the use of rebates and welfare benefits to help the lower income group and less privileged to overcome the various higher indirect tax burdens such as GST increase and the higher cost of living expenses. I am afraid that the long term use of rebates, reliefs and benefits will lead to a crutch mentality of the people. Somehow, we have to gradually wean the less able segment of the people to take care of themselves and become less dependent on welfare and financial aid. The same applies to the young. This contention is in line with my previous point that to build a truly entrepreneurial nation, the people have to learn to be less dependent on the Government, before we can truly create a new entrepreneurial and vibrant nation.”
“I do admit that I seem to be speaking with a forked tongue. Just a moment ago, I expressed concerns about a continuing budget deficit, and now I seem to be urging the Government to spend more to create a higher budget deficit to stimulate the economy. Let me explain. Although we said that Singapore has incurred three years of deficits, on closer examination, the deficits are still very small. In FY 2001, a total deficit of about $2.8 billion was incurred. This was about 10% of the total Government revenue for that year. This deficit was high but it was needed to stimulate the economy against a recession then. Last year's deficit for FY 2002 has been revised and estimated to be a modest $0.1 billion or $100 million, versus the original figure of $0.9 billion, or $900 million. So, FY 2002 is nearly a balanced budget. But for FY 2003, the estimated deficit is $0.9 billion. This is only 3% of the total Government's operating revenue collections for the new year amounting to $29.6 billion. For the sake of getting our economy out of the rut, and to give a booster to the people and business confidence, I would advocate a higher deficit for this new financial year. I believe we can afford it. Generally, it is thought that a deficit budget is expansionary. I would like to point out that this is not necessarily true. It depends, to a major extent, where the budget funds are allocated. If funds are not earmarked for expansionary projects, like infrastructure and growth, but to longer term projects like education and social targets, then a deficit budget may not be expansionary. This year's budget may be in a deficit, but I am not sure whether it is a sufficiently expansionary budget.”
“However, the general public is more focused on their immediate problems. Their immediate concerns are unemployment, firstly; then the uncertainty of domestic economic recovery, diminishing asset values, the looming threat of war in Iraq and the fall-outs of war, the unclear US economic recovery, terrorism, threats of China and India, quarrels with our nearest neighbour Malaysia, and the unclear geo-politic development in Indonesia. Looking through this long list, there is indeed reason for our people to feel deeply worried. Many are experiencing a sense of loss and despondency. The road ahead is hazy and directionless. Sir, turning back to the Budget for FY 2003, the Budget will see a deficit of $900 million. This is the third year of deficit in a row. It is a cause for concern on Government's principle of budget prudence. We have budget deficit for three years in a row. In this context, I can accept the announcement that there will be no corporate and personal income tax cuts and no income tax rebate for FY 2003. To make such cuts now will mean that there will be a larger budget deficit. However, I would urge the Minister for Finance that should good times return next year, please do not forget to reward the hardworking tax-paying people by giving them some income tax rebates. On the other hand, if the world and domestic economies remain poor for a few years, I wonder how would the Government meet its stated intention to cut direct taxes to 20% by 2005, without incurring further budget deficits or introducing higher GST increase. The latter move, of course, will be very unpopular. Mr Speaker, Sir, although we have a deficit budget for the new year, there is also a disappointment that the new Budget is not stimulative enough for the domestic economy.”
“It is, therefore, left to the relevant Ministries and agencies to follow through. The Report states that the Ministry of Trade and Industry (MTI) will co-ordinate the follow-through actions. Whilst I do not doubt the capability of MTI to undertake this task, I do wish to voice out aloud why it is not deemed important enough for this matter to be monitored henceforth by the Prime Minister's Office, or the Deputy Prime Minister's Office. I feel that the overseeing body should be either PMO, or by the DPM himself. In any case, he is the Chairman of the ERC. This rationale for high level monitoring is similar to the new Ministerial Committee on Services. I fully support the formation of this Ministerial Committee on Services to oversee the development of major new services, such as health, media and education. The reason is that the work crosses over many Ministries with inter-ministerial issues. Similarly, most of the ERC recommendations cut across Ministries. Therefore, a supra-Ministerial person being in-charge should spur smoother and speedier implementation. Mr Speaker, Sir, I wish to move on to the policies and measures announced in the Budget for FY 2003. As I have said earlier, the difficulty with this year's Budget debate is that we have to shift our orientation between the long term issues spelt out in the ERC Report, and then re-focus back to the short term matters in the Budget. This could be one reason why the reception to the ERC Report has been lukewarm, as some attention of the public has been diverted to short-term impact measures announced in the Budget. Sir, on focus on short term issues and threats. We know that the ERC Report is a very important landmark document. It spells out fully the total blueprint for Singapore's future survival.”
“Sir, on GST, in view of the budget deficit and the estimated $650 million cost for deferment of 1% GST increase for one year, I support the Government's intention to proceed to implement the second instalment of the next 1% increase in GST in January 2004. It is prudent not to incur higher deficit due to insufficient revenue collections if the GST increase is deferred further. On CPF, I agree with the recommendation to defer the restoration of the balance 4% CPF for another two years. This will enable companies to save on lower operating costs and better able to sustain their viability during this depressed business environment. However, I do want to voice my concern for those workers most affected, such as those in the older age group of 50 years old and above. This age group will not have their CPF cut restored, and will have to contribute more to their CPF Special and Medisave accounts. The lowering of the CPF salary ceiling from $6,000 to $5,000 will also mean that they will receive less contribution to their CPF from their employers. Then, they will have to face the double blow of higher expenses due to the further increase in GST totalling 2%, and, of course, general living expense increases which are inevitable. Therefore, the lower income group and the higher age group will continue to need support from the Government in the form of S&CC rebates, rental and utility rebates. Sir, on the next step for the ERC. As I said earlier, the ERC Report is very wide and comprehensive. What I find lacking are the specific recommendations on the implementation details to achieve the stated plans. I can concede that it will be too thick to spell out the actual implementation plans for every recommendation.”