Lim Biow Chuan
Singapore
“Sir, just two short supplementary questions. First, currently, the United Nations define seniors as 65 years whereas we have set ours at 67 years. So, would the Ministry of Manpower (MOM) consider reducing to 65 years for the age eligibility criterion for getting the concessionary rate for the MDW?”
“In light of this, the existing practice of the Ministry, which disallows the repeated renewal of shorter term COEs, should also be eliminated to preserve the maximum flexibility for EV drivers to extend the use of an environmentally friendly car.”
“Sir, in June last year, the Thomson-East Coast Line (TEL) was launched. Sir, let me express my gratefulness to LTA for the TEL line, as there are three TEL MRT stations within the Mountbatten constituency. The TEL line has facilitated travel for many residents in my constituency.”
“Sir, I receive many queries from Polytechnic and GCE "A" level students wanting to know about their enlistment dates, asking about their Physical Employment Standard (PES) status prior to enlistment for. Sir, I also receive queries about NSmen hoping to study overseas.”
“MFA has said on several occasions that Singapore supports the right of Palestinian people to a homeland of their own. Singapore delivered not one, or two, but a total of six to seven tranches of humanitarian aid for Gaza in January 2025.”
“Even in Parliament, Sir, our Clerks and other staff work such long hours because MPs debate long hours, spend time debating Bills until late in the evening and sometimes until late at night. Sir, I have on many occasions, received emails from Ministers late in the middle of the night.”
The complete record
Every one of 802 lines we hold for Lim Biow Chuan, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 8 of 17.
“Even as the experts review the options for 38 Oxley Road, I urge the Government to ascertain what were the exact wishes of the late Mr Lee Kuan Yew regarding 38 Oxley Road, a property of historical significance. Mr Lee Hsien Yang and Dr Lee Wei Ling had claimed in their media release that the late Mr Lee Kuan Yew removed the Prime Minister as executor and had specifically inserted into his will his wish for 38 Oxley Road to be demolished. In response, the Prime Minister issued a statutory declaration on 15 June 2017 questioning the circumstances behind the making of the seventh will. I have two concerns after I read the statutory declaration. First, why did the Prime Minister not challenge the will if he had doubts about the circumstances behind the making of the will? Why did he allow the Grant of Probate to be extracted without challenge? Second – and here, I wear my hat as a practising lawyer – rule 46 of the Legal Profession (Professional Conduct) Rules prohibits a lawyer from acting for a testator who intends to make a significant gift to any member of the family of that lawyer. In fact, the lawyer shall advise the client to seek independent advice in respect of the gift. The Singapore Court of Appeal had also stated that a solicitor, before preparing a will, should discuss the matter with the testator on the legal issues. This is a basic fundamental principle that most lawyers would be aware of. The rationale for the rule is really to avoid any potential conflict of interest, to avoid any allegation that there was undue pressure on the testator by the witness and to ensure that the testator has been independently advised. Mr Lee Hsien Yang, in his Facebook post, had said that Ms Kwa Kim Li from Lee & Lee had drafted the will. Ms Kwa promptly denied that.”
“At that time, I lamented at "the demolition and loss of other prominent buildings like the National Library, the National Theatre, the Van Kleef Aquarium and Queensway Cinema". I argued that our children and the future generations should not be left to read about Singapore's heritage, culture and history only through history textbooks, photographs or some sanitised heritage trails." Because 38 Oxley Road holds greater historical significance and heritage value to Singaporeans, I agree that we ought to consider all options for this property because, once demolished, part of our history would be gone forever, permanently. Thus, whilst many of us understand the reason why Minister Mentor Lee wanted to demolish 38 Oxley Road, I would be greatly disappointed if the Prime Minister had ordered the Government to demolish the Oxley Road property without going through due process of considering the heritage and historical value of the property. If the Prime Minister had done so, this means that Minister Mentor Lee's wishes are above the law. How then will the Government account to Singaporeans whose properties were previously conserved against their wishes? If 38 Oxley Road had been demolished without due process to consider the value of conserving the property, many Singaporeans would then have accused the Prime Minister of having a different law for Mr Lee Kuan Yew as compared to other Singaporeans. This would truly be an abuse of his position as Prime Minister. Hence, I cannot understand why Mr Lee Hsien Yang would claim that the Prime Minister had abused his position. Prime Minister Lee had a duty to all Singaporeans to consider the heritage value of 38 Oxley Road.”
“Could Mr Lee Hsien Yang be frustrated with the fact that after buying the property at full market value, he now finds out that the Government is unwilling to allow the demolition of the property or is not ready to allow any re-development of the property? Was Mr Lee Hsien Yang aware that the Government is still deliberating about what to do with Oxley Road when the Prime Minister offered to sell the property to him at full value? I urge the Prime Minister and the Government to share as much information as possible so that the citizens of Singapore can continue to have confidence in the political system and the rule of governance within the Singapore Government. Next, I refer to the statement by Mr Lee Hsien Yang and Dr Lee Wei Ling regarding the desire by Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew to demolish 38 Oxley Road. Mr Lee Hsien Yang and Dr Lee Wei Ling were insistent that 38 Oxley Road is to be demolished as stated by Mr Lee Kuan Yew in the seventh will dated 17 December 2013. The allegation about the Prime Minister's abuse of power seems to centre on their unhappiness that a Ministerial Committee was set up to consider the options about the future of 38 Oxley Road. Had this property been any apartment or condominium, I would have agreed that this is a private matter. But, unfortunately, the property concerned is 38 Oxley Road. Many Singaporeans recognise that 38 Oxley Road holds special historical significance to Singapore and the late Minister Mentor Lee would have recognised this fact as well. Last year, I filed an Adjournment Motion and appealed to the Government to consider the preservation of the Dakota Crescent rental flats.”
“Parliament is not the place for that. But what is private, he will try to resolve privately. For that statement, he has my utmost respect. There are certain queries which the public has and I hope that the Prime Minister's answers will clear the air. Many of the queries have already been answered in the Ministerial Statements yesterday. I just have a few more queries. Were there any decisions made by Ministers within the Committee because the Prime Minister had explicitly directed them? How much influence did the Prime Minister have in the decision whether to demolish or not to demolish 38 Oxley Road? Did the Committee consult the Prime Minister before any decision was made even though he had recused himself from any decision on the property? How can members of the public be assured that Cabinet members involved in the decision would make rational decisions and not worry that they would lose their jobs if they were to make a wrong decision about Oxley Road? Were they in awe of the Prime Minister and would defer to his wishes even though those wishes were not expressed? I think these questions are best answered by Deputy Prime Minister Teo, as any reply by the Prime Minister may be seen to be self-serving. Next, I wish to ask the Prime Minister about his Ministerial Statement that he offered to sell the Oxley Road property to Dr Lee Wei Ling for $1 but later sold it to Mr Lee Hsien Yang for the full market value? In addition, the Prime Minister asked him to donate half of the value of the property to charity. Why did the Prime Minister do so?”
“Prime Minister Lee and Deputy Prime Minister Teo had issued Ministerial Statements on these allegations and the rationale for the setting up of the Cabinet committees yesterday. Prime Minister Lee also stated that he had recused himself from deliberations about Oxley Road. Is Parliament the proper place to discuss these issues? I have no doubt because the allegations go towards the question of whether there was abuse of power and this affects the integrity of the Government and the system. If the Prime Minister does not defend the allegations in Parliament, where does he do so? On social media? The Prime Minister has also invited all Members of Parliament to speak freely and ask queries so that he can clear any doubts which we, Members of Parliament, as representatives of the people may have. And we have seen PAP Members of Parliament, Opposition Members of Parliament and Nominated Members of Parliament rise to ask many questions yesterday. For the Members of Parliament who had called on Prime Minister Lee to sue, I felt a sense of dismay. How many of us present in Parliament today would truly want to sue our own siblings or even relatives in Court for defamation? Whatever unhappiness that we may have with our own siblings, our own brother or sister, would we really, really want to take them to Court? Is not blood thicker than water? Would you not think of how your parents would feel if they see their own children squabbling so publicly or, worse, sue each other in Court? Many of us, each time we read in the newspaper about a child suing their parents or a sibling suing another sibling, we shake our heads in dismay. The Prime Minister said yesterday right at the start of his speech that he was not in Parliament to make a case against his siblings.”
“Mdm Speaker, the allegations made by Mr Lee Hsien Yang and Dr Lee Wei Ling on 14 June 2017 are serious. I had initially hoped that the dispute is just a family dispute which many other families would have. Unfortunately, the allegations made by the two younger siblings of the Prime Minister go beyond a dispute whether to demolish 38 Oxley Road. The two of them allege that the Prime Minister had misused his position and influence over the Government. They further allege that the system has no checks or balance to prevent abuse of Government and fear the use of Organs of State against the two of them and Suet Fern. Mdm Speaker, I struggle to understand the thrust of their allegations. Are they saying that our Deputy Prime Minister, the Ministers and other officebearers are subservient to the Prime Minister's wishes and cannot think for themselves? That the senior civil servants would set aside their personal beliefs and convictions just to obey the Prime Minister blindly without question? The allegations of abuse are short on details and not substantiated. After reading several of the media releases of Mr Lee Hsien Yang and Dr Lee Wei Ling, I surmised that the crux of the siblings' unhappiness is that the Prime Minister failed to comply with the desire of the late Mr Lee Kuan Yew to demolish 38 Oxley Road. They are unhappy that a Ministerial Committee was set up to consider the options regarding 38 Oxley Road. However, because these allegations of abuse came from no less a person than the Prime Minister's own siblings and they attack the integrity of the leader of the Government, it behoves the Prime Minister and other Cabinet Ministers involved to set out the basis for their decisions so that they can be scrutinised by members of the public.”
“Mdm Speaker, there were several reports in the newspapers about bicycles having been dismantled, having had their Global Positioning System (GPS) devices removed, and some are thrown into the river and so on. Surely, the Police ought to take punitive action. If we do nothing, then it may be seen that we are tolerating, we are accepting behaviour that totally disregards the rights of the owners of bicycles. If we allow such behaviour to continue, then, today, it may be those bike-sharing companies; tomorrow, it will be some other illegal activity. I would like to ask the Parliamentary Secretary whether the Police would take a more stringent approach against culprits who abuse shared bicycles, who remove and dismantle them or who basically convert the shared bicycles to their own use and leave these bicycles at home. To me, this is theft, this is conversion.”
“Mdm Speaker, I get quite a lot of feedback from my residents that the roads are dug again and again and again. And it seems like the Road Opening Coordination Committee is really not doing its assessment well. May I ask the Minister whether is it possible to have a moratorium on digging up roads again unless it is for extreme emergency? That means once you have dug up a road, for the next four, five months, no digging of the road again unless it is for an emergency to be determined and approved by the Minister only.”
“May I ask the Senior Minister of State whether there are also plans for maintenance of the toilets to make sure that they are kept clean because building toilets are just part of the equation?”
“Mdm Speaker, if I may just further address some of the concerns since CASE has been mentioned a couple of times. I wanted to request consumers to also exercise their right of choice, because if all consumers do not exercise their right of choice and just pay whatever a coffee shop demands, then, of course, you will be supporting the price increases arbitrarily. From CASE's point of view, we will continue to monitor prices of drinks in coffee shops and in the event that one coffee shop raises its price more than others, we will be happy to publicise coffee shops which have not raised the price of their coffee and other drinks. Basically, this is to create a more competitive situation where consumers then have a choice. I would urge consumers also to refer feedback to CASE and we will follow up with MTI if there is a need to do so.”
“I notice that over the past few months when people made false and malicious allegations against the Police, the Police issue a correction. Unless the Government takes action to protect the integrity of Government institutions, I am concerned that the trust and faith in Government institutions will be undermined. May I ask the Minister whether the Ministry of Home Affairs would consider implementing or taking stern action to make it a punishable offence, make it a jailable offence, for people to make false and malicious allegations, which are not the same as what the Minister earlier said, which is, that when officers are investigated. But I am referring to false and malicious allegations against the Police.”
“However, I have no doubt that it is the right and responsible thing to do, as it would result in better public accountability and strengthen financial management. It is good and for the benefit of the residents and, therefore, I support the Bill. 3.46 pm”
“However, sub paragraph (iii) of section 48A(1) seems to place a heavier burden on that person. And in some circumstances, it is really not so easy to determine whether a person knew or ought reasonably to have known that the offence by the Town Council would be committed. Can the Senior Minister of State clarify under what circumstances would this clause be invoked? Before I close, Mdm Speaker, allow me to comment on some of the views expressed earlier by hon Members of the House. As far as I can recall, Hougang Town Council has been in existence for many years. What I know is that Mr Low Thia Khiang had managed his Town Council well for many years. He gathered his own group of supporters and he was elected again and again. At the end of the day, if WP is able to manage the Town Council well and with proper governance, then clause 24 or Part VIA will not be implemented. The Government will not come in. It is for this reason we have clause 24 or Part VIA of this Bill. If my Town Council is badly managed, then I will expect that the Government will look after the interest of the residents and would interfere and would ensure that the compliance of the Town Council is taken seriously. As an example, if Mr Pritam Singh's Town Council chooses not to transfer monies into its sinking fund, or uses its revenues for its routine operational expenses only, should the Government not be concerned that his Town Council is unable to carry out its functions, to carry out cyclical works in the future? Should the Government then do nothing to protect the interests of its citizens? So, for that reason, Mdm Speaker, I do support clause 24 Part VI A of the Bill. Mdm Speaker, if this Bill is passed, it would really mean more work for each of the Chairman of every Town Council.”
“In some private estates, if a situation like this happens, the residents would be forced to pay a special capital levy of a large sum of money to pay for the lift replacement. The alternative is for the residents to do without the lift. Thus, it is financially prudent that the Town Council set aside part of its sinking fund collection now to ensure that the Town Council does not have to suddenly raise funds to pay for a large bill when the time comes to pay for the lift replacement. It would be irresponsible for any Town Council to kick the can down the road and leave it to future residents to solve the problem of raising funds to pay for lift replacement. When the Bill was tabled, one of the things that caused me some concern was clause 25 of the Bill. The clause inserts a new section 48A to the Town Councils Act and introduced the concept of personal liability for the Chairman or Secretary of the Town Council. Thus, if a Town Council had committed an offence under section 21A(4) or section 43D(4) of the Town Councils Act, not only would the Town Council be subject to a fine, the Chairman or Secretary of the Town Council would also be guilty of the same offence if the provisions of section 48A(1)(b) are met. The clause does seem onerous for the Chairman and the Secretary as it involves personal liability for the two office bearers. If found guilty, the Chairman or the Secretary would be liable to a fine or to imprisonment. I agree that if a Chairman or Secretary had consented or connived to effect the commission of an offence, or if that person had, by act or omission, knowingly been concerned in or is a party to the commission of an offence by the Town Council, then some degree of penalty on a personal basis is warranted.”
“They ignore the fact that the Town Council does not have power to take injunctions against a recalcitrant shopkeeper. Instead, SCDF issues a summons to the Town Council for failure to comply with safety regulations. Is there a better way in which the Town Council can work with HDB or statutory bodies to address such issues? If a Town Council is fully cooperative and wishes to ensure that there is compliance with the regulations imposed by the Government, can the Government agency consider that Town Council's efforts and attempts in getting the residents or shopkeepers to comply with the law? You see, even PAP Town Councils are not immune from the arms of the Government agencies. Next point is clause 18 which talks about the lift replacement fund. This clause introduces a new requirement for the Town Council to establish a lift replacement fund. And each Town Council is required to set aside part of its sinking funds for the lift replacement fund. In Marine Parade, there are about 1,400 lifts. In some of the bigger towns, like Ang Mo Kio, there are more than 2,000 lifts. Each lift would have an operational lifespan after which the Town Council would eventually have to replace the lift. Thus, for older estates, if the flats are more than 30 years old, the lifts are likely to be 30 years old and prone to frequent breakdowns due to its mechanical age. Setting aside a lift replacement fund is a prudent and responsible thing to do. Otherwise, years from now, when the time comes to replace these lifts because they are no longer serviceable, then it is foreseeable that the Town Council may not have sufficient funds to pay for the replacement costs of all the lifts.”
“This is a common requirement for many Accounting and Corporate Regulatory Authority (ACRA)-registered companies. I was surprised that this six-month deadline was not a previous requirement. Submission of audited financial accounts to the Government is important because if there are any issues with the accounts, it is important that all parties sit down quickly to find out what these issues are and how to resolve them. It is also a form of public accountability because the Government gives each Town Council grants worth millions of dollars every year. Next point, clause 14, interaction between Town Councils and statutory authorities. Clause 14 of the Bill introduces a new section 21A which imposes on the Town Council an obligation to work with HDB and any statutory body performing the functions listed at section 21A(1)(b) of the Bill. I understand the intent behind the clause is to ensure that Town Councils do not impede the work of a statutory body for the purposes stated at section 21A, that is, to secure public safety, ensure public order, prevent disease or injury or create and maintain a healthy environment. In principle, I agree with this purpose. These are all clearly meant for the benefit of the residents of the HDB estate and to improve their quality of life. However, I wish to raise an issue which the Town Council faces on the ground. To cite an example, Town Council issues summonses or notices to shopkeepers to keep the common area free of clutter. The shopkeeper may choose to pay the fine. Then, when a statutory body like the Singapore Civil Defence Force (SCDF) inspects the place, they ignore the fact that the Town Council has been trying to enforce the regulations.”
“What is fundamental to every organisation dealing with the award of contracts is the need to keep the system transparent and to have good governance. Otherwise, if a Town Council member with a business interest in a major project does not declare his interest, he may then be able to persuade members within the same committee to award a contract to him at an inflated price. In such a case, there is likelihood of abuse of the system. At the end of the day, the interest of the residents would suffer as the Town Council may be paying above market prices to its contractor who has a vested interest in serving in the Town Council. It also begs the question as to who is looking after the interest of the residents if there is conflict of interest. I also support the amendment to extend the conflict of interest disclosure requirements to the Secretary, an employee, a staff or MA of the Town Council. Senior staff members of the Town Council sometimes do have influence over members of the Council because of friendship built up over the years. These staff members should also be required to disclose their interest in any contracts to be awarded by the Town Council to their company or to their associates. Otherwise, it would be easy for staff members to persuade Town Council members that the best contractor in any tender is their own company in which they have a vested interest. Given that the Town Council awards contracts of large values regularly, it would be easy for someone with a vested interest to benefit from these contracts. Clause 21 of the Bill requires the Town Council to submit its audited financial statements to the Minister within six months after the close of FY.”
“Most Town Councils would need to set aside millions of dollars in its sinking funds because such cyclical works involve huge capital expenses. The Town Council needs to ensure that they have enough funds in its sinking funds to cater for future cyclical expenses as and when they are required. Mdm Speaker, I have been involved in the Town Council since 1990. I served 16 years in the Legal and Finance committee of Jalan Besar Town Council and then moved on to serve in the Marine Parade Town Council from 2006 to today. Over these past years, a large part of my time doing Town Council-related matters is spent on reviewing contract awards. It is critical to ensure that contracts awarded by the Town Council are all done above board and that commercial decisions by the Town Council are made without any self-interest involved. Many of the contracts awarded by Town Councils to their contractors are of high value and in the hundreds of thousands of dollars. Just to give the House a flavour of the amount involved, in a recent tender to carry out repairs and redecoration of 15 blocks of flats and a hawker centre, the tender bids alone were all above $1.6 million. So, these are large sums of money involved. Because of the large sums of moneys involved and given the fact that the Town Council handles funds collected from the public, I support any rules to tighten financial management and to introduce rules of governance. I wish to touch briefly on four points in the Bill. First, clause 9 talks about conflict of interest and disclosures. The requirement to disclose conflicts of interest at clause 9 is nothing new. It is already in section 15 of the existing Act. In many charities and voluntary welfare organisations (VWOs), similar requirements on disclosures are also imposed.”
“Mdm Speaker, I declare my interest in speaking on this Bill as Chairman of Marine Parade Town Council. According to the Town Councils Act, the role of the Town Council is to control, manage, maintain and improve the common property of the residential and commercial property in an HDB estate. On the ground, the actual work of the Town Council is very wide-ranging. For example, it is the Town Council that ensures that the common areas of the HDB estates are cleaned, that rubbish is cleared from rubbish bins, that rubbish chutes are flushed regularly, that the lights at the common corridors, void decks, car parks and other common areas are properly maintained, that the lifts are maintained and repaired whenever they break down. In addition to the daily maintenance work of the HDB estate, the Town Council also carries out cyclical works like major repainting works, renewal and replacement of roofing system, replacement of water tanks, pumps and water supply system, fire-fighting and protection systems, water pipes and water pump sets and lifts. These cyclical works involve huge expenses as the scope of the work is much larger. Many Town Councils also carry out improvement projects like installing children's playgrounds, fitness corners and building covered linkways. The annual budget of most Town Councils range between $30 million and $40 million. This is a large sum of money. The revenue of the Town Council comes mainly from S&CC collected from residents and from Government grants. From the S&CC collected, Town Councils will have to set aside a proportion of its revenue to a sinking fund to cater to the future expenses for its cyclical works.”
“Madam, I submit that these 16 active mobility enforcement officers are simply inadequate and not effective. Without adequate enforcement, there is a real risk that riders may simply ignore the LTA rules and ride recklessly. In the process, they endanger other road or footpath users. LTA should not just rely on its 600 volunteers as the deterrent effect and impact are not the same as having dedicated enforcement officers. Bicycle-sharing Scheme”
“Madam, with the passing of the Active Mobility Bill recently, bicycles, powered mobility devices and power-assisted bicycles are allowed to be used on public paths. I understand and accept that these devices would allow more people, especially the elderly, to move around without the use of the car. This will be environmentally friendlier and help Singapore achieve a car-lite society faster. However, members of the public have given feedback that they are still worried about the potential for accidents on the footpaths caused by reckless and inconsiderate users of such powered mobility devices or power-assisted bicycles. The concern is really for the young children and the elderly who are less alert to the dangers of speeding riders. I urge LTA to have a greater outreach to all potential riders of powered mobility devices or power-assisted bicycles so that they can learn to be considerate and responsible riders. LTA should conduct safety courses not just in English but also in other languages for riders. If LTA anticipates that more seniors will be using such devices, LTA should conduct such safety courses in the vernacular languages and at convenient places like the Community Centres or Community Clubs. We need to do more to reach out to the potential riders so that they can learn to respect other road and public path users. In many parts of Europe and Australia, both pedestrians and riders of powered devices are able to co-exist because of mutual respect and consideration for each other. I also call on LTA to enlarge its team of enforcement officers. Last month, I filed a Parliamentary Question and I learned that there are currently only 16 LTA active mobility enforcement officers.”
“Could our students learn in a better and more enjoyable manner instead of expecting them to memorise everything and regurgitate them during the national exams? The schools should ensure that the students are tested based on what is expected of them. Direct School Admission”
“MOE should allow these students who are not too far off from the cut-off point of the school, maybe just one or two points away, to demonstrate their ability to the principals through an interview or some form of assessment. In the past, principals of schools do have some discretion to admit students on a case-by-case basis. They can look for students who had performed well throughout the six years of school but fumbled on PSLE day. It may be that the student has other skills or talents which the school may be able to develop. For example, a school with a tradition for swimming may be a better choice for a budding swimmer. Our school principals are very capable civil servants. Allow them some discretion to admit students based on their assessment or interviews. The universities are already practising this. Please do not send a wrong signal to the students that the PSLE score is everything. Next, I wish to ask MOE about its policy on schools which deliberately set exams to such high standards so that a majority of students do not do well. I understand that some schools pride themselves on their ability to fail a large percentage of their students during the school exams in the belief that these students will strive to do better during national exams. By doing so, would not the school be imposing a disproportionate level of stress on the students? Has MOE ever studied the effect of such stress on the students? Surely, there may be some students who are greatly discouraged by their poor results. Some students may suffer a breakdown when they find out that they had failed a few papers despite working very hard through the year. Why do such schools take away the joy of learning by imposing an unrealistic standard for the students?”
“In July 2016, MOE announced changes to the PSLE system. MOE said, "The current T-score system grades students very finely. It is unnecessary at this young age to make such fine distinctions between children. Some people believe that a student who scores 231 points is better than another student who scores 230, but it is not educationally meaningful to differentiate so finely between the two at this age. Hence, we are moving to wider scoring bands, where students in the same band are similar academically." MOE wants parents to believe that it is not necessary to chase after the last mark in the PSLE exam and that "Primary school education is a time when students develop foundational language and numeracy skills." But yet, after PSLE results are released, every school is told that if the student does not meet the cut-off point for the school, there is no scope for appeal. The contradictory message which MOE is telling the students and the parents is that "every point counts". If you do not make the PSLE score, you do not make the cut-off point, there is no discussion. The principal has absolutely no discretion. I appeal to MOE to reconsider this policy. You may say every school is a good school. But students do have their aspirations, their dream choices. For various personal reasons, they may not have opted for Direct School Admission (DSA) to be admitted to their choice secondary school. Or they could not make it for their dream school based on DSA. But sometimes, their dreams, the aspirations are just within a finger's grasp away. Because of a bad day due to illness or nervousness, they did not perform to their expectation.”
“The Land Transport Authority (LTA) can also analyse commuter data from the bus transport operators to determine where there is peak demand for buses on normal days, so that the bus companies can despatch buses to places where there is high commuter ridership. I urge the Government to consider investing more on digital and data technology so that it can continue to deliver essential services to the public and yet keep the costs of human capital low. Elderly Access to Government Services”
“Madam, a few months ago, I met with Traffic Police to ask for more enforcement action against drivers who are racing or speeding in a dangerous manner along the East Coast Parkway. I asked the Police whether they could install more portable speed cameras within the constituency so that the need for constant patrolling by the Traffic Police can be reduced. To my surprise, it seems that installing a speed camera is not so straightforward. Despite the fact that cameras are so common nowadays, to date, the portable speed camera is not yet installed. This made me wonder whether the Government can do more to tap on technology to deliver its services to the public. For example, we currently already have closed circuit television (CCTVs) to monitor places where there is illegal parking. Can we use the latest wireless technology to install more such CCTVs at lower costs so as to deter illegal parking which obstructs other road users? I also urge the Government to consider using the latest camera technology to curb high-rise littering and littering along areas like public parks or bus stops and other busy public places. The Government can use sensor technology to track whether roads and drains have been regularly cleaned by the cleaning companies. Today, when my mobile data usage on my phone reaches 80% of my limit, Singtel automatically sends me a short message service (SMS) to alert me. Can the Government rely on such similar technology to alert residents when their household water usage exceeds 80% of the norm? This will remind residents to be more careful about their water usage.”
“Thus, the Government is helping companies with their wage bill if they employ retrenched workers. There have also been tripartite guidelines given requiring employers to inform MOM within five days of laying off workers and to provide the employees' details. Unfortunately, as can be seen from a recent case when an employer terminated several workers on grounds of poor performance, employees who lose their jobs for whatever reasons will face a certain period of financial uncertainty in their lives. With an increasing number of workers who have lost their jobs in 2016 − I think it is 11,890 in the first nine months − may I urge MOM to reconsider the need to provide mandatory retrenchment benefits to workers? After all, a recent survey in late 2016 showed that 90.6% of employers do pay retrenchment benefits to workers who were retrenched. If retrenchment benefits are made compulsory, only a small number of workers will be affected. But making retrenchment benefits compulsory would certainly help these workers. And to the worker who is retrenched without any compensation, it is really a frustrating time for him as he struggles to provide for his family. I know the Minister has spoken on this topic just last month but allow me to be a little bit more persistent, because workers whose employment is terminated really do not know what their rights are and what they can do to seek fair compensation from their employers. So, may I urge the Minister to reconsider the need for a mandatory retrenchment benefit law?”
“Mdm Chairman, one of the bugbears which I frequently hear is about Singaporean workers who lose their jobs and were replaced by foreign workers who are either less costly or who are related to their foreign employers. Another area of frustration of many Singaporeans is that they work in a company where the majority of employees are foreigners. Can MOM update this House on the actions taken by the Government to reduce such unfair and unethical practices and what measures are there to protect Singaporean workers? We need to assure Singaporean employees that the Government does not condone such behaviour of employers who discriminate against Singaporeans. Are there any punitive actions taken against any such companies found to have flouted MOM's regulations? It is also important for MOM to signal to employers that there are severe consequences if they take advantage of policies to employ mainly foreigners in their companies. In such a case, we might as well not allow such companies to operate in Singapore as there is no benefit to the country. For recalcitrant companies, would MOM consider cancelling the Work Permits or EPs of these companies? It is a drastic action but I cannot see the benefit of having such companies operate in Singapore if they do not provide sufficient employment for Singaporeans. 12.30 pm Mandatory Retrenchment Benefits Last year, during the Budget Debate, I appealed to MOM to consider a mandatory retrenchment benefit law for workers who had lost their jobs due to retrenchment. MOM had then shared about their schemes to help workers who were retrenched. I was particularly impressed by the Adapt and Grow initiative and CSP which provided wage support for companies which employ eligible Singaporean PMETs.”
“There is never a good time to raise prices for utilities. However, increasing the price of water in times of economic uncertainty is definitely not a good time. Let me stress that I totally agree with the Finance Minister that water is critical to our survival and we need to take adequate measures to conserve water. But sadly, the 30% increase in water prices seems to have detracted from the main intent of the Budget. And due to rumour-mongering, many people seem to have been so caught up and so concerned over this 30% water price increase such that they seem to have forgotten or ignored the various other measures that the Government has introduced to help Singaporeans mitigate the price increase. Thus, it seems to have distracted many of us from the much important message that all Singaporeans need to focus on, which is how to plan our future, how to develop stronger capabilities in a fast changing world. That is the main message of the Budget but, seemingly, when I go for feedback sessions, everybody's first question is about the water price increase. And I felt that it is really an unnecessary distraction for all of us. If it is really not possible to defer the water price increase, then I hope that the Government would consider measures to ensure that businessmen do not profiteer from this water price increase. And this may be similar to the Committee Against Profiteering (CAP) which was set up some years ago when the GST was raised. Mdm Speaker, I support the Budget.”
“I have a large number of such middle-income residents in my constituency. Many of them are PMETs who are living in condos or five-room flats. I also have a number of retirees living in private homes which they had bought many years ago after saving for many years. For this category of residents, they feel that they have been left out in this Budget. They feel penalised simply because they were trying their best to live their aspirations in the past. For the retirees, they have no income and are relying on their savings, pension or their children to provide for them. For the PMETs, their income is unlikely to rise due to wage freeze in many companies. Yet, these retirees and the middle-income PMETs will face increases in water pricing, car park and S&CC charges. Some of the PMETs may also face job insecurity. This group will not benefit from many of the support measures of Budget 2017. If they stay in HDB flats, they may receive a smaller S&CC rebate. If they stay in private properties, they will not benefit from the GST U-Save vouchers, the S&CC rebate or the GST cash special payment. And the retirees also do not benefit from the tax rebate. So, I urge the Government to consider ways in which we can allow the retirees and middle-income Singaporeans to share or enjoy the growth of the country and to move forward together as a nation. We should find other more equitable ways to share and redistribute the country's wealth rather than rely on home type as a proxy for measurement of their wealth. Let us do more for the middle income so that they too can find the theme for this year's Budget, "Moving Forward Together", a meaningful theme for them as well. Finally, I also want to urge the Minister to consider a stay on water price increases for this year.”
“Some of these businessmen were hoping that Budget 2017 would provide them with some form of financial relief or reduced costs. However, it seems that their hopes may not materialise. The feedback which I have received is that many of the budgetary measures in this year's Budget would only help a specific segment of the business community. The focus of the Government is to strengthen capabilities for the future. Thus, for some of the smaller businesses, this year's Budget may not be a major event. It has little positive impact for them. Instead, some of the measures taken to protect the environment and the water price increases may hurt them more. I do not believe that businesses are hoping for a handout from the Government. What they are appealing for is a business climate which is less costly and friendlier to businesses. As it stands, property-related costs are still very high. I urge the Government to consider some additional measures, for example, a rental rebate for all tenancies where JTC or HDB is the landlord, or a property tax relief which landlords of private properties must pass on to their tenants. Although there is an SME working capital loan, the feedback is that not many SMEs are aware of the loan or how it works. There is also the perception that it is not easy to get such loans. How can the Government do more to reach out to the many SMEs which are looking for a lifeline for their businesses? Can the Government elaborate on its plans to conduct more outreach to the SMEs on all the available help? Would the Government also consider a one-year stay on any foreign workers' levy (FWL) hike until the economic situation has stabilised? Next, allow me to express my concern for the middle-income Singaporeans.”
“Mdm Speaker, I rise in support of the Budget. There are many things that I like about this year's Budget. I like the fact that the Government is trying to prepare Singapore for the future economy and to sustain employment for the seniors. I like the budgetary provisions to help all of us build an inclusive society and to strengthen our economy. The CFE's recommendations are important and relevant proposals. If well executed, they will help Singaporeans prepare ourselves for the future economy. I also believe that the young couples hoping to start a family would appreciate the generous increase in housing grants. It is a clear indication that the Government cares for our younger generation. I hope that younger Singaporeans hoping to start a new family will consider the option of buying a resale flat with the increased housing grant. I also want to say that I appreciate the increase in Goods and Services Tax (GST) Voucher, U-save rebates, the cash special payment and the increase in service and conservancy charges (S&CC) rebates. All these would provide much needed relief for the average Singaporeans who face higher cost of living expenses. The additional support of up to $100 million for the voluntary welfare organisations (VWOs), $6 million for the self-help groups and the support for people with disabilities and mental health conditions send a very strong signal that this Budget is to enable all of us, as Singaporeans, to move forward together. However, Madam, allow me to express the concerns of many smaller businesses which are facing serious struggles to survive in an unpredictable economy and which are also facing declining sales. The reality is that not every business is doing well over the past few years.”
“May I ask the Parliamentary Secretary whether this Programme also highlights the risks of entrepreneurship to the students? I am concerned that you paint a rosy picture of entrepreneurship and that you do not highlight the risks of failure to such students. At the end of the day, many of them may go into business without knowing the risks involved.”
“I have been told by my residents that when they bought the flat from HDB, they paid the same price as the other owners. Now that they are trying to sell it, because of the EIP, they have to sell it at a lower price and they are unable to fetch a fair market value for their flats due to this policy. So, would the Ministry of National Development (MND) consider giving them a grant to top up the difference between the fair market value and the actual sale price that they sell the flat for because they are selling at a loss compared to when they bought the property at the time from HDB?”
“Mdm Speaker, I do have some residents who have children who lack mental capacity. Can the Ministry consider amending the law to allow parents of children without mental capacity to make an LPA on their behalf? Currently, the children already cannot make an LPA, so can the parents do so on their behalf so that we can dispense with the need to apply for an order under the Mental Capacity Act?”
“In the Conservation Report, they shared more about the architectural, historical and social significance of Dakota Crescent and the rationale for wanting to preserve this unique piece of estate. I have seen the report. Mdm Speaker, it is with me and it will be presented to NHB and URA. It is very interesting to learn more about the uniqueness of the design of the flats from an architectural point of view. The Conservation Report shared about how Dakota can be used to become a space for educating the future generation about Singapore. There are suggestions as to how the estate can be re-developed for use by arts groups, social enterprises, or as rental flats for couples waiting for their BTO flats. So, this is not just a call by residents to conserve the place. They have even taken the effort to share more about how the Government can use the space even as we conserve it. Many of these suggestions warrant serious consideration by the town planners. I hope that by speaking on this Motion, I can persuade the Government to re-think its redevelopment plans for Dakota Crescent. I believe that this Government can do more to preserve our heritage, culture and history. And by preserving key portions of a unique neighbourhood like Dakota Crescent, the Government would encourage cultural and social networks to be involved and to thrive. This, Mdm Speaker, I submit, would make Singapore a better place for all our future generations. 5.40 pm Page: 70”
“Dakota Crescent was built in 1958 by the Singapore Improvement Trust (SIT), the predecessor of HDB. There are 10 blocks of seven-storey flats, four blocks of three storey flats and one block of two storey flats. It is a tranquil place located next to the river. In fact, I would invite Members of the House to drop by there one day just to walk in the evening, very tranquil. To many Singaporeans who pass by Old Airport Road regularly, they call the flats the "seven-storey houses", or what they say in Hokkien, "qi lao chu". Dakota Crescent is one of the first public housing projects built during the SIT era to provide mass housing just before the role of mass building for the public was passed on to HDB. The fact that this estate is older than Singapore is a cause for celebration and should be an important consideration for conservation. The estate was named after a Dakota plane crashed at Kallang Airport. In the midst of the estate sits a dove-shape marble playground which I was told is the only dove-shape playground left in Singapore. I was also told that in 1959, the Constitution Exposition was held at Kallang Airport to commemorate internal self-government in Singapore. It was a spectacular exhibition and a huge celebration at that time. Dakota Crescent was witness to this exhibition as it was situated just next to Kallang Airport. The group of residents whom I talked to laboured for many months and they have prepared a Conservation Report to URA and the National Heritage Board. This report is a ground-up movement from interested residents who feel passionately that Dakota Crescent should be preserved.”
“" Prof Koh said that "the Singapore conservation movement came in time to realise the importance of conserving our built heritage and the anchors of our individual and collective memories". This brings me to the question: how does the Government balance between developing our country for better progress as against preserving our heritage, culture and history? Can the Government help citizens to develop a greater sense of belonging to Singapore by preserving more of our history, more of our culture and more of our heritage buildings? How can we recall our past with nostalgia? Hence, I wish to call on the Government to reconsider its plans for redeveloping Dakota Crescent which is within Mountbatten constituency. I raised this matter in 2015 in a Parliamentary Question. And plans for the redevelopment of Dakota Crescent were made known sometime in 2014. After the announcement, HDB started to brief the residents about their relocation options and the plan to move the residents to a new block of rental flats. During this period, many residents came to share with me that they will miss the place after staying in Dakota Crescent for more than 50 years. They have so many stories to tell and so many memories attached to the place. Page: 69 Even people whom I have not met before came up to me to share that they had lived in the estate when they were young. They can recall their days growing up in the Old Airport estate and Dakota area. Sometime in 2015, several residents approached me to argue that there is sufficient merit for the Government to consider preserving Dakota Crescent. I met these residents and other interested parties to better understand their viewpoint. After hearing them out, I agreed with them.”
“Mdm Speaker, we need to do more to encourage our citizens to develop a greater emotional connection to Singapore, to develop greater social cohesion and to better identify themselves as Singaporeans. One way to do so is to identify the collective memories of Singaporeans and to see how we can preserve the existing way of life and the local identity. Old buildings like the National Library, National Theatre, Van Kleef Aquarium; places like Sungei Road, Chinatown, Little India, Bugis Street; they all form part of the culture and heritage of Singapore. These are the buildings and places which existed during the days of nation building. They are all part of the Singapore history. Many other countries are also taking steps to preserve their heritage and culture. Just look at the efforts by Japan, Hong Kong and the countries in Europe. If Singapore does not take urgent action to evaluate what to preserve and how to preserve our local heritage, culture and identity, these memories may be lost forever. Try as we may, we may never be able to re-create the same culture, the same setting. Just look at Chinatown and Bugis Street as examples of our attempts to re-create the environment and setting but which did not succeed. One of my concerns is that when a Singaporean leaves the country to work or study for a few years, when he returns, the place becomes unrecognisable because new buildings keep sprouting up and older buildings get demolished. Prof Tommy Koh, in a recent speech at the World Cities Summit, said, "History and culture can play an important role in the rejuvenation of cities and in transforming ordinary cities into great cities.”
“Over the years, we have seen the demolition and loss of other prominent buildings like the National Theatre, the Van Kleef Aquarium and Queensway Cinema. Prominent places like New World, Gay World, Great World – they are all gone. The old Bugis Street, Chinatown and Sungei Road are also all gone and, in their places, we have commercial buildings and shopping complexes, many of which lack the original identity. Critics say that they all look similar to other buildings and shopping complexes which can be found all over Singapore. I recognise that Singapore needs to progress and development has to take place. However, when Singaporeans experience loss of too many familiar buildings, familiar places of entertainment and environment, there will be this sense of loss of roots, a loss of emotional attachment to Singapore. Museums should not be the only repositories of a nation's memories and history. Our children and the future generation should not be left to read about Singapore's heritage, culture and history Page: 68 only through history textbooks, photographs or some heritage trails. Our future generation should have the opportunity to walk through and experience for themselves the same places which their parents had previously walked through, to allow them to experience and feel the presence of a particular environment of a local culture. Just to cite an example, I can show a person a picture book of the Botanic Gardens, or even take him on an interactive journey on the computer to explore the Botanic Gardens, but it is never the same as taking him to the Botanic Gardens for a walk in the park to admire the rainforest, the Ginger Garden, the majestic Tembusu tree or to watch the swans at the lake.”
“Thank you, Mdm Speaker. Mdm Speaker, I raised this Motion so as to create a better understanding on the need to preserve our heritage, culture and history and, in particular, to urge the Government to consider the conservation of Dakota Crescent. When I was young, I was a regular visitor to the National Library at Stamford Road. The National Library allowed me to read books and to find out more about the world without having to take a single step out of Singapore. I recall spending hours at the old National Library reading fictional books, books about playing chess, stories about Greek mythology and so on. When the National Library at Stamford Road was torn down in 2005 to make way for Fort Canning Tunnel, I was very disappointed. The National Library was a building which carries many fond memories not just for myself but for many other Singaporeans around my age group. I can still recall eating ice kacang from the stall full of bees flying around at the coffeeshop. Sadly, those memories of my time as a young boy at the Stamford Road National Library would now only remain as memories. In 2011, LTA announced that Rochor Centre would be demolished to make way for the new North South Expressway. I had lived at Rochor Centre from 1977 to 1990. I shifted there when I was in Secondary 2 when it was a new block of flats and lived there until I married and moved out. I spent the better part of my growing up years in that estate. It was at Rochor Centre that I started volunteering as a grassroots leader because I wanted to improve the condition of the estate. It saddens me that the four multi-coloured blocks of flats which carry 40 years of memories for those residents would disappear soon.”
“Before I end my speech, I wish to acknowledge my appreciation to MTI for carrying out public consultation for the proposed changes. I also thank the Minister and the staff from MTI for their strong support and constant engagement with CASE to improve consumer protection. Mdm Speaker, I support the Bill.”
“7 million as at January 2015, the company continued to sell platinum memberships and collect prepayments from their customers. It was reported that one member paid $1,700 for a 26-month package just nine days before the company closed. When company managements behave in such a dishonest manner and consumers get cheated, something must be done. I urge the Government to take strong action against the directors and management of any company whose management knowingly continues to collect large sums of prepayment when they are fully aware that the company is insolvent and cannot continue its operations. This will send a strong signal to the directors and management of a company that they must not act dishonestly or recklessly. Third, may I ask the Minister of State whether the Government would consider issuing a "grey" list of contractual terms which the Government considers to be unfair? This can be done by subsidiary legislation. It would help consumers and businesses alike to understand which contractual terms may be considered unfair. An example of such an unfair term which may be included in a "grey list" would be terms that require all disputes with consumers to be referred to arbitration. The use of the arbitration clause in contracts makes it near impossible for consumers to seek redress for small claims as this is because arbitration is simple too expensive when the claims are too small. Consumers also cannot turn to the Small Claims Tribunal (SCT) for help due to the arbitration clause, which ousts the jurisdiction of SCT. So, one option, if I may propose, is to disallow compulsory arbitration clauses if it relates to claims below $10,000, which is similar to the limit for SCT. I hope that the Minister of State can clarify my concerns.”
“First, much of the frustration in respect of the Sim Lim Square fiasco arose because the conduct of the supplier was not just about "unfair practice". The supplier was dishonest. He cheated consumers by asking them to pay for non-existent unlocking phone fees or he could ask the consumers to buy fake compulsory insurance. In such instances, any Court injunction by SPRING would be of limited effect as well. So, may I seek an assurance from the Minister of State that if SPRING discovers evidence of criminal conduct during the course of investigation, they would not hesitate to refer the wrongdoing to the Police for prosecution? This would be a stronger deterrent to crooks, compared to a Court injunction. They face imprisonment if they continue to behave in such criminal manner. Likewise, if retailers act in breach of the Court order, can I seek the Minister of State's assurance that SPRING will take up contempt proceedings against such retailers? If SPRING does not initiate contempt action, surely, retailers will not bother with any injunction taken up against them. Second, I notice that the proposed amendments make no attempt to discourage the taking of prepayment or deposits for future services. CASE has always been concerned at the losses suffered by consumers who had paid deposits or made prepayments to companies which subsequently became insolvent. We had received many complaints from consumers who had lost money when travel agencies cease operations or when wedding boutiques or other companies go into liquidation. The latest company closure which adversely affected consumers is the liquidation of California Fitness. I read the report by the provisional liquidators, and I was appalled that even though the company was clearly in negative equity position of $21.”
“Thus, I welcome the amendments to the CPFTA to give SPRING the power to investigate, require production of documents and enter premises to inspect and seize documents. These are wide powers needed when dealing with errant retailers, and once the evidence has been obtained, SPRING has the power to apply for injunctions against egregious errant retailers. I also support the provisions for SPRING to seek Court orders that require suppliers to publicise the details of the declaration or injunction and notify the consumer about the Court orders. This will ensure that such retailers cannot try to cover up their unethical conduct. They should understand the severe consequence for breaching the CPFTA. I am also pleased that the proposed Bill includes a provision at clause 10 for the Court to grant an injunction restraining a person from knowingly abetting, aiding, permitting or procuring a supplier to engage in an unfair practice. This means that an injunction order can be extended to third parties like employees and agents and can even extend to family members of the supplier as long as they knowingly help the supplier to carry out unfair practices. This will ensure that the injunction order cannot be side-stepped by using other people's names to start a new business. Much as I am happy with the amendments, the proposed changes to the CPFTA are not a magic bullet to solve all consumer disputes. The reality is that consumers, too, must do their part to exercise caution when buying goods or services from suppliers. I just want to assure the Minister of State that CASE will do its part to continue to educate consumers on their duties as well. There are a few concerns which I hope that the Minister of State can address.”
“We helped them to set up a consumer complaint terminal, put up consumer alert notices naming retailers with the most number of complaints. However, there is little effect as consumers continued to be deceived and lured into buying products due to the perceived lower prices. Once a consumer has made payment for the product, the retailer imposes additional costs like "phone unlocking fees" or "in-house insurance" and illegally refuses to allow the consumer to collect their purchased products. The presence of such recalcitrant retailers who flout the law and engage in unfair practices suggests that more muscle must be given to the authorities to take punitive action. CASE does not have any power under the existing CPFTA to take criminal prosecution against dishonest retailers. The Police often classify disputes between consumers and retailers as civil disputes. They refer consumers who had lodged Police reports to CASE. The Police expects CASE to advise the consumers and retailers to resolve their disputes and to mediate a settlement. However, dishonest retailers are no respecter of the law. Due to the perceived lack of action, a small minority of retailers persist with their unfair practices and consumers suffer when they are taken advantage of. Court injunctions are also of no effect on retailers who are not serious about their business. Out of the six injunctions taken out by CASE, every one of them had ceased operations after the injunction. Some retailers who have signed VCAs had used the names of their relatives to set up another company to operate a new business, and this defeats the intent of VCAs and Court injunctions as any restrictions imposed can easily be overcome.”
“Mdm Speaker, please allow me to declare my interest in speaking on this topic as the President of the Consumers Association of Singapore (CASE). The Consumer Protection (Fair Trading) Act (CPFTA) provides consumers with protection from unfair practices and offers consumers a simpler recourse to civil remedies against errant retailers who engage in unfair practices. Under the Act, the Government empowers specified bodies like CASE and the Singapore Tourism Board (STB) to take action against suppliers who engage or are likely to engage in unfair practice. As Specified Bodies, CASE and STB are empowered to invite a supplier to sign a VCA and even to apply to Court for an injunction against errant trade suppliers. With the proposed amendments, the power to take injunction action would be removed from CASE and STB. SPRING will be appointed as the administrative agency for the CPFTA with powers to investigate and to enforce. CASE supports the proposed amendments. Ever since the CPFTA took effect in 2004, CASE has entered into 20 VCAs and taken out six injunctions against retailers who had breached the CPFTA. However, there are limitations to the operation of CPFTA when dealing with dishonest retailers. An example would be the few dishonest retail operators at Sim Lim Square who were ripping off consumers and tourists. Their antics were reported in the media in late 2014. Instead of selling their products in an honest and ethical manner, these retailers practised deception and cheated consumers and tourists, and this resulted in many cries of foul play by consumers. The actions of a few bad hats have affected the reputation of the other honest retailers in Sim Lim Square. CASE had worked with the Management Corporation Strata Title (MCST) of Sim Lim Square.”
“May I ask the Minister of State, recently, there were some media reports about students committing suicide; does the Ministry of Education review all circumstances to ascertain why the warning signs about such students were not detected earlier and to see how we can plug the gap and try to make sure that such suicides do not recur?”
“Mdm Speaker, just to ask a couple of supplementary questions. I have residents who said that their children are staying with them to help look after them because they are advanced in age and then because their children are staying with them, their household income has exceeded the requirement for the scheme. The solution seems to be to ask the children to shift out and that seems to defeat the purpose of having children look after the elderly. Would the Ministry consider situations like these, where the children stay to look after their parents, but their income should not be included because they are doing it as a matter of filial piety? Secondly, in respect of the Minister's reply about having a website or hotline, many of the recipients are actually above 65 and I think that they probably do not have the ability to go to the website. Is CPF Board open to having, say, open houses at community centres to do better outreach to try to better explain to the seniors who do not really understand what this scheme is about? Many of my residents do tell me that they feel disadvantaged because their neighbours get it, and they do not.”
“Mdm Speaker, may I ask the Deputy Prime Minister: there is some concern that because of the economic uncertainty in Europe and the UK, that many foreigners would want to come to Singapore to look for employment opportunities. So, can I ask whether MOF will work with the rest of the Government agencies like MOM to ensure that we do not allow these foreigners to adversely affect employment opportunities for Singaporeans in the FIs?”