Low Thia Khiang
Singapore
“Mr Speaker, my question is for the Minister for Health. The official communication channel to the people who subscribe to the WhatsApp group quoted the Prime Minister saying that "Experts think that the Wuhan virus may be less deadlier than SARS". So, can we have some verification whether this is true so far?”
“In Mandarin, Sir. (In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] So, Member Mr Gan Thiam Poh meant to say that although the Minister has the decision-making power under this Bill, you can still go to Court to challenge the decision.”
“Mr Speaker, clarification in Mandarin. (In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] I have stated clearly that the Government already has a lot of power under existing legislation. They can even shut down websites.”
“(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] First and foremost, you must follow the Minister's decision to take down the message, you cannot go to Court. According to this Bill, you must comply with the Minister's order. Otherwise, you will be charged.”
“In Mandarin, Sir. (In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Our Secretary-General is in the Committee. He told us about the contents of the Committee's discussion, so we know what was discussed in the Committee.”
“(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] You assume that the Minister will not do this, but is your assumption correct? It may be correct now, but will it be correct in the future? Even the Minister cannot guarantee that, he said he cannot be sure that future governments will not abuse their power. Can you be sure?”
The complete record
Every one of 2,669 lines we hold for Low Thia Khiang, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 28 of 54.
“For parents who are keen to engage private religious teachers for their children, my advice, Sir, is to engage teachers who are on the MUIS list. MUIS ensures that all our mosques engage qualified religious teachers on its list. Other providers, such as Malay/Muslim organisations and private education centres, also provide religious classes to complement the efforts of the mosques. MUIS will look into the private service providers market to ensure that the standards are also maintained. Sir, MUIS' public education effort this year will promote greater understanding about Islam among non-Muslims, as well as educating Muslims of the need for balance and moderation in practising their religious beliefs in multi-religious Singapore. MUIS and the mosques are engaging in goodwill visits, talks, joint activities with grassroots organisations, and organisations such as NTUC, schools and Chinese clan associations. Sir, together with the partners, MUIS will continue to undertake its full slate of religious development and social programmes. I would like to assure Mr Zainul Abidin Rasheed that there is no cause for concern that good programmes will be curtailed for lack of resources. Funding for the MUIS administration has increased steadily from 1998 to 2001. In 2002, because of the preceding year, where there was negative growth, the funding will be slightly adjusted downwards. But I do not think there is cause for concern. Over and above the grant to cover MUIS administration, the Government has also, since 1999, provided MUIS with an annual matching grant of up to $1.3 million for programmes to strengthen Malay-Muslim families.”
“In fact, MUIS, on its own part, has set out to meet the various stakeholders, both within the Muslim and the non-Muslim communities, to understand further some of their concerns, and these are inputs which will be fed back to the Fatwa Committee as and when an issue which is important to the Muslim community needs to be deliberated. I would like to assure the Member that the Fatwa Committee will not turn away any feedback or any information that may be useful for their deliberations. Sir, on the matter of religious teachers, we know that many Muslims receive teaching and guidance from religious teachers. MUIS ensures that religious teachers are well qualified and able to guide Muslims appropriately in the context of multi-racial Singapore. MUIS, for example, conducts training and orientation programmes to mosques, imams or religious leaders on the positive roles that they can play in guiding the Muslim community towards growth and development. For example, the "Nadwah, Imam and Khatib" (NIK) programme is a platform for imams to discuss contemporary issues and their implications to the Muslim community. So there is a process of engaging between MUIS and the various religious leaders within the community to ensure that they receive timely information and understand some of the important concerns at the national level. Sir, Dr Mohamad Maliki has raised the issue of registering religious teachers. MUIS maintains a list of qualified religious teachers. The list is being updated and the information will be made available on the MUIS website in July this year. This will enable the public to make informed decisions when engaging religious teachers.”
“MUIS plays an important role in helping to strengthen bonds across communities and presenting the religion in the right perspective to both Muslims and non-Muslims, and MUIS leads the Muslim community in evolving the practice of the faith which is true to Islam and, more importantly, appropriate for multi-racial and multi-religious Singapore. MUIS reaches out to Muslims in a number of ways. For example, through the weekly Friday sermons in the mosques, Muslims are guided on the right religious values and their responsibilities to forge a better future for themselves, the community and the nation. In another instance, as mentioned by Mr Maidin, fatwas or rulings which serve to clarify Islamic jurisprudence are important in guiding Muslims on the sound practice of the Islamic faith. Through fatwas, Muslims are guided in the practical application of Islam in response to emerging issues and developments in society. The Fatwa Committee is a very high-level committee which is in MUIS, and it is chaired, rightly so, by the Mufti and comprises Islamic scholars with sound judgement and who have extensive experience in Islamic jurisprudence. Fatwas are religious rulings and they are binding on the Muslim community. Mr Maidin has asked whether there are opportunities for groups to express their opinions on the Fatwa Committee. I would like to inform the Member that the channels of communication are constantly open. Groups who may have opinions on certain matters that they would like to express are more than welcome to write to the office of the Mufti, or to express them through letters and use the MUIS website. So there are many opportunities which are open to the Muslim community who may want to express some of their views, and this is something which we welcome.”
“Sir, I understand that the National Council of Social Service has developed a programme evaluation system to assess VWOs' programme output and outcome. This, I also understand, has resulted in some programmes of VWOs not being funded. I would like to know the objective of implementing such a system and how the system works. I would also like to know what are the criteria of the evaluations, and under what evaluation results would a particular programme not be funded. How many programmes have been disqualified so far after the evaluations and why are they disqualified? There is also concern that such a system measures quantitative output of the service provided rather than the qualitative service. So I would like to request the Minister to clarify this. Assoc. Prof. Yaacob Ibrahim: Sir, I would like to thank all the Members who have raised issues relating to MUIS and the Malay-Muslim community. Let me take those cuts first together, Sir. Let me first respond to Mr Maidin's question on how MUIS, a very important institution, can help our Muslims to stay on course with the right Islamic values and beliefs and guard against deviant teachings. Sir, MUIS is committed to building an exemplary Muslim community as an integral part of the multi-racial and multi-religious Singapore society. There are a few important principles which MUIS subscribes to. Firstly, the Singapore Muslim community's experience has shown that Islam is consistent with progress. Muslims can progress in tandem with other communities without losing their religious identity. Secondly, one can be a good Muslim and a good citizen, and these are not opposing aims. Thirdly, Muslims must reach out to other communities to build mutual understanding and trust, and vice versa.”
“Further clarification, Sir. I wonder, where is the balance? On the one hand, IDA is supposed to provide the service standard and, on the other hand, it is saying that you leave it to the market. So, which is which?”
“He said that service standards were set for SMS. But is the standard for delivering messages set?”
“Sir, can I seek a clarification from the Minister?”
“What is the IDA going to do about it to ensure the service operators take the necessary action to prevent all this frequent problem of dropped lines?”
“Sir, we have just heard that Singapore wants to be an infocomm hub and IDA has to ensure that we have a world-class standard of infocomm infrastructure and quality of service. However, there are complaints of mobile phone service standards. Firstly, the issue is on mobile phone portability. The mobile phone is mobile but the phone number is not. When one switches to another service provider and wishes to retain the phone number, the operator will use call forwarding service to solve the problem. But this is not the complete solution, as is pointed out by many users who had complained to the press. I note that the IDA, in its reply to the complaint, has said that it recognises that with technology advancements and market developments, it is necessary to review the MMP solution regularly. I would like to know whether a review has been made and what is the position of IDA now on the issue. Secondly, Sir, is regarding the issue of the service standard of SMS. There were complaints that SMS messages were not delivered even after days. I wonder - because the Senior Minister of State dislikes SMS - whether IDA is going to set mandated service standard for the SMS service providers. Or is it just going to deem it as not one of the functionalities not needed by most users, and thereby need not set any mandated standard? And I would advise the Senior Minister of State that if he had a problem in using his thumb, maybe he should try the PDA phone. You can write Chinese as well, using your hand. Thirdly, Sir, it has also been brought to my attention that there are instances of dropped lines when mobile phone users enter MRT tunnels during train rides. There was also a complaint today from MPs that if one goes inside the lift, he would also experience dropped lines.”
“Sir, it was reported in the press that the latest attempt of ENV to solve the problem of dengue fever is to breed one new breed of mosquitoes to kill or neutralise the dangerous breed that will cause dengue fever. My concern is: how confident is ENV in ensuring that this initiative is 100% error-free? Is the Minister sure that the bio-science laboratory responsible for the project will not mistakenly unleash another type of mosquito that is more deadly than what we already have here? I would also like to know whether the new breed of mosquito bites and sucks blood like other types of mosquitoes. If so, when the new breed of mosquitoes is released and residents complain of mosquito bites, what should we tell them? Are we to tell them that they are healthy and friendly love bites, so never mind? Sir, despite my concern, it is a quite a bold idea. If the initiative is proven successful and safe here, perhaps, we can export the new breed of mosquitoes to make some money and maybe develop ourselves into a regional mosquito hub.”
“--- and Singapore will degenerate into a rootless duckweed floating in the ocean of theworld economy.”
“Conclusion, Sir. In the first wave of our nation-building, we rightly put our emphasis on English as the means to plug in to the grid of the western world, and to achieve economic success. In the face of intensified globalisation, the world is becoming smaller, international competition is getting more and more heated up. In the era of rapid changes in information and technology, if we do not attach importance to the transmission of mother tongue and culture in our second wave of nation-building, the next generation of Singaporeans will face a situation of cultural hiatus of our various ethnic groups ---”
“Our cultural foundation shall never be built on the English language. The passing on of cultural heritage from generation to generation requires firm mother tongue foundation.”
“The crux of the matter undoubtedly lies with the attitude of our people towards their mother tongue. Such an attitude is the result of the PAP Government's social engineering over the past 30-odd years. It has fundamentally altered and even severed the emotional ties between the people and their mother tongue. They are treating the language entirely by a so-called rational and utilitarian principle. Some may call it "pragmatic policy", but I will call it the "rootless policy". It is a policy whereby English reigns supreme. That being the case, why do we not just simply embrace the western civilisation? If in the fields of technology, humanity and culture, we can thoroughly and effectively arrive at the way it is done in the west, then we may well consider it as an alternative. However, if after careful consideration we find that it is not possible for us to embark on such a path, then should we not accord our own mother tongue language and culture the status and respect it deserves? We should not be bashful about it. Otherwise, we may end up "neither fish nor fowl". There is no point to pinpoint who is to blame for all these. The most important thing is that we must have a clear understanding of what our present situation is. Recognise that this is indeed a problem. Deal with it seriously. Adjust the mindset. Shake off the over-sensitiveness in discussing issues concerning the Chinese language. Then mobilise the resources of the Chinese community, and take advantage of the collective wisdom, and genuinely strive to improve on the present situation. The Government should discard the adverse effect of the too pragmatic attitude on the choice of culture and language. Recognise the pluralism of our society.”
“We should ask, "While some communities in the world are sacrificing their lives to protect and defend their cultural and ethnic identity, why are our young people despising or abandoning their own mother tongue, the most important link to one's cultural and ethnic identity with absolutely no psychological burden at all?" The Minister for Education said that it would take three generations before a society can truly claim to be proficient in a language. Singapore needs another one-and-a-half generation before English can be extensively used by the entire society. Regrettably in less than one-and-a-half generation, the status of the Chinese language here is already in a very precarious situation. In another one-and-a-half generation's time when English is universally used by the entire society, what will be the position of the Chinese language then? If we do not do something about it, the consequences will be quite obvious. As far as the many intellects who take the destiny of Chinese to heart are concerned, they have already said all that they need to say, and have probably done all that they ought to do. Yet, such individual efforts are incapable of changing the big environment, because this big environment is set by the Government's educational policy and the society's attitude towards the language is influenced by such an educational policy. Moreover, whenever the Chinese community talks about the Chinese language and Chinese culture, it will be labelled as being Chinese chauvinists. We are still living under this kind of shadow. The Government claims the low standard of Chinese is the result of the parents' own free choice, and is a price we have to pay for our economic development. I am unable to agree with this argument.”
“The significance and importance of this kind of soul-searching are not inferior to the review of our economic strategy. I feel that the model of seeking similarity while accommodating diversity, mutual tolerance and understanding, plurality and co-existence is far superior to the singular model of "English-only", and is better able to consolidate our foundation in building up a multi-racial nation. The deeper the understanding of the various ethnic groups in their own language and culture, the more positive effect it will have in the process of our nation building. In the past, because of political reasons, the Chinese community was not able to comprehensively discuss and resolve the problem of its own language and culture. As a result, the standard of Chinese among the younger generation of Singaporean Chinese is consistently on the decline. They disregard and even despise their own language and culture. This question comes on from time to time. After being left in the doldrums for some time, it resurfaced again recently because of a few incidents of mistakes in the translation of some official publications. It goes to show that the problem does exist. We have to look at it squarely. These incidents of mistakes in translation are certainly not an isolated phenomenon. It reflects our society's typical mindset and style towards the Chinese language. So long as this mindset remains unchanged, I will not be surprised if this sort of "classic jokes" or "national disgrace" are repeated again. If the problem we are facing is purely the decline in the standard of Chinese language, then the remedy is relatively easy to find. Unfortunately, the problem lies with the mindset or mentality towards the Chinese language, and this kind of mindset is quite common.”
“Sir, Singapore is an immigrant society. The plural ways of life have been part of our living here. Against this background, it is indeed a great challenge for us to preserve the co-existence of the plural ways of life among the ethnic groups while pursuing to build a strong nationhood. To a different extent, the various ethnic groups are facing a common problem, and it is how to preserve and protect their own language and culture in a predominantly English-speaking environment, so that they will not be further eroded and even subjugated. In form, the Government's policy appears to favour bilingualism, but in substance it is undoubtedly, "English is supreme!" We do admit that the use of English is conducive to the interaction among the ethnic groups and enhances their mutual understanding. But, do we really want to be naturalised by the English language to become a homogenous people? That is an entirely different matter. While projecting our common destiny as Singaporeans, I believe each ethnic group also hopes to preserve and retain its own way of life, its own language and culture. We also agree that English is useful to us in making a living in this highly competitive global economy. However, do we really want to just earn a living and give up our own way of life? What about our cultural characteristics? I believe the various ethnic groups of this generation are unwilling to see our society losing its present multi-cultural flavours, or degenerate into a language and cultural form which is without substance. After all, this is the precious asset of our nation. We must strike a balance between the nation and the community, and between economic development and cultural heritage. This is a major issue we must explore into.”
“Students would be grouped into different classes based on the merit of their individual subject. Although it could be argued that this is still a form of streaming, I am sure such a system of allowing individual students to learn at their own pace is more progressive and is likely to lessen social stigma. This is not to say that schools are to abandon the idea of all-rounded education, but rather the main thrust of the proposal here is the acceptance of the fact that different students have different strengths. Hence, there must be avenues, opportunities and recognition available to allow individual student to "major" in what he or she loves. To allow the above to be implemented, there must be a total revamp, in terms of entire education process, such as grading, protocol, examination systems, admission requirements, etc, to support the new education system paradigm. I do not have specific recommendations for the various components, which require further in-depth studies and analysis for more details. 1.00 pm”
“Thirdly, Sir, although the purpose of streaming is to help an individual student to develop his or her potential to the fullest, by being able to study in his or her own pace, the question is whether streaming itself is effective enough to develop a child's potential. Earlier, I have mentioned that streaming will reinforce academic ability as the only criterion for judging students. However, the question is: what exactly constitutes academic ability? Some children are better with their mathematical understanding, some better with Science, and some are better with languages. The current streaming system streams in accordance with the cluster of subjects and determination of academic ability, in totality, in the cluster. Such a system fails to take into account the relative strengths and relative interests of each student based on the individual subjects. This is even more jarring at the Secondary 2 and Secondary 3 levels. For example, a non-Pure Science Express stream, or non-Express stream student, is likely to face a situation that his interest in reading individual Pure Science module, such as Biology, might be hampered as a result of the streaming. Also, for that matter, a Pure Science streamed student might never have the opportunity to pursue technical studies, or arts subject at the "O" level, as a result of the streaming. This is because the current streaming system assumes that students streamed to a particular stream are naturally more inclined to certain subjects offered. I would therefore ask the Ministry to consider exploring the idea of organising schools based on subjects. This means scrapping the current streaming system based on a cluster of subjects and replacing it with a system based on subjects.”
“Sir, with the world changing at a fast pace to one that requires future generations to have critical, creative and innovative minds, there is indeed a danger of our young getting lost in our nation building process. I therefore believe it is timely now that the Ministry of Education review the streaming system. There are side effects about streaming of students under the current education system. First of all, by categorising our young into academically enumerated groupings, this reinforces the view that only children who are academically intelligent are valuable and relevant assets of the future. Those individuals who are talented in other aspects, be it in sports or music, etc, seem to have no niche in this streaming system. Although the recent announcement of setting up of the speciality school can address these problems somewhat, I am of the view that the streaming system should be changed to better reflect the emphasis on individual capability and talent in areas other than just academia. Secondly, nation building means coagulating a diverse population into one entity. The streaming system does not encourage the recognition and toleration of diversity in terms of talents and capabilities. The streaming system suggests that we are judged purely in terms of academic performance. In other words, only the academically sound are deemed working to be our best pillars of tomorrow. Of course, not all those in the best stream eventually become leaders, and neither will those in the lower stream fall by the wayside. But, as a general trend, what I have suggested - that the system has inculcated important values which, I emphasise again, are academic capabilities - is valid.”
“Sir, may I seek two clarifications from the Minister? How long does the Minister expect to ease the problem of shortage of doctors in public hospitals? Secondly, Sir, has the current shortage and overwork of doctors in the hospitals affected the medical standard of public sector hospitals?”
“Sir, Singapore has become a de facto regional medical centre. It is common knowledge that many patients from our neighbouring countries come to Singapore for medical treatment and, despite the economic downturn, business is still good. However, there are some concerns which I would like to ask the Minister for Health. (1) Would the Minister evaluate whether we do have sufficient doctors and specialists in Government sector healthcare? (2) Are we doing enough to attract, and to encourage doctors' training and research, to spearhead Singapore's drive towards the attainment of a bio-medical centre? (3) Whether the shortage of specialists is a factor in the long waiting time for patients in SGH specialist clinics and National Cancer Centre. Sir, a truly world-class medical hub should be a responsible one that cares not just its mega-bio projects and medical technology, but also one that cares for the patients and doctors who are the backdrop of the entire healthcare system. This brings me to my fourth question, ie, whether our medical officers in the Government hospitals are being overworked and maybe potentially unsafe, as reported by the Review Panel led by Lord Ronald Oxburgh. I would also like to know whether there is an element of truth that the morale of junior medical officers in the Government sector healthcare hospitals is low and they are overworked. And has the Ministry of Health any plan to improve the service conditions of the medical officers in the hospitals? 4.30 pm”
“Sir, precast concrete is now widely used for the construction of HDB flats. It has become important components of flats. I understand that in the past, HDB required the presence of inspectors before the casting was done. However, presently, the system has been changed to that of merely conducting random spot checks on the plant, and testing of the precast concrete. In the light of the above, I would like the Minister to address two concerns. One, how does HDB ensure that the precast slabs are of acceptable quality and do not inherently contain potential problems, such as spalling in the future. Two, will the Minister explain and evaluate the current system of inspection and supervision of precast plants, and how the quality of precast concrete components in HDB flats is determined and assured?”
“Does the HDB do cyclical works such as resurfacing the access roads to open surface car parks?”
“Sir, may I seek clarification from the Minister? We have now heard another reason for the increase in car park charges because there is a road tax rebate. So the Government is giving money in one hand and taking back from the other hand. Sir, first, I do not see any Government subsidy reflected in the accounts. The amount of deficit, I believe, is a total reflection of the cost. I wonder whether the Minister will agree that if the depreciation of the construction cost is taken over a longer period of time, it will not incur so much deficit and thereby, we can afford to charge lower car park fees. My other question is whether are there cyclical plans for car parks, just like HDB flats and not so much on the maintenance.”
“And if the depreciation is zero and the cost of building the car park has been recovered long ago, I suppose, those built in the 60s and 70s, where is the justification to increase the parking fees in these car parks by reason of HDB incurring a huge deficit? And if the justification is to recover the huge deficit in car park operations, then is the HDB prepared to just break even for car park operation in the long run? Sir, the other issue I want to bring up is whether the HDB has a cyclical work plan to improve the car parks. I wish to inform the Minister that car parks in the estate in Hougang constituency have not undergone any major improvement by the HDB since they were built together with the flats in the 70s. The condition of most of the access roads and parking lots has been bad. I would like to ask the Minister whether the HDB would pay for improving the car park access roads and the parking lots in Hougang constituency.”
“Sir, in this Budget the Finance Minister announced that car park charges would be revised, and he said: "Where HDB residential parking is concerned, the existing charges do not cover the costs of building the car parks, leaving HDB with a large deficit." This, I assume, is the justification for the increases in HDB season parking charges. Of course, I do not know whether the HDB will take this opportunity to revise the hourly parking charges as well. Sir, I have checked from the HDB's Annual Report and found that in 1994/1995, the deficit from car park activities was less than $6 million. In 2000/2001, the deficit went up to $99 million. The bulk of the increases in expenses resulting in deficit were interest expenses and depreciation which formed $62 million in 1995, increased to $140 million in 2001, and interest expenses went up from $84 million in 1995 to $186 million in 2001. Sir, I would like to know how these changes in the financial position of HDB car park activities came about. Is the HDB dumping the cost of building multi-storey car parks in the new estates and upgraded precincts into the account? If this is the case, is it fair to increase all HDB parking charges across-the-board, including those old open car parks in HDB estates built in the 60s and 70s? Is the deficit incurred as a result of HDB building more multi-storey car parks, bearing in mind that HDB continues to collect parking fees even for car parks they already have, probably, zero depreciation value? Building of car parks is therefore equivalent to a long-term investment.”
“Sir, I would like to know from the Minister of State whether he is satisfied with the way his Ministry offers employment assistance. Secondly, I would like to ask him whether or not he is satisfied with the success rate of job-matching at 15%, as he mentioned in his speech. Dr Ng Eng Hen: Mr Low would clearly know that is rhetorical and obviously none of us are satisfied. How can we? That means 85% are unemployed. Until they are all employed, then we will be satisfied. Can we do more? Obviously. Even if we did more, would we be more successful? Perhaps a little bit. But if there are no jobs, no matter how much we do it, that is not a permanent solution. The solution to unemployment is not more job placements but job creation.”
“Sir, do I have your permission to seek a clarification from the Minister of State?”
“The question is: out of the 1,600 unemployed people per month, how many people were successful in getting a job? The Minister for Manpower said in Parliament a few days ago that about 15% of the people were successful in getting jobs. Is he happy with the 15% success rate? Moreover, when MOM recommends jobs to the people, what is the ratio between the number of vacancies and the number of applicants? If there are only 10 vacancies, do they recommend these 10 vacancies to some 100 applicants, and consider itself as having helped these applicants? On the other hand, the Ministry of Manpower must have systematically collected information on the people who have been unemployed for a long time and conduct further analysis on the profile of these prolonged unemployed, so as to follow up and resolve their unemployment problem. If it is ascertained that a certain category of unemployed people is no longer able to secure suitable jobs that they would want to undertake in the market, then MOM should consider providing employment counselling to these people, to advise them to switch over to other suitable lines of employment, so as to prevent them from being perpetually unemployed in the face of economic restructuring.”
“Mr Chairman, I know the Ministry of Manpower has set up employment assistance centres to help jobless people to find jobs. I also know that the Government has set up a National Employment Task Force to coordinate and strengthen the assistance given to the retrenched and unemployed people. But from my meet-the-people sessions, I know that although the Ministry of Manpower has been giving this kind of assistance to the unemployed people, many job applicants have called the companies recommended by MOM, only to be told that no vacancy was available. Some may be called up for interview but, at the interview, they were told that the vacancies had already been filled. Time and transport expenses were wasted for nothing. Many of these unemployed people have already lost confidence in MOM. They told me that seeking the assistance of MOM and the CDCs was merely some form of self-consolation. The result is that their hope of getting a job is dashed, and they have still to wait for a job opportunity to come. On 17th January, the Straits Times reported that a certain CDC had misplaced the application form of a job-seeker, and the information of companies listed by another CDC for the reference of job applicants was outdated. I feel that the Government should re-assess whether the present mechanism to assist the unemployed people is still effective, and is there room for improvement. Assessment of the effectiveness of this mechanism should be based on the number of people who are successful in getting a job through the assistance of the Government agencies concerned. On 17th April, Lianhe Zaobao reported that out of the 1,600 unemployed people who sought help from MOM every month, only about 6% were given referrals for jobs.”
“Sir, I understand that under the current income tax system, an annuity purchased with cash is subject to a tax of 3% of the capital sum until such time that the amount deemed to be a refund on capital has been exhausted. Then all payments received subsequently are taxable in full, while annuities purchased with CPF funds are tax-exempt. I wonder why annuities bought in cash should be subject to tax. First of all, is the Government not encouraging Singaporeans to save for old age? I think taxing of such savings meant for old age is contrary to the objective of the Government to provide a saving framework for old age financial security. Secondly, Sir, since we do not have capital gains tax and the Government has decided not to tax interest earnings in savings in the recent Budget, is there justification to continue to tax on annuities bought in cash? I would like to ask the Minister for Finance to consider exempting tax for annuities bought in cash.”
“Sir, first clarification. The Finance Minister has said that to put off the GST increase now will result in a chronic situation. Can he clarify what does he mean by chronic situation? I wish to remind him that GST is not the only way the Government collects taxes. We are not talking about reducing corporate and personal income taxes to zero. There is still something to collect. On top of that, we have property tax, customs and excise tax, import duties, motor vehicle taxes and betting taxes. The motor vehicle tax collection is even more than the GST in fiscal year 2001. Sir, second clarification. The Finance Minister also said that the increase in GST in this Budget will provide options to the Government. I wonder whether it is the Government's financial policy to always budget for a surplus. If my estimate is right, I think the Government will end up with quite a huge surplus in 2005. My question is, are we over-taxing? Is the Government over-taxing the people for what is needed by the Government? Third clarification, Sir. The Finance Minister also said that the world has changed, and we are at a turning point. The turning point, to me, seems that now Robin Hood cannot rob the sheriff of Nottingham. So he robs from the "Roberts" on the street. I do not quite understand. The turning point, it seems to me, is that, from now, we have to accept that the rich will get richer, and the Government would even have to do more to woo them and to persuade them to stay here. I would like the Finance Minister to explain why the Government does that and how these rich people affect our economic growth in one way or another.”
“Sir, can I have your permission to seek clarifications from the Finance Minister?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, may I clarify? First of all, I did not forget the offset package but I would like to state that the offset package is not forever. It is a smokescreen that makes you feel good but eventually, you have to pay GST, but without the offset package. I did not forget that. Mr Gan talked about my objection to philanthropy and car ownership. I did not. I have given this and others as examples to ask whether or not we should consider other options rather than just raising GST as an easy way out. Raising GST would affect the majority of the people, especially the lower and middle-lower income. When a Government decides to increase a tax, which is so broad-based, affecting everybody, including the business at this point in time, should we not ask: is there any other option, or do we just accept whatever it is?”
“They can even afford to lower the prices of their merchandises and our people will not have to go all the way across the Causeway to do their shopping. The fourth point is that with effect from 1st September, the monthly parking fees in the HDB estates will be increased from $75 to $90, an increase of $15 per month. The open car park fees will be increased by $15. I am afraid that residents affected by the SERS projects, these residents who used to park their cars in the surface car park and paying $55 per month will now have to park their cars in the multi-storey covered car park and will now be asked to pay $90 per month, an increase of 35% per month, or $420 more per year. This is a very huge increase. I hope the Government will give them special consideration. Personal income tax will be adjusted downwards over a period of three years. Similarly, the increase in parking fees should also be spread over three years. Then there will be a balanced way of treating two different groups of people. This will be one good way to help our people, so that they will not suddenly be faced with a huge increase in parking fees. On the rebates for public utilities, there is no mention on this issue. I have been asked by many residents whether the Minister for Finance has forgotten about the rebates for utilities. Over the past few years, there is some kind of utilities rebates announced every year. It will be very helpful to the poor and low-income families. They hope that the Government will consider re-introducing the rebates for public utilities. Sir, I support the Budget.”
“Likewise, if a job seeker wants to become a driver, arrangement can be made for him to be trained at Comfort Taxi or SBS, or undergo some form of training through the relevant trade unions. In this way, he will acquire the necessary skills to prepare him for the job. MOM can also seek the cooperation of all the factories, companies and enterprises to report to the Ministry any job vacancies available. With this kind of information from the CDCs and MOM, we will be able to provide better job-matching services. My second suggestion is that the Government provides some form of incentives for employment. In helping the unemployed people financially, the Government gives $200 relief a month. For a period of three months, the total is about $600. This kind of financial assistance is only temporary in nature to help the unemployed people maintain their family. Over the long term, the Government can set up some kind of unemployment incentives for companies or businesses to employ the older workers, say, those who are 40-50 years old. For example, give $100 a month to every 40-year-old worker employed for a period of six months. With this kind of incentive, companies will be attracted to employ the older workers. This will help to reduce our unemployment rate. It will also help our workers to get jobs to look after their families. Then they will not face financial hardship. The third suggestion I would like to make is for some kind of rental rebates to be given to the JTC and HDB shops. This was also the suggestion of Mr Inderjit Singh. At the moment, they can be given about 20% rental rebates, so as to lower their operating cost, and they will be in a better position to carry out their business and tide over the difficult period.”
“In order to understand the situation of unemployment, the CDCs have conducted a random survey of about 1,200 interviewees to understand what kind of problems they are facing, what kind of attempts they have made, before they approach the CDC or MOM for assistance. The survey shows that 21.5% of the job seekers went by the recruitment advertisements in the newspapers, and some went to employment agencies, while some browsed the Internet. About 13.7% attended job fairs. Only 11% went to MOM, and 10% approached their friends for help, and a very small percentage of 7% went to the CDCs. According to the survey results, we feel that the CDCs and MOM can work harder to provide better services to the unemployed people to help them look for jobs. Mr Speaker, Sir, in this Budget for a changing world, I would like to raise five points: One, the most important, is how can we help the 100,000 unemployed people look for jobs. I suggest that we have a one-stop employment agency service. We must first have a national registration of unemployed people. Through more than 100 community clubs and community centres of the People's Association, we could register the unemployed people together with information concerning the kind of job they want or desire to have. Through this data centre, we can re-channel the information to the CDCs for reclassification. For example, if a person wants to work as a cleaner, he can go to the CDC and be matched up with the cleaning contractors on the list, and arrange for the relevant training to be provided. Once the applicant is familiar with the job, I believe it will be easier for him to secure a job.”
“In order to overcome this difficulty, the Government has made a lot of tax restructuring to provide impetus to stimulate the Singapore economy, to reshape Singapore as a place which is more attractive to foreign investors whose investment would help to generate more jobs for our people. The people are now very concerned as to whether they are able to keep their jobs. About 100,000 people are presently unemployed, and they are having difficulty getting another job. I wonder if the Economic Review Committee (ERC) is able to come up with some kind of indicator as to how many of these 100,000 people are being given job offers and what kind of jobs are being offered to them. On 12th May 2002, a factory placed a job vacancy advertisement in a morning newspaper. Within 25 minutes of the opening of its gates, some 400 people turned up to apply for the 200 vacancies. This is the report in Lianhe Zaobao. From this newspaper report, we can see that many people are unemployed. There were only 200 jobs, and within 25 minutes they attracted more than 400 applicants. That is, two applicants to one job. Those who are eventually recruited are like having struck a lottery. Over the past few months, the various CDCs and the Ministry of Manpower have conducted a number of job fairs to help the people look for jobs. But the success rate is not encouraging. Many who attended the fairs, particularly those who are above the age of 40, would find that the jobs offered at the fairs are not suitable for them. Because at the job fairs, most employers were looking at younger people or people who are computer savvy. These fairs do not seem to cater to the needs of the older job seekers.”
“The increase is 20%, and not 2%. The Government knows the problem. A Committee under the chairmanship of Mr Chan Soo Sen has been formed to combat profiteering to ensure that prices will not be increased without a good reason. So if anyone is to come across any instance of such profiteering, he should feedback to Mr Chan Soo Sen or to any Member of Parliament. Let Mr Chan be the Justice Bao of the new economy. All you need to do is to fill up a simple form and send it to Mr Chan Soo Sen. I am very glad to see that Mr Chiam See Tong has been invited, and he has accepted, to join the Committee. Perhaps, Mr Low Thia Khiang should also volunteer his services to the Committee. All these measures are preventive in nature. We hope that the hawkers and merchants would not increase their prices without good reasons. But we must take preventive measures. Prevention is better than cure. So this prevention by appointing the Committee to act against profiteering is far-sightedness on the part of the Government. Mr Speaker, Sir, another emphasis of the Budget is to be pro-business, to lower income tax for the companies and the individuals, to increase our competitiveness and to attract foreign talents so as to create more jobs for Singaporeans. I hope that this good news will turn into good opportunity. In the 21st century, competition is becoming increasingly intense. With the opening up of the China market better opportunities are provided for investors to go to China. So in attracting foreign investments to Singapore, we face a greater challenge.”
“I would say that this year' Budget is generally supported by the people. The people here appreciate that this is necessary. The Government has done its best to lay down the foundation and measures to rebuild our economy. In this year's Budget, there are only three types of tax increases. First, GST to be raised from 3% to 5%, secondly, the tobacco and liquor taxes will go up, and thirdly, the parking fees would be increased. In order to offset the impact of all these increases, there will be certain measures to help the people to ensure that most families will not suffer under the increase of the GST. These packages include (1) lowering personal income tax and corporate tax, (2) giving SC&CC rebate for HDB dwellers for five years, and (3) cutting down road tax and vehicle registration fees. In addition, parents' relief will be more generous. Rebates for foreign workers' levy will be extended and Economic Restructuring Shares (ERS) will be distributed to all adult citizens of Singapore. Mr Speaker, Sir, when we look through the entire Budget, we all feel very relieved because the 2% increase in GST has also been offset by other measures and the Economic Restructuring Shares given to us could be used to offset the increase in GST, if necessary. But the people in general also fear that the increase in GST will cause a consequential increase in the prices of goods. This is possible. Soon after the proposed GST increase was announced, the television station interviewed some ordinary citizens. A hawker who was interviewed was asked whether he would sell his wares at higher prices. He promptly replied "Yes, of course!" "By how much would you increase?" "I used to sell a bowl of noodle for $2.50. Now it will be $3.00". So there is an increase of 50 cents.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, in my speech I talked about the small-time businessmen and hawkers who are struggling for survival. Who dares to profiteer at this moment? I think all these small time businessmen will have to swallow their misery in silence. I do not know whether Mr Seng could not understand me or that he is distorting the meaning of my speech. If you want to catch the culprit for price hike, I think the biggest culprit is the Government. Mr Ang Mong Seng (Hong Kah)(In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to thank you first for giving me the opportunity to take part in the debate. The Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance announced that the important change in Budget 2002 is to cut down on corporate tax and personal income tax so as to create more job opportunities for Singapore, and for Singapore to continue to prosper. To balance the Budget, he accepted the Economic Review Committee's recommendation to raise the Goods and Services Tax (GST) by 2%. At the same time, in order to cushion the impact of GST increase there is an offset package to help the low income families to lighten their burden. Mr Speaker, Sir, at a time when the economic prospects of the world are not certain, the Government has accepted the recommendations of the ERC to make a comprehensive restructuring of our tax system to help the poor families or lower income families to offset the effect of the increase in GST. This shows that the Government and the people of Singapore are also cooperating in recreating Singapore. So it also lays emphasis to say that in time of economic difficulty the people and the Government will continue to cooperate and make the necessary preparations for our future take-off and prosperity.”
“Sir, do I have your permission to clarify the point on my speech referred to by Mr Seng Han Thong, Member for Ang Mo Kio?”
“Whether the economy is good or bad, you have to pay GST for your food, clothing, transportation, accommodation and so forth. The Government could just sit idle and enjoy the fruit of other people's labour, with a guaranteed stable revenue. This is indeed the real reason for the Government's decision to increase the GST!”
“But the feedback I received from the people is that the Government is giving you a piece of candy, and in return it is going to cut a piece of flesh from your body. The Government has also announced the establishment of a Committee to Combat Profiteering. Let me tell the Government, at the moment, the small-time businessmen and hawkers are faced with the predicament of bad business, strong competition and high operating cost. They should consider themselves lucky if they can just survive. How would they dare to raise their prices and profiteer in the present circumstances? I think most of them would probably absorb the additional cost after the GST increase, and swallow all their miseries in silence. It is most ridiculous to blame the small-time businessmen and hawkers for raising the prices! Is it not because the Government has raised the GST first? If you say the small-time businessmen and hawkers are profiteers, then the PAP Government, which raises the GST, must surely be the biggest profiteer - the main culprit! From the revenue for the financial year 2001, we can see that even without reducing our corporate and personal income tax rates, the Government's tax revenue had already been reduced by $2 billion. As for the GST, even if the tax rate is not increased, the Government's tax revenue could only be $550 million less. Apparently, at the time of economic downturn, the corporate and personal income tax would greatly affect the Government's revenue. On the other hand, the Government's revenue from GST will not necessarily be slashed substantially because of the economic downturn. GST is the Government's magic wand to generate financial surplus.”
“The Government should review certain items of the Main and Development Estimates, and explain to the people that if GST is not increased, the Government would not be able to provide these services, so that the people will clearly understand why it is necessary for the GST rate to be increased. For example, this Budget decides to lower the vehicle tax and road tax. Is it really necessary to lower these taxes, causing revenue loss and thereby warranting an increase in GST? In this Budget, the Government is giving double tax reliefs to donations to charity. Philanthropists who have a heart to donate to charity will not withdraw their donations just because the Government is not giving them tax reliefs. If by not giving them the reliefs, the Government can avoid raising the GST, then the philanthropists will surely feel that their donations are more meaningful, because such donations will benefit not only certain organisations, but all the people of Singapore. They will be very happy indeed. On the upgrading of HDB flats, the Government has set aside some $300 million for this upgrading programme. Since the Government says that there will be a budget deficit and therefore it needs to raise the GST, does it mean that by carrying on with the upgrading programme, it will make the increase in GST inevitable? Hitherto, the impending upgrading projects would cost some $5.8 billion. Can the people have a choice as to whether they want upgrading or GST? When the Finance Minister announced the GST increase, he also announced an offset package. The media immediately followed up and publicised vigorously how this package will benefit the people.”
“But the Economic Restructuring Shares (ERS) alone will cost the Government $1.2 billion. The difference is only $100 million. Will the Government run into financial deficit just because it collects $100 million less in tax? The Finance Minister also said that by reducing the personal income tax and corporate tax to 22%, the Government will lose $1.32 billion in revenue. In 2004, when it is further reduced by 2%, what would be the estimated loss? And if we reduce only the corporate tax by 2%, and not the personal income tax, what would the Government's financial situation be? If the Government's Net Investment Income (NII) is pushed up to the ceiling provided for under the Constitution, and if our economy has improved, coupled with the increased revenue from other indirect taxes, would it still be necessary to raise the GST? In the Budget Statement, the Finance Minister stated that by reducing the ceiling of personal and corporate income tax to 20%, the Government would lose some revenue, amounting to some 9% of its annual tax revenue. What is the basis on which the decision is made that the GST must be adjusted now for the 2004 Budget year? Please tell us, if the corporate tax is reduced to 20% in 2004, what would be the Government's revenue loss? If the personal income tax is reduced to 20% in 2004, what would be the Government's loss in revenue? Moreover, this reduction of corporate tax and income tax to 20% is something that will happen only in the year 2004. Why are we starting to increase our GST in the year 2003? Has the Government considered other means to obtain a balance in our Budget or because the increase of GST is the most convenient and easiest method for the Government to fill up its coffers immediately?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the distinguishing feature of this Budget is to shift the tax burden from the corporate profits and the higher income people to the ordinary citizens in the medium and lower income groups. Originally, the principle of taxation is to tax according to the company's profit and the individual's income, and the Government's role is to redistribute the wealth through taxation. If reduction in corporate tax can serve to attract foreign investments, thereby creating more jobs for Singaporeans or bringing them higher income, it is well and good. But the question is when the investors decide whether or not to invest in a country, will the sole consideration be on the tax rate alone? On the other hand, the Government says that because of a reduction in corporate and personal income tax rates, the Government will run into deficit and therefore we have to shift the burden to the ordinary citizens. This is indeed inconceivable. The greatest beneficiary of this round of tax reduction is the small group of high income earners and the consequence is that all Singaporeans will have to bear a heavier tax burden. So is the Government looking after this small group of rich high earners, or the interest of the ordinary Singapore citizens? In addition, before this announcement, the maximum rate in personal income tax has already been reduced to an effective rate of 22.1% after tax rebate. Why is the Government saying that the reduction in personal income tax will result in substantial loss to the Government and that it has to raise the GST? From this Budget, it is apparent that there is no necessity for the Government to raise the GST in 2003. The Government says that by raising the GST to 5%, their estimated revenue loss will be $1.3 billion.”
“Sir, the Minister of State's answer is that we know how the ground works here on education. How sure is he that that the project work will not become an added pressure on the students which is contrary to the objective of the Ministry of Education?”
“Sir, the Minister of State's answer is that we know how the ground works here on education. How sure is he that the project work will not become an added pressure on the students which is contrary to the objective of the Ministry of Education?”