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 4 of 54.
“Madam, I thank the Minister for his long reply. But the issue here is not payment: how much we should pay the volunteer corps. We all appreciate their work. The issue is on AGO's report. I would like to ask the Minister: first, it was unlawful that officers who were not authorised to do so, approved the increase in payment. Then, subsequently, the Minister decided to make it lawful by amending the regulations and approving retrospectively the seven years of overpayment. My question is: is this the correct way for the Government to make an unlawful payment lawful? Overpayment to become correct payment? And is this the way to respond to AGO's report on lapses?”
“Mdm Speaker, on the same point made by Ms Sylvia Lim on clause 9, I am wondering whether this will raise the perception of Singaporeans that the Government is using the cost to intimidate Singaporeans in bringing any legal case against the Government. So, you have no choice whether you think you are being wrongly or rightly prosecuted, but because you look at the cost, you say, "Oh let's forget about it, let's pay." So, is that a good thing for Singapore as a society? That the people who feel somehow victimised by the Government are intimidated by the cost; you do not know how much the Court is going to decide. In the past, you said, "Okay, it is limited to two lawyers", but now, there will be more. So, the sense of intimidation of Singaporeans, I think, does not spell well for the future of Singapore.”
“00 pm An independent commission would signal to the public that the Government is not here to control and censure history. The historical exhibitions will have more legitimacy with the public and, therefore, promote citizenship education. Heritage Impact Assessment”
“Sir, I believe that the learning and understanding of Singapore history can contribute to having a stronger national identity and of being Singaporean. This is especially so when young minds in schools are exposed early to the history of Singapore. I am of the view that this can only be achieved if history is presented to encourage students to consider multiple perspectives and engage in critical thinking. This will also reduce students' and parents' perceptions of using history as Government propaganda. I believe the same should apply to the representations of history in exhibitions curated by the National Heritage Board (NHB). This would include exhibitions at museums such as the National Museum and interpretive centres, such as the Malay Heritage Centre and Nanyang Memorial Hall. It is time we move away from representations of a "standard" or "official" history. We should allow different interpretations of history with the goal of encouraging critical thinking and promoting citizenship education to guide NHB exhibitions. For example, the recent Parliament in Singapore History exhibition could take on different interpretations as seen from the multiple perspectives of the Pioneer statesmen, ruling party backbenchers, opposition party Members, women Members, minority Members and so on. NHB now provides grants to organisations and individuals keen to conduct historical research and curate exhibitions on history. An independent commission made up of professional historians and heritage specialists from different institutions should be set up to oversee the grants, with the mission to encourage critical thinking through different interpretations of history. 7.”
“I would like to ask the Minister whether he will require hospitals to publish on their website waiting times for SOCs by medical speciality.”
“Madam, inpatient hospices and palliative care facilities charge patients on a day-by-day basis, and it has been estimated that a month's stay at a hospice will cost about $7,000 before means testing. I understand that patients whose families have a per capita monthly household income of $2,601 and above will not receive any subsidies for inpatient hospice care. With one in four Singaporeans estimated to be over 60 by 2030, the demand for such specialised care will increase. The additional factors of increases in healthcare material costs and remuneration for healthcare workers will also drive up the costs of hospice and palliative care. I would like to know what the average length of stay in a hospice was from 2012 to 2015. How many people have benefited so far from the last increase in the income ceiling? And how many have written in to appeal for subsidies for the high costs of inpatient charges at the hospices? In light of the gradual increase in gross monthly income and the increase in cost of living, I would like to know if the Ministry is considering raising the income ceiling so as to allow more families to benefit. I would also like to propose that ElderShield be extended for the use of hospice and palliative care. A thorough review of the ElderShield scheme is long overdue and it is perhaps the right time for the Ministry to not only include hospice and palliative care under the scheme, but to also review the adequacy of the subsidies and payout period of the ElderShield scheme.”
“What are MOH's plans to strengthen community mental health support network and framework at the national level? Will we be seeing a new blueprint as well? Seniors' Mental Health”
“Can the Minister give an update on what has been done in the last few years to ensure our care systems are able to deal with the future increase in the number of dementia sufferers and whether there are plans to expand pilot projects, such as "dementia-friendly" town? Community Mental Health Framework Assoc Prof Fatimah Lateef: Madam, mental health is as important as physical health. As there is stigma, many are not coming forward to be diagnosed early enough or for follow-up regular treatments. Thus, it is important to have services and counselling in the community, in a less threatening environment, compared to being in an institution or a ward. At Geylang Serai, I have got Silver Ribbon sited at my community club (CC) at My Wellness Centre and they do house visits and counselling at the CC as well as the residents' homes. Therefore, we need to have more such programmes. What we do at Geylang Serai is we create awareness of mental health problems. We give talks, organise mental wellness seminars, hold World Mental Health Day celebrations annually, launch suitable books and educational materials, mental health road shows and we even have a Geylang Serai Mental Wellness Taskforce operating for the last several years, comprising 10 partners from the relevant industry. Therefore, we hope that this model can be initiated and replicated elsewhere as well. This is under the initiative of WeCare@geylang Serai. In fact, this year, we are actively involved in organising and partnering other agencies in The Asia Pacific Mental Health conference in October. My grassroots leaders (GRLs) will be sharing programmes, experiences and initiatives and we need such initiatives in the community.”
“Madam, as our society ages, we have been paying close attention to our healthcare costs as an ageing population. It is also time for us to put more focus on mental health. Mental illness, while perhaps less understood, is no less real than physical illness. There is also the stigma and lack of understanding which patients and their loved ones combat daily. Some studies estimate that one in six of our population would suffer from mental health issues at some stage of their lives. Currently, our MediSave, MediShield and MediFund (or 3Ms) framework allows support for mental illnesses, but it is limited. For example, MediSave has a withdrawal limit of $150 per day for inpatient psychiatric treatment, with an annual cap of $5,000. Compare this with a daily limit of $450 for other patients who have been hospitalised. For MediShield Life, the difference is even greater, with a daily coverage of $700 in a normal ward, but $100 for a psychiatric ward. Mental illness is as real and debilitating as other illnesses. Funding from the 3Ms and other insurance plans should be on par with coverage for other conditions. Companies, too, need to be encouraged to provide equal levels of support and coverage for employees who suffer from mental health issues. Another equally important issue is how prepared is Singapore to deal with the rising numbers of patients with dementia. It was recently estimated that 10% of us aged above 60 suffer from dementia, with a rise in younger patients being diagnosed. This may not always be classified as a mental or even physical illness, but the strain on our healthcare costs and infrastructure can be massive.”
“Sir, normal waiting time for appointments and medical investigations at Specialist Outpatient Clinics (SOCs) for subsidised patients has been a long-standing problem. I asked about this during the COS debate three years ago and was assured by the Minister that MOH adopts a multi-pronged approach to address the queue at our SOCs. However, three years have passed and the situation does not seem to have improved. I have received feedback from a patient who needed to wait for six months to see a lung specialist and another three months for the biopsy result. During this long wait, a patient's condition could deteriorate and he could develop complications which will be harder and more expensive to treat. Can the Minister share, from the time an appointment is made to the consultation with the specialist, what are the average range, median and 95th percentile waiting times for consultation at SOCs for subsidised patients? After the consultation, what are the average range, median and 95th percentile waiting times for the conduct of investigations and tests like MRI or CT scans and for elective surgery? How do these numbers compare with three years ago? Has there been any improvement? Moving forward, to help benchmark SOCs' performance, will MOH publish SOCs' appointment waiting times regularly on its website for the median and 95th percentile, like it does for waiting times for admission to wards and registration and consultation at polyclinics? The long waiting times seem to affect subsidised patients much more than unsubsidised patients. Are these long waiting times the way SOCs regulate subsidised patients' demands for their services or are they due to insufficient resources being made available to meet subsidised patients' demands? Page: 129”
“I want to clarify that the Town Council does have a regular maintenance regime for the lifts. What we found out is that the breakdown or failure of the parts are unusually fast, compared to some other lifts. The question then is what is the quality of the LUP lifts? What are the safeguards or specifications that HDB has got, in terms of the tender? On the issue of lift market, maintenance market, I understand that the new lift being installed with the manufacturing company will come with its own motherboard, which other companies will not be able to maintain. Which means that, going forward, the Town Council's lift maintenance will be held ransom by this manufacturing company. The fundamental question is what is the situation of the lift manufacture and maintenance market in Singapore? Is the market competitive or are we in a situation where you have not much of choice, but are dependent on these companies? Will they decide how much they will increase the price in maintenance every year? Of course, probably Opposition Town Councils will be at a disadvantage, because we are not given the leeway of discounts, as they give to PAP Town Councils, from what I know.”
“This will ensure competitive pricing in the manufacture and maintenance of lifts. Pneumatic Waste Conveyance System Sir, since 1997, we have heard about the idea of pneumatic conveyance systems for waste disposal in our HDB estates, brought up in this House by the then Minister for the Environment, Mr Yeo Cheow Tong. In 2013, I filed a cut noting that a pilot project under the Greenprint Initiative was slated to be carried out in Jurong East in 2013 and 2014. I would like to seek an update on this, as pneumatic waste conveyance systems would be a huge productivity improvement over having to manually empty individual bulk bin inside each bin chute every day. Such a system can afford all Town Councils not only better productivity but also savings in manpower costs. It is environmentally sustainable and gets rid of the problem of foul smells during refuse collection. In June 2015, HDB said it would test-bed this pneumatic system in Yuhua. What has been the Ministry's assessment of applying the system to an existing HDB estate? Can the Ministry comment on how feasible it will be to roll out the system to other HDB estates, especially the older ones? It appears that upcoming HDB projects at Tampines North, Bidadari and Punggol Northshore will also have the same system. However, the modernisation of waste collection is a benefit that should be experienced by as many HDB estates as possible, including the older HDB estates. HDB Goodwill Repair Assistance”
“Thank you, Sir. The Aljunied-Hougang Town Council currently manages 1,760 lifts in HDB estates, out of which 470 are new lifts installed under the Lift Upgrading Programme (LUP) being turned on from 2012 onwards. Based on the figures gathered for lift breakdown in financial year (FY) 2015/2016, there were 3,683 breakdowns in total, or 7.84 breakdowns per lift on average. This is a relatively high breakdown rate, considering these new lifts are barely three years old. I am not sure whether this happens only in Aljunied-Hougang Town or across the board. I would like to urge MND to take a look at the quality of the LUP lifts. Next, with the growth in the number of lifts contributed by LUP, the expenditure on lift maintenance for each year is also rising. In the case of Aljunied-Hougang Town Council, the latest revision in maintenance contracts by the original lift manufacturers will result in a cost increase of between 4.08% and 8.52%. The projected upward revision in maintenance rates beyond 2017 is even higher, estimated to be between 8.66% and 10.72%. I believe that moving forward, lift maintenance will be a heavy financial burden on all the Town Councils. Hence, I request MND to consider providing a special grant for lift maintenance. Finally, new lifts are designed by different lift manufacturers with their unique features and parts, especially the motherboard. This gives rise to maintenance issues, as the original manufacturers control the parts and pricing. I suggest HDB consider a standardised lift design for HDB estates to require manufacturers to produce lifts based on a standard design and make the standardised lift parts, so that both electronic and mechanical parts will be readily available.”
“Mr Chairman, since the TPP and RCEP are so complicated, are we looking at some other alternatives? China recently has announced "One Belt One Road" as a new macroeconomic strategy. Is MTI looking into how Singapore can position itself to take advantage of the new economic strategy?”
“As this change will impact our entire population, does the Government have any plans to kick-start the publicity campaign earlier, so that people have enough time to digest the news? The difference between domestic users and commercial users is that one may need to communicate with domestic users in a language other than English. Are authorities well-prepared to roll out the publicity in different languages? Hitting our Renewable Energy Targets”
“(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Singapore has progressively opened the retail electricity market since 2001. As at today, there are 890,000 users who can choose their own electricity suppliers, ranging from large-scale plants to small shops. The Energy Market Authority (EMA) launched the Electricity Vending System as early as 2007. In 2010, EMA launched a trial of the Intelligent Energy System, and in 2012, it rolled out Phase 2 of the trial in Punggol New Town. During the COS debate in 2013, Ms Sylvia Lim had enquired about the above trial. She had asked if there are plans to fully liberalise the retail electricity market in the near term. At that time, the Minister only elaborated on the sophisticated technology involved, but did not reveal the results of the trial and the operation of the system. Mr Iswaran, Minister for Trade, announced last October that Singapore's retail electricity market will be fully liberalised in the second half of 2018. This will allow the remaining 1.3 million users, who are primarily domestic home users, to have the flexibility to choose a supplier according to their electricity usage habits. They will be able to choose the electricity price package, just like choosing a mobile phone service package. The full liberalisation of the market in 2018 may be good for the domestic users. However, if they do not understand how the retail electricity market operates, they may not be able to choose a price package that will help them save on their electricity bills. I would like to ask the Minister, if there are any plans to help the public understand the full liberalisation of the electricity market.”
“Could the Government give an update on the progress of the programme and the results? Energy Security Madam, Singapore is dependent on foreign imports for its energy needs. Over the years we have reduced our dependency on oil and have increased our use of natural gas for power generation, from 74.4% in 2005 to 95.5% in 2015. While gas-fired plants are among the most efficient and gas is the cleanest fossil fuel, with more countries importing liquefied natural gas (LNG), we are going to face more competition for LNG sources. This heavy dependency on natural gas opens us to risks of spikes in prices and disruption of supplies. In the medium to long term, what is the status of other energy options that we are looking at to further diversify our energy mix to improve our energy security? The ASEAN Power Grid (APG) has been mooted in 1997 under the ASEAN Vision 2020 towards ensuring regional energy security while promoting the efficient utilisation and sharing of resources. Would we be able to tap on these energy resources under the programme? What is the current status of the APG project? Currently, electricity tariffs are calculated based on fuel oil prices. In the past, when the rationale for linking our electricity tariffs to fuel oil prices was that there was no distinct market in Asia for the price of natural gas, hence, indexing its price to fuel oil prices is the next best alternative. Earlier this year, the Singapore Exchange (SGX) started up a new index for LNG known as SLInG, which provides an industry pricing benchmark. Should we consider now factoring in the LNG Price Index in our formula for electricity tariffs to better reflect the actual costs of power generation? Energy Market Authority (EMA) Madam, in Mandarin.”
“Madam, in 2010, MTI published the results from their Nuclear Feasibility Study. In it, they recommended that nuclear energy was currently not yet suitable for Singapore, but that we needed to "keep our options open for the future". Both Indonesia and Vietnam have mooted plans to build nuclear power plants. If Indonesia builds a nuclear power plant, there is always a possibility that an earthquake could cause a disaster on the scale of Fukushima and the weather patterns and ocean currents would bring the nuclear fallout to Singapore. Even without natural disasters, a nuclear plant located anywhere in the region would produce a large amount of nuclear waste that would need to be disposed of. This waste is significantly radioactive and would take tens of thousands of years to be rendered safe. Extremely stringent security must be in place to ensure that this waste does not fall into the hands of terrorists. The waste can be used to make a so-called "dirty" bomb, which would be a very effective weapon of terror. Is Singapore prepared for such a risk? This is not a remote threat, as Prime Minister Lee has revealed at the Nuclear Security Summit in Washington that Singapore authorities have intercepted a cargo with nuclear material. It is good to know that the Government has tightened its export control regime, upgraded radiation-screening technology at the ports and is building a border laboratory. The National Research Foundation created a five-year programme in 2014 to conduct research and education into nuclear safety, science and engineering. It aims to train about 10 people a year to produce about 100 nuclear experts at the end of 10 years. However, in two years of operation, the research programme has only managed to train nine people, which is fewer than the target.”
“Madam, I note that SAF established a centralised Cyber Defence Operations Hub in 2013. Such capabilities are important today, given the network-centric nature of contemporary society and, indeed, military operations today. I have three sets of questions for MINDEF on these matters. First, I would like to ask if MINDEF can assure the public on the readiness of SAF to handle cyber defence by explaining the types of threats it seeks to address. Cyberattacks need not simply be about conventional military operations. They can involve everything from gathering and corrupting sensitive information to disabling vulnerable civilian infrastructure, such as public utilities, communications, financial systems, emergency and medical response, business infrastructure and even transportation management systems. These actions can disrupt society and make it susceptible to pressure. How does MINDEF's cyber defence address these issues? Second, what further capabilities does MINDEF intend to develop? How does MINDEF intend to ensure that Singapore is well-protected? Further, like other military systems, cyber defence capabilities may raise suspicions and tensions with neighbours that can, ultimately, make the nation less secure. How does MINDEF plan to mitigate this risk as it develops its cyber defence capabilities? Lastly, cyber defence tools are powerful and hard to detect. How does MINDEF ensure that there is sufficient oversight of its systems to prevent inappropriate use by other individuals or Government agencies? Can MINDEF assure the public on this matter, such as by issuing an annual report or audit on cyber risks, breaches and mitigation efforts? Defence Diplomacy”
“I would like to ask the Minister, in his view, what is the new and most salient programme or measure in this year's Budget.”
“Madam, I am happy to note that the Minister of State has said that MOH, and even the whole of Government, is always building ahead to prepare for demand. Perhaps the Minister of State would like to give us some examples as to how MOH has been building ahead in terms of hospitals, in terms of step-down care facilities, in terms of healthcare workers, so that residents or patients can be better served. Would he give us some examples or some statistics to prove what he said, that MOH is always building ahead of demand?”
“Thank you, Madam. How does the Minister of State know that the profit made by the petrol companies is not excessive and, if so, by what standard?”
“I would like to seek the view of the Minister of State. I would like to ask whether, in the view of the Minister of State, the petrol companies are profiteering at the expense of consumers' interest.”
“Thank you, Mdm Speaker. Since our objection on paragraph (c) has been recorded, we will abstain from voting, instead of objecting.”
“Paragraph (c) of the amended Motion, as what I had stated.”
“Madam, we would like the dissent to be recorded that we are objecting to paragraph (c) of the amended Motion.”
“Yes, we do think there is something to contribute and that is why we allowed individual qualified members to decide whether they want to be NCMP. But the NCMP scheme itself is not a scheme which we will support as what we explained many times, that the scheme itself is not going to serve us well. I have just explained earlier on why. I am not convinced that this is going to be a scheme that will be able to allow genuine, serious Opposition parties to develop.”
“If such a political culture becomes the predominant phenomenon, we will have bad politics. What is more worrying is, should the Ruling party fail one day, what we have left to form an alternative government may be such politicians who have gained exposure and fame through the NCMP route. Madam, on the other hand, we also recognise that Parliament is a forum to discuss issues affecting the lives of Singaporeans and the future of our nation. We recognise that having one more NCMP will contribute to the debate and possibly, better policy outcomes. Hence, it is also meaningful for well-intended individuals who aspire to represent the will of the people to be NCMPs who contribute to the process. Mdm Speaker, I beg to move.”
“Mdm Speaker, I think I have said most of the things and answered some of the questions and doubts raised. Madam, the Workers' Party remains, in principle, opposed to the NCMP scheme. I have explained earlier, we are a responsible and rational party; we work within the system. It is the same: we oppose GRC, but we contested in GRCs. There is no contradiction. Make no mistake about that. And that is the spirit of the Workers' Party in wanting to work the system by respecting the law. Madam, essentially, Parliament is representative of the people. MPs secure a mandate from the people to make decisions on their behalf in Parliament, thus, representation is the foundation of Parliament. Any politician who aspires to enter Parliament must seek and obtain the mandate from the people to represent them so as to seek and effect positive change for the people, not just talk. You can air your views, you can debate here, but is there change? Is there a new direction set? I think that is what matters most. That is what Parliament is for. We have to ask: what are we here for? What is Parliament for? Therefore, the NCMP scheme is a distraction from the fundamental meaning of Parliament. The NCMP scheme has the potential to anaesthetise Opposition politicians from the consciousness that political conviction is what brings him or her into politics. Opposition politicians may delude themselves that they are checking the Government when they are, in fact, merely participating in the discussion forum with no real power to effect change. The NCMP scheme can also inadvertently attract candidates with a different motive and intent to participate in the Elections basically to seek personal fame and glory.”
“Yes, so I am talking about the amended Motion? I can continue with the Motion proper, right?”
“It can be useful, but fundamentally, this is not what Parliament is for, because Parliament is not a forum to talk shop, or just air views, or spar with Ministers to show that you are a smart guy. Parliament is not an academic conference. A Parliament of a functional democracy must give Opposition MPs real power to check and to contest with the Ruling party of the day to hold the Government accountable. The NCMP scheme can be a drug to Opposition parties, whose candidates may stand for Elections, aiming just to be NCMP, instead of elected MPs. This may cause Parliament to become a colosseum in the long run; for the nation to vent their emotions in a show, but with no real consequence. As what Ms Sylvia Lim said, "What makes the PAP change? What makes the Cabinet shift left?" Not the voice here. The Workers' Party has been represented in the House since 1981. Mr Jeyaretnam was the first Opposition Member in 1981. We have said a lot. Does the PAP change? No. If PAP does, I may not need to even move out of Hougang in GE 2011. I moved out exactly because I realised how much you can talk here, the PAP may not move, because you do not believe what I say. I am only one single Member here. How do you make a judgement?”
“So, it is correct, as NCMP, you cannot sink roots in that way because you just cannot possibly connect with the residents the way you want. Next, the difference between NCMP and Constituency MP is this: as a constituency MP, you conduct Meet-the-People Sessions (MPS), you represent the residents, you write to the Ministries. From the response of the letter, you will know what is the policy and what is the implementation of the policy. There are gaps. You follow up through the case. You know what is the trend. Yes, NCMP can talk to people. You can do surveys and thereby, you can air your views in this House, but you will not know exactly the problem and the policy gaps, because you do not get those kinds of cases. So, that is fundamentally the difference between constituency MP, elected MP and NCMP. You cannot grow muscle because you do not have roots, you are floating. Let us be honest about the difference. I have stated why we will reject the amendment because this amendment is not true. We are not manoeuvring. It is allowed under the law. We do not tell Ms Lee Li Lian, "Look, you don't accept NCMP, and thereby, we can have whoever we like here". We do not work that way. Madam, the Government Whip asked why should the PAP, after having won 69.9% of the vote at the last Elections, do this. So generous? So magnanimous? To get more Opposition representation in Parliament? Mr Leon Perera has given a very good answer. Yes, you want Singaporeans to believe that there is no need to vote for Opposition. Just vote for PAP and let us have Opposition members as NCMPs. And you are telling them, "Yes, your views will be represented. NCMPs can participate in the debates here". I am not saying that it is not useful.”
“It is exactly because Ms Lee did not and would not take lightly the voters of Punggol East, that she decided having been their elected MP for over two years, their rejection means she has no legitimacy to be in Parliament. This is the way of respecting the wishes of the voters. Neither is she disrespectful of the Constitution, as the Constitution clearly allows it and precedence also permits for an individual to vacate the NCMP seat. So, I do not really understand what the fuss is about. It is not a political manoeuvre because it is provided for under the law that says if an NCMP like Ms Lee Li Lian has not taken up the seat, Parliament can decide to fill the vacancy under the law, and hence I moved the Motion to allow Parliament to decide. The last part of the amended Motion, referring to what I said to the press, that I compared an NCMP to "duckweed on the water of the pond". Let us make no mistake about it. There is a fundamental difference between an NCMP and an elected MP, or a constituency MP because there are a lot of things you cannot do as an NCMP. Ms Lee Li Lian just told me her application for the use of a venue, a common area, for some function has been rejected by the Town Council. Is there a difference? You cannot even have a place to organise activities for the residents. That is the difference of being an NCMP. Even if she accepted the NCMP seat today, I think the outcome will still be the same. Let us not be hypocrites to say that, "Look, they are the same". They are different. I know because I have been an elected MP. And I see through how the PAP works. Of course, the rejection is explained as "we do not allow political parties to use common areas ". You use the People's Association (PA), you use Advisers. Come on. Let us be honest about it.”
“Madam, I will first deal with the amended Motion. Madam, the Workers' Party rejects the amended Motion, the paragraph (c), because there is no basis to say that this is a political manoeuvre. First of all, Ms Lee Li Lian did not accept the NCMP seat not because the party asked her to do so. She feels that she should not accept because she has lost the mandate to serve Punggol East. She was an MP with full mandate to be in this House. I will deal with that in terms of mandate and what Parliament is for. I think we better go back to the basics and fundamental. What is Parliament for? I think it is what Minister Heng Swee Keat had asked, "What for?" I will go back to that later, but let me deal with the amended Motion first. The argument that because Ms Lee Li Lian has obtained 15,800 votes in Punggol East and thereby, she should represent the 15,800 voters who voted for her to be in this House to make a contribution. It is illogical because NCMP, by definition, is Non-Constituency Member of Parliament. An NCMP cannot represent the minority who voted for her in this House. So, I do not understand the logic that because she has obtained the votes and, thereby, is "elected". If you want to work the system to say that you wish the minority voters to be represented by MPs, then let us make it equal for all MPs and it should be elected by a proportionate representation system, not our system. NCMP is basically the "best loser". It is a very different concept from proportionate representation of party lists. So, I think let us not try to change the concept and tell people that this is the same. They are different. Members are saying here that, "Look, you don't take Punggol East voters seriously, you don't respect them". But Madam, it is the contrary.”
“It is the view of the Workers' Party that the only way forward for a strong Parliament, one that can hold the government of the day to account, is for the Ruling party, in the position of strength, to create a political system that would allow both genuine and loyal Opposition parties to grow as well as the Ruling party to perform and compete for seats. I expect the Workers' Party's NCMPs to grow strong from their position of weakness and to hold their heads up high with pride and dignity. They will respect Parliament, respect the law and respect themselves. Thank you. [(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]”
“These purported benefits were repeated again in 2010 when NCMP seats were increased from six to nine seats. The first reason is to provide PAP Ministers and Members with the experience of the cut and thrust of debate by sparring with Opposition Members. The second reason is to allow the electorate to judge for themselves what elected Opposition Members can and cannot do for the people. The third reason is to dispel any suspicions of cover-ups, since Opposition Members would give vent to any allegation of misfeasance or corruption or nepotism, even if these proved false and allow the Government to rebut them. From the above, Mdm Speaker, it is clear that the creation of the NCMP scheme is chiefly for the benefit of the Ruling party and Opposition Members are deemed as valuable only in relation to the training they give the PAP Ministers and Members. Although the PAP is trying very hard to convince Singaporeans that NCMPs are on par with elected Members, they have shown the cloven hoof by referring to the NCMPs as second-class Members in this House and Opposition best losers who crave for publicity and personal fame. Such a view was characteristically articulated two days ago in this House by Member Cedric Foo who was so arrogant to say that Mr Leon Perera's presence here is by the grace of the PAP. Madam, with the backdrop I have described above, it should be no surprise that the Workers' Party has been opposing the NCMP scheme, a scheme which was created to the PAP's political advantage.”
“As a result, East Coast GRC despite being qualified as the next succeeding GRC, only one candidate instead of two was declared NCMP. Under the circumstances, it is logical that Parliament consider filling the vacant seat by declaring another candidate from the East Coast GRC team as NCMP. Madam, it is public knowledge that the Workers' Party opposes the NCMP scheme. The Workers' Party believes that the NCMP scheme is not the way forward to make our political system more robust. The NCMP scheme has become an attempt to whitewash the tremendous negative impact driven by the change in our political system from Single Member Constituency (SMC) to the creation of GRCs to entrench a one-party political system with no insurance against the failure of the Ruling party. The Workers' Party is a rational and responsible political party. We understand the political reality. We understand that the struggle for a functional democracy by a loyal Opposition must be fought from within the existing system under the law legislated by Parliament even though we disagree with that. Therefore, we do not oppose individual Members who are willing to sacrifice their time and energy to contribute to the national debate in Parliament. Hence, if one Member who is declared as NCMP is unable to take up the seat, it is my duty as the leader of the Workers' Party to nominate the next best volunteer. This is why I have decided to move the Motion. The Constitution of the Republic of Singapore provides us for a maximum of nine NCMPs from the Opposition in this House if there are none being elected at the January elections. When the NCMP scheme was proposed in 1984, three benefits were given in support of the scheme.”
“Mdm Speaker, I beg to move, [(proc text) "That this Parliament, pursuant to section 53 of the Parliamentary Elections Act – (proc text)] [(proc text) (a) declares that the seat of Ms Lee Li Lian, who was elected a Non-constituency Member of Parliament under section 52 of the Act, has become vacant by reason of her having failed to take and subscribe before Parliament the Oath of Allegiance under Article 61 of the Constitution of the Republic of Singapore at the first and second Sittings of the first session of the present Parliament; and (proc text)] [(proc text) (b) resolves that the seat be filled in accordance with sections 52(2) and 52(3B)(a) of the Act." (proc text)] Mdm Speaker, the Motion before the House is to provide for the filling of the vacant seat in accordance with the relevant section of the Parliamentary Elections Act. Ms Lee Li Lian of the Workers' Party was declared an NCMP at the General Elections 2015 but has decided not to take up the seat. Ms Lee Li Lian has not taken the Oath of Allegiance under Article 61 of the Constitution of the Republic of Singapore at the first Sitting on 15 January 2016 and the second Sitting on 25 January 2016 of the First session of Parliament. Under the Parliamentary Elections Act, three NCMP seats were declared elected. Since Ms Lee Li Lian has not taken up the seat, Parliament has the power to resolve to fill the vacant seat. Madam, under the Parliamentary Elections Act, if the election results of the Group Representative Constituency (GRC) qualifies for the NCMP seat, two seats are offered to the team of candidates in the GRC. However, there were only three NCMP seats declared under the Act at the last General Election.”
“Alternative parties are valuable because they are an insurance against any collapse or failure of the existing ruling party. We cannot expect a political party to transform itself into a credible alternative party overnight. If this Government truly believes in preserving this shining red dot, then the onus is on it to build a political system conducive to the growth of alternative parties as well as the renewal of the ruling party. Political value must not be narrowly construed and concentrated in one political party. That is too dangerous for a small state such as ours. Chasing the Pledge. In all this talk about the future, SkillsFuture, Right Politics for FutureSg, we must not forget our foundational ideals enshrined in our national pledge – to build a democratic society based on justice and equality so as to achieve happiness, prosperity and progress. Mr Lee Kuan Yew said, I quote, "In 1966, my colleagues and I settled the words of our pledge. We did not focus on our navel or we would have missed that rainbow in the sky." Madam, no other nation in Asia has such lofty and progressive ideals. And it would be an injustice to the memory of our Founding Leaders and Pioneer Generation if we do not chase this ideal and keep focusing on the PAP navel instead. Singapore needs to choose and make our own destiny, but we cannot depend on one political party or the Government for charting and directing our path, if we are to be not just an exceptional, but an outstanding nation that is an example to all in Asia. 3.31 pm”
“In fact, if we look at SkillsFuture, it leverages on the so-called narrow interests of individual Singaporeans to pursue the collective good. Page: 35 Instead of rejecting narrow interest-based politics altogether, we need to nudge Singaporeans with narrow political interests to talk to each other. We should take such discussion as an educational process for Singaporeans to learn and to discern what is politics for the collective good of the nation and society. We should not design a system of shutting out discussion based on assumption that it is interest-based and narrow. Third, our politics must trust Singaporeans to be independent, rational and wise social actors. The Government and the ruling party must be able to let go and allow the building of independent institutions trusted by the people, regardless of race, language, religion and political affiliation. Our Universities are a case in point. For a while, they were tightly controlled for fear of their political influence. But since they were released and their autonomy protected, we can be proud of our Universities today for achieving world-class status. Today, our academics could disagree and criticise the Government and a few have even joined alternative political parties to contribute to the national debate and in politics. Our political system has not been destabilised as a result. Fourth, our politics must see value in the broadest sense. The outcome of good politics is not to ensure no gridlock. Excessive fears of political gridlock will lead to a society depending only on one political party, waiting for it to rot to the point of no return before any alternative party can be formed to take its place. We must see value in having alternative parties around and having the opportunities to develop.”
“Although the ASPIRE Report is the correct road map, we have a long road ahead to redefine our long-ingrained notion of success from the focus on material gains and academic achievements to the pursuit of passion and happiness and the possession of different kinds of skills. Right politics as insurance. Madam, I agree with the President that we need to get our politics right. But while empowering confident Singaporeans is the way for us to ensure our shining red dot stays brilliant, getting our politics right is the way for us to insure against bad government and the failure of governance. The outcome of good politics is not just good policy and ensuring no gridlock. That would be a narrow technocratic view of politics. The outcome of good politics is the fostering of a political system that is able to withstand shock and turbulence, including the unexpected collapse or slow corruption of the ruling party, to ensure the continuity of the nation as a united people. Such a resilient political system must be able to make adjustments in the face of adversity. How should we do good politics to ensure a resilient political system and a confident nation? I believe the same principles making up the policy DNA for SkillsFuture are pertinent. First, our politics must be all-inclusive. National interest should be defined by consensus and the narrative should not be shaped and monopolised by the ruling party. The Government should recognise that there are many on-going and independent national conversations and should allow for differences in opinions to flourish without marking these conversations as disloyal and divisive. Second, our politics must be nudging instead of censoring. We should not be afraid of narrow interest-based politics, which I do not think we can avoid.”
“These two are important and also because they are related to SkillsFuture. If the graduates of our schools are not self-driven and Page: 34 unafraid to take risks to pursue their interests, then SkillsFuture will become meaningless over time. It would also be a terrible waste of synergy if SkillsFuture helps Singaporeans to be more enterprising but the lack of funding and business opportunities, as well as high operating costs, continue to hamper the growth of the SME sector. In the schools, we need to nurture the thirst for learning and to revamp the syllabus and assessment methods so that we would not kill the natural curiosity of children. In the last few years, we have been discussing educational reforms in terms of reducing the stress on children. I think we might have been wrong in focusing on the symptoms of the problem. Empowering our students to think critically and creatively and to solve complex problems can also be stressful, but it will be a rewarding and fulfilling kind of stress. We have also been emphasising too much on cohesion as a value in schools and have not appreciated the importance of diversity, differences and even dissent for cultivating critical thinking and creativity in schools. Our curriculum and culture in schools should avoid influencing our students to think in narrow practical terms and not in relation to their interests and passion. Graduates of our schools should have a strong sense of self-driven purpose with the right values of tolerance and respect for diversity and differences.”
“I believe the Government's SkillsFuture programme contains the DNA for empowering confident Singaporeans. What is this DNA? First, it is all-inclusive and does not discriminate on the basis of household background, income and employment status, educational attainment or age. Second, it trusts individual Singaporeans to be the ones who know themselves best and have the wisdom to know where they should head to next in life. The Government takes a step back and only provides counsellors to help those who want advice to help them decide. Third, it does not measure value in the narrow terms of economic value-add and caters to people's passion and interests. It has been said that one could even use the SkillsFuture credits to improve one's skills in calligraphy. Fourth, it exemplifies what some analysts call a nudge policy instead of the usual carrot-and-stick approach favoured by the Government. A nudge policy is said to be more effective for today's modern citizens and does not mean less or weaker Government. Although the $500 SkillsFuture credit is not a big sum, many people are exploring ways to use the credit. The credit is nudging Singaporeans to engage in lifelong learning. Fifth, and most importantly, the whole policy is focused on empowering Singaporeans, instead of trying to direct or steer them to fit into the planned economy or the needs of corporations. Empowering Singaporeans' future is something the Workers' Party will fully agree with. Madam, SkillsFuture is not enough. If we want to empower confident Singaporeans, this policy DNA – all-inclusive, trusting Singaporeans, seeing value broadly, nudging and empowering Singaporeans' future – should be applied to many other policy areas. It should be applied to at least the schools and the SME sector.”
“Mdm Speaker, the President asked an important question that should concern all Singaporeans in the next decade, "How do we ensure our island-nation remains a shining red dot and that our children and grandchildren will thrive?" Page: 33 In the last 50 years, the question that has occupied us was different. It was how to make sure our small island state and our multiracial people survive an unforgiving and hostile world. Our solution has been to discipline ourselves and to make sacrifices under a strong one-party top-down rule to guide the development of the economy and society. National institutions were built and tied closely to the PAP so that the leaders could steer the ship in the direction they thought best and everyone else was not to rock the boat. Times have changed. We are now a globalised society with a well-educated people. We are now seeking to ensure our children will thrive, not just survive. The ship model has to change. Singaporeans are aspiring to set sail on their own to fulfil their aspirations. Many have become leaders of their field. Global conditions are now very different. We need to be nimble and experiment as a country to search and seize the hidden opportunities in the next industrial revolution. We cannot simply rely on a group of so-called super talents in Government steering society from high above. For Singapore to continue to shine as a red dot, the people of Singapore must shine, Singaporeans must shine if Singapore is to chart our own path. The red dot will no longer be red if its people turn pale in the face of challenges or when faced with intimidation. Hence, nurturing a confident Singaporean people is the way to ensure that our children and grandchildren will thrive. Empowering confident Singaporeans.”
“Does the Minister not agree that corporate governance has nothing to do with whether the Board member is appointed by the Minister? I think corporate governance is something that is expected. I mean, for the Town Council, the members are not appointed by the Minister but I think we debated here on corporate governance. So, I do not understand. We are not objecting to the part about corporate governance. We are only objecting to the part of appointment power that is given solely to the Minister. So, how does appointment power and corporate governance have to link in that way?”
“We have explained again and again that we are in support of the change of name to honour Encik Yusof Ishak. Our problem is that we cannot understand why there is a need to use this name change at the same time to change the appointment of the Board members. How does it square with honouring the President and at the same time removing the President's power originally in the Act to appoint the chairman and vice-chairman of the Board? We cannot square with that. So, yes, while we wholeheartedly support the change of name to honour President Yusof Ishak but, at the same time, we cannot square with the change that is being "tumpang" in Malay, with the name change, that it is something which is not in accordance with the spirit of you wanting to change the name to honour the President. Page: 80”
“Madam, I would like to seek the Minister's clarification. Would he agree we relook at clause 7? I think it is a question of not so much of whether the Board is big or small, but a question of why you need the Minister to be the sole appointer. Can the Minister assure us that it is going to be as diversified as what it used to be? And why is there Page: 79 a need to have a sole appointer? I think it fundamentally changes the character and the appointment of the Board. So, would he agree? If he agrees to relook at the provision, the Workers' Party will support that.”
“Madam, clarification. We were wondering whether the Government is sincere in honouring Encik Yusof Ishak. Is it in disguise in honouring Encik Yusof Ishak by changing the name for controlling ISEAS by changing the appointment power of the Board? Because this makes me think of how eventually the Nanyang University was closed. The Board subsequently changed and closed.”
“Thank you, Madam. I have a clarification for the Deputy Prime Minister. The Deputy Prime Minister mentioned in his speech that the Net Asset is the basis of calculation for NIRC. I would like to know what type of asset class he is referring to and how does he consider "Net".”
“Yes. Because of the use of the materials, the defect may not surface within a year. Thank you.”