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 48 of 54.
“Just now, the Acting Minister mentioned that industrial and commercial premises are let out at below market price. How about tenders? The HDB puts out tenders and the tenants tender at market rates.”
“Sir, I declare my interest because my company is a tenant in HDB industrial premises. Based on the answer given by the Minister, was it the interpretation of the Acting Minister that the intention of the Finance Minister, in announcing the reduction of property tax, was to help Government reduce expenditure on subsidies to industrial premises?”
“Would the Minister say, based on the criteria he has set, that so far PCF is the sole organisation which has qualified and it is justifiable to have the privileged allocation from HDB to enjoy such subsidies?”
“Can I take it from the Minister that the rules are designed solely for the PCF to have the premises?”
“Besides the PCF, so far, has any approved organisation been allocated premises by the HDB to run education centres at void decks?”
“If the premises become vacant, would the HDB consider tendering or letting out the premises to private organisations or charitable organisations?”
“Does it mean that if an organisation fulfils the conditions mentioned by the Minister, HDB will give them automatic allocation?”
“Sir, does that mean that it will be by way of tender or by way of allocation by HDB?”
“The question is: if the PAP Community Foundation (PCF) should withdraw, would the HDB allow a charitable organisation to run the education centre at the said premises which were used by the PCF?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, may I have a clarification with the Deputy Prime Minister? Does the Deputy Prime Minister agree that Article 151A sets a precedent that the absolute power to decide on a specific matter is now given to the Prime Minister and another Minister, rather than a decision which rests with the Cabinet? BG Lee Hsien Loong: I disagree completely. As I have explained, firstly, the Permanent Secretary and the Chief of Defence Force have to be involved. Secondly, the money finally has to be voted by Parliament. The Prime Minister and the Defence Minister do not have absolute power. They do have ultimate responsibility. Therefore, they have considerable leeway to make the move. But in the end they have to come and justify and get the money from Parliament.”
“Sir, is a single parent eligible under the scheme?”
“Sir, will the Ministry of Home Affairs consider requiring the Police to use a camera during interrogation and the taking of statement from a suspect? Assoc. Prof. Ho Peng Kee: Sir, I am not sure whether that will solve the problem. Because even if we video tape the recording of the statement, it is still open to the accused to say that there was inducement, threat or promise, before the statement was given.”
“Is there any control by the Ministry of Education as to whether kindergartens should be set up at certain places or whether they should be discontinued?”
“Sir, does any kindergarten, whether to set up or discontinue a kindergarten, need to notify the Ministry of its intention?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, of course, western countries have values, but he says they have degenerated because of democracy. My question is whether, in his view, democracy has necessitated the degeneration of social values.”
“Yes. I am referring to Dr Chen's speech. He said that there was strong tradition in the western country and democracy. It seems that values have degenerated. So I would like to ask him whether it means that democracy has necessitated the degeneration of social values in society.”
“Okay, we do not speculate. Would the Minister agree that the Committee should look into these possible causes?”
“Sir, since the Committee of Inquiry has not completed its findings, on what basis is the Minister sure that what I have mentioned in my Question would not have happened?”
“Has the Committee of Inquiry completed its findings?”
“Sir, I think the Senior Parliamentary Secretary should release the figures in terms of tender price, in terms of land cost, work it out per unit, and how much HDB would recoup from selling the flat. Would he agree to do that for these particular projects because there is ground for comparison in the same area?”
“Sir, does it mean that because people can pay and are willing to pay for a higher price, compared with the resale market, therefore, the HDB can just increase prices?”
“Does the Senior Parliamentary Secretary agree that he cannot convince Singaporeans by merely saying "better design". I am sure there is a way to work out: how much it will cost, let us say, per unit for this kind of design with better quality of tiles. Would he release the figures to the public?”
“It seems to me that the reason for the increase in sale price is due to better design and bigger area. So would the Senior Parliamentary Secretary tell us what exactly are "better design and finishes"? And how much would it cost exactly, and justify the cost increases?”
“To get a total picture of museum visits in Singapore, we must include visitorship to The Empress Place Museum. The 1993 visitorship figure was 275,000. Thus, total visitorship to the National Museum and Empress Place Museum together in 1993 was 538,200 compared to 406,900 in 1985. BUILDING PROGRAMME FOR HDB PURCHASE FLATS (Acceleration) 12. Dr S Vasoo asked the Acting Minister for National Development whether he will give some details of the building programme for the Housing and Development Board purchase flats for the next 3 years and if there are further plans to accelerate the release of more new flats. The Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for National Development (Mr Matthias Yao Chih) (for the Acting Minister for National Development): Sir, HDB's building programme has already been increased from 24,000 units in 1992 to 28,000 units in 1993, and to 30,000 units in 1994. The approved building programme for new HDB flats from 1994 to 1996 is around 30,000 flats per year. However, in view of the high demand for HDB flats, my Ministry is reviewing the building programme to see if it can be increased further.”
“Question No. 11, Sir. NATIONAL MUSEUM (Drop in number of visitors) 11. Mr Low Thia Khiang asked the Minister for Information and the Arts why the number of visitors to the National Museum dropped from a high of 406,900 in 1985 to 203,103 in 1993 despite the extensive upgrading works done. The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Information and the Arts (Encik Mohamad Maidin B P M) (for the Minister for Information and the Arts): Mr Speaker, Sir, in 1985, as part of the 20th National Day celebrations, the National Museum reopened with new attractions including a diorama depicting historical scenes since 1819, an 18-projector sight and sound presentation on Singapore, a new Straits Chinese Gallery, a Trade Ceramics Gallery and a 15-minute multi-slide show on Singapore River, Chinatown, Serangoon Road and Kampong Glam. A special effort was made to get school children to attend. This resulted in the high visitorship that year. The visitorship gradually declined in the following three years after the novelty wore off. In 1989/1990, the National Museum was closed for repairs. The entire timber roof of the building and part of the timber floor had to be replaced due to termite infestation. The dome was also restored. It reopened in November 1990 with the permanent displays remaining largely unchanged. We started organising special exhibitions. Last year, the Children's Discovery Gallery and the Art Gallery were closed for air-conditioning works. The visitorship of 203,100 for 1993 did not include 40,100 students who came on guided school visits. It should have been included. The total visitorship for 1993 was in fact 243,200. This year, we expect the number to be more than 250,000.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, before I ask Question No. 11, I would like to ask why one of the Questions for Oral Answer which I submitted to Parliament on 12th July is not printed in the Order Paper. Mr Speaker: I think your Question is set down for tomorrow. So are you asking this Question?”
“Sir, is the Minister saying that the office holders of the various committees, like the members of the CCMC, are not PAP members? Or if they are PAP members, they are not qualified to sit there?”
“My question is: Is there a difference between a Government appointee, as the Minister mentioned, and a PAP appointee? Mr Lim Hng Kiang: Of course, there is a difference when a person is a party member versus a person who is not a party member. For the purposes of this scheme, the volunteers are all appointed by the People's Association and, under this scheme, their assessment is based on their work in the grassroots organisations.”
“Sir, the Acting Minister mentioned that I have misconstrued and that these grassroots members are actually appointees of the Government. Is there a difference between the so-called Government-appointed or PAP-appointed grassroots members?”
“Clarification, Sir. What I am asking is, first of all, what are the safeguards that you have from the time a person receives the application up to the time it is keyed into the computer? How does the computer actually prioritise, let us say, by giving one year's headstart to a new applicant compared to an upgrader? How does the computer categorise that and through what system?”
“Sir, I think the HDB should make the procedure clearer, from the time the applications are submitted, how they are keyed into the computer, how the computer prioritises or rates the priority of, let us say, new applicants in mature estates, and how are they given the priority. I think at present the procedures are quite vague and abstract.”
“The Minister says that there are some built-in controls to ensure the integrity of the system. What are the controls that have been built in to ensure that there will be no fraud? Would the Minister make public the auditors' reports on the computer balloting system? As regards inviting the public to witness the balloting, I am referring to the actual running of the computer itself. When you run the selection, would someone be present to witness it?”
“Sir, how many staff are there in the Ministry's Translation Unit? BG George Yong-Boon Yeo: We have eight Chinese translators and we put three or four of the more senior translators to work on the CRC Report because of the importance of that Report. MEDISAVE WITHDRAWAL FOR COMMUNITY HOSPITALS (Rationale for limit) 5. Dr Kanwaljit Soin asked the Minister for Health what is the rationale for the limit of Medisave withdrawal of $100 per day for community hospitals as compared to $300 per day for restructured hospitals when the ward charges for community hospitals are 80% of those for restructured hospitals.”
“Sir, could I take it that that was because of low priority given by MITA in the translation of the CRC Report? It has taken, I think, almost a year to finish the translation. BG George Yong-Boon Yeo: Sir, the Report was made public at the end of September 1993. I do not have an abacus here, but I think it is less than half a year. The point is that from January to March this year the Translation Unit was heavily loaded with more urgent work, including the translation of the Civil Service medical benefits booklet and the translation of many important documents relating to projects in China.”
“Sir, the privatisation exercise was done in Singapore, but the Minister mentioned about going to the best lawyers for advice on international law because of the huge public offer of shares. Why was there a need to do that? Would the Minister explain further? Cdre Teo Chee Hean: I would be glad to enlighten the Member on the intricacies of such a share offering, particularly when it involves many other countries. While Singapore Telecom is a Singapore company, the Member should know that the shares were also on offer to nationals and companies in many other countries. The 'C' tranche, for example, of 450 million shares initially on offer was a very large offer and was taken up by many investors in many different countries quite successfully because of the advice given. COST REVIEW COMMITTEE REPORT (Translation) 4. Mr Low Thia Khiang asked the Minister for Information and the Arts when the translation of the Cost Review Committee Report will be ready, and why his Ministry has taken such a long time for the translation.”
“There are two questions here: Firstly, what is the legal cost of engaging the American lawyers? Secondly, I asked the question why there was no competent law firm or expert in Singapore who could give the same sort of service. Cdre Teo Chee Hean: Sir, the issue at hand here is going to where the best advice is available. As I said, the Singapore Telecom offer was a very large offer made in many different countries and we should go to the lawyers who could offer us the correct advice in these countries so that the share offer could proceed without legal hitches. Mr Low Thia Khiang; Sir, what about the legal costs involved? Cdre Teo Chee Hean: I do not have all the costs before me. But the segment that I have suggests that the fees are in the order of US$145,000 plus expenses. Seen in relation to the size of the offer, I think this is quite reasonable.”
“Sir, would the Minister agree that this does not seem to be in congruence with the Government's decision to sever its links with the Privy Council? We said that we in Singapore want to establish a legal practice or legal standard by ourselves. Cdre Teo Chee Hean: Mr Speaker, Sir, I think the Member has got the two issues quite unnecessarily confused together. Whether or not we go to the Privy Council is a separate issue, ie, whether we consider them to be an appropriate body to take up appeals in particular cases. Here, we have gone to engage experts in this area in order to advise us on what are the correct procedures in the case of a public offering of shares.”
“Is the Minister saying that there is no such expertise available in the local law firms? Cdre Teo Chee Hean: Sir, for a privatisation of this kind where it is a very large and complicated privatisation process, I think it is prudent to go to where the knowledge resides.”
“Sir, why was there a need to advise on international law when the privatisation was carried out in Singapore? Cdre Teo Chee Hean: Mr Speaker, Sir, the Member should be aware that the laws regarding commercial transactions in different countries may be different and therefore specialised legal advice was required for a listing of this kind which was put out in many different countries.”
“I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The sum of $449,217,930 for Head U ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. The sum of $4,862,344,800 for Head U ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. 5.59 pm”
“Since the CCC can apply on its own, as I have mentioned, Hougang CCC did not support the application put forward by the town council. The Senior Parliamentary Secretary is trying to suggest that the town council's project may not be lasting. I think it is wrong, because we are having the same project as the other town councils which the other CCCs approved. The question is: why did the Hougang CCC not apply? Is it because there is no project? Or is it because there is no need to improve? Is the Hougang Town Council doing such a good job that the CCC need not do anything?”
“Why not save the money then? Why give it to the CCC to spend?”
“Does the Senior Parliamentary Secretary know the reason why there was no application?”
“Sir, now I understand what is meant by "goodwill". I would like to know so far, how much funds have been allocated to Hougang CCC under the CPIC fund.”
“Sir, I think many people see it that way. It is through the CCC that the PAP town councils will get the funds for improvement works. They get at least a 75% subsidy, depending on the project. And that will give the PAP town council an upper hand in terms of improvement works. Is that not true?”
“Does the Senior Parliamentary Secretary agree that as long as the system of application remains with the CCC, it will be seen as a fund solely for use by the PAP? An hon. Member: No.”
“Is the Senior Parliamentary Secretary aware that the Hougang Town Council has applied but was not supported by the CCC?”
“Sir, is it not a fact that only PAP town councils will be allocated funds from CIPC, because of the requirement that the application must be submitted through the CCC? Mr Matthias Yao Chih: Absolutely not, Sir. The Hougang Town Council can always apply through the Hougang CCC for the funds. And if it merits consideration, we will consider it.”
“It is $14 million, not $140 million. It is $14,962,904. It is at page 617 of the Budget book. Just now the Minister of State said that the CIPC funds are not given to the town councils. From what I know, CIPC funds are reflected in the financial reports of town councils. From the latest figures, for financial year 1992/1993, PAP town councils received a total of more than $12 million from CIPC funding. Would the Minister of State explain?”
“Sir, I beg to move, That sum to be allocated for Head U of the Development Estimates be reduced by $10 in respect of Code UJ 5100. (In Mandarin): Sir, in the Budget of the Ministry of National Development, every year the Government allocates, through the Citizens' Consultative Committees, $20 million for the spending by the PAP town councils, so that they could beautify their estates. The Government is using the people's money to add glamour to estates managed by the PAP town councils. What is the justification for this arrangement? In this year's Budget, there is a provision of $400,000 for Goods and Services Tax (GST). May I know what is the nature of this GST? Moreover, in 1992, the PAP town councils or PAP constituencies spent a total of $14,962,904 of the people' s money. I would like to know how much did each of the PAP town councils receive from this amount. What project was the money spent on? Mr Matthias Yao Chih: Sir, Mr Low made a mistake. The CIPC funds were not given to PAP town councils. The PAP town councils did not receive the funds. As for the $40 million for GST, this is going to be distributed to town councils to offset the GST charges on S&C.”