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 53 of 54.
“Sir, does the Minister agree that the scope of service and the number of centres provided by an organisation should correspond with its capital capacity rather than requiring the organisation to have a minimum paid-up capital of $5 million?”
“I believe that the PAP Community Foundation, which sets up hundreds of education centres in Singapore, would need to spread the capital over all its education centres. Does it not mean that it is not necessary to run one centre with a $5 million paid-up capital?”
“Sir, is there a limit to the number of centres which a foundation can set up with the $5 million minimum paid-up capital requirement?”
“Has the financial position of Mount Charlotte improved since it was reported the last time? Dr Richard Hu Tsu Tau: Indeed, it has. TECHNOLOGIES HOLDINGS GROUP (Investment in Silicon Valley) 6. Mr Ling How Doong asked the Minister for Finance if he will say what was the total amount of investment by Singapore through Technologies Holdings Group in the Silicon Valley in Australia; whether the investment suffered any loss in 1991 and 1992; and what was the extent of the loss.”
“Does the Minister agree that the level of risk tolerance for Government investment is much lower than private capital investment, as the Government's money is the people's money?”
“Does the Minister agree that if the money is invested somewhere else, or in other investment instruments, the investment would have a better yield?”
“Can I take it that the Minister is confident that the investment on the hotel would give us a good return by 1995 or 1996?”
“Would the Minister estimate how much Singapore could recover from the investment should the hotel be eventually wound up? Dr Richard Hu Tsu Tau: It would not be wound up. The hotel will be profitable in a few years' time. I cannot predict what is going to happen in a few years' time. But, hopefully, with the recovery of the hotel market in London, which is incidentally the largest single hotel market in the world, and will remain so even when UK is part of the European Community, it will remain for a long, long time as a major tourist hotel market in Europe.”
“Under what consideration did the Government decide to pump in another £150 million to save the hotel, as it was reported?”
“Sir, it was reported that the hotel occupancy rate had been at its worst since 1980. Why then did the Government decide to buy 30% of Mount Charlotte for around £237.5 million in May 1991?”
“If not, I would like to postpone my questions to the next available sitting of Parliament.”
“I would like to ask if this House is prepared to extend the Question Time.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, there is less than half a minute left and ---”
“Sir, the Minister mentioned just now about loan schemes. Does the Minister think that it is healthy for the future of Singapore if our graduates are indebted as a result of study loans, even before they enter the job market?”
“Sir, why is the Ministry still increasing the University fees in the light of the Government's conclusion that wages have exceeded productivity and there should be lesser or no wage increase? Does the Minister think that parents can afford the increase?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like the Minister to make public my question. I am asking details of "wage and other cost increases" in 1991 for NUS.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, in my question I asked for details of "wages and other cost increases", not only percentage increase.”
“Just now the Minister mentioned that the PAP Community Foundation is different from the PAP.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, does the Minister agree that the price of public housing should be kept at a level which is affordable to Singaporeans?”
“Clarification, Sir. The power of the elected Chamber is restricted. I believe in Great Britain, the Upper House and the Lower House have different functions.”
“We know that the Constitution has already provided for the positions of the Speaker and Deputy Speaker of Parliament to be assumed by people nominated under the Constitution. Therefore, the system of NMP is just an extension of this foundation. This does not deprive our people of their basic right to elect their own representatives, neither is it against the one-man-one-vote system, because the appointment of NMPs has to be approved by each Parliament, with the support of the elected Members of Parliament in this House. It does not go against the rights of the elected Members. At the same time, it provides the electorate an additional political service in addition to the one-man-one-vote system. Therefore, the Nominated MP system is in compliance with the principle of our Constitution and, at the same time, does not contradict the right of the people to elect their own representatives. The Member for Hougang said, a moment ago, that the Government could amend the Constitution at random, and that some 10 elected MPs can appoint another 70 to 80 other MPs to form the Government. If that is the case, and if the PAP Government is really amending the Constitution at its whims and fancies, then Mr Low Thia Khiang can file a petition at the High Court to take the Government to task on this. Has the Constitution been amended at random? If I were Mr Low Thia Khiang, and I feel that the PAP is amending the Constitution at random, then I will mobilise the people to support the Workers' Party to topple the PAP at a General Election.”
“Mr Peh Chin Hua (Jalan Besar GRC)( In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I support the motion standing in the name of the Leader of the House, Mr Wong Kan Seng. Sir, when the last Parliament passed the Bill on Nominated MPs, the system of Nominated MPs started a new chapter in our parliamentary and political systems. Regrettably, the term of the two Nominated MPs was a very short one. They had served for less than a year when Parliament was dissolved. Just now, I heard Dr Tan Cheng Bock very eloquently presenting his strong objection to the appointment of NMPs in this Parliament. The moment he completed his speech, he immediately received a warm round of applause from the four Opposition MPs. This led me to some kind of misconception that Dr Tan Cheng Bock seemed to have replaced Mr Chiam See Tong as the Leader of the Opposition. However, I understand Dr Tan Cheng Bock's stand on the NMP. He does not support the People's Action Party's stand on the NMP, neither does he support the Opposition's stand. At most, I would say that Dr Tan Cheng Bock is non-partisan, as far as this issue is concerned. In my view, people like Dr Tan Cheng Bock are the most suitable candidates to be appointed NMPs. The Opposition Member, Mr Ling How Doong, said that this act of the Government was against the principle of parliamentary democracy. He also stressed that it is against the democratic system of one-man-one-vote. In other words, he feels that this is against the Constitution. Mr Low Thia Khiang also said that the Government can amend the Constitution at random. From my observation, psychologically, they seem to have a very strong repulsion against the idea of NMPs.”
“Then, the 10 elected MPs will appoint another 71 MPs to make up the number of 81 Members in Parliament. This can also be legitimate! Is this going to be the direction of our political development? Or perhaps, this is what some people describe as an oriental and unique style of democracy. This is a matter of concern to me. Generally, ever since the system of Nominated MPs was approved by Parliament, Parliament has appointed Nominated MPs. Today, may I ask all the hon. Members in this House: has the appointment of these Nominated MPs achieved the objectives laid down by Prime Minister Goh when he introduced the Bill in 1989? Have the Nominated MPs made up for the level which the PAP has failed to reach, and for the group of Singaporeans who have been neglected? Ever since the Nominated MPs entered Parliament, has the Government's policy been changed because of their presence? Moreover, by introducing this motion of appointing Nominated MPs, once again, does it mean that the leadership in the PAP feel that among the PAP MPs today, there is still a lack of professional technocrats, or that the PAP has failed to persuade the top talents in the various sectors to serve the nation? Mr Speaker, Sir, in my view, appointing Nominated MPs, who have not been elected by the people and yet enjoy voting rights in Parliament, is in breach of the spirit of democracy. It has also deprived our people of their right to elect directly their representatives in Parliament. I feel that the PAP's motive in introducing Nominated MPs in this Parliament is rather vague. It will not achieve the objectives of the concept of Nominated MPs which were publicly announced previously. For this reason, I oppose the motion.”
“The people go to the polls to return their MPs who in turn formulate the policies to govern the nation. This is the root from where Parliament derives its right to legislate. Members of Parliament have the right to vote when decisions are to be made in Parliament. This is because the MPs are voting on behalf of the people who have voted them into Parliament. This is the meaning of democratic representation. Nominated MPs do not go through the election process, yet they have voting rights in Parliament. This is in contradiction of the true spirit of the democratic parliamentary representation system. Who gave the mandate to the Nominated MPs to exercise the right to vote in Parliament? Who do these Nominated MPs represent? Another important principle is: when the electorate elects their MPs to represent them in Parliament, it does not necessarily mean that they have given their elected MPs the right to nominate other Members to represent the people. Nominated MPs are also Members of Parliament. Yet, they are appointed by Members of Parliament. This is contradictory to the spirit of having to hold a General Election under the one-man-one-vote system to elect Members of Parliament. Mr Speaker, Sir, if we allow the Members of Parliament, as representatives of the people, to appoint other Members of Parliament, and these appointed Members have the rights almost identical to the elected MPs, and even the right to become Ministers, or Prime Minister, then, will it come a day when the people need to return only 40 MPs, and allow the 40 elected MPs to appoint another 41 Nominated MPs to represent the people, thus, making up a total of 81 Members in Parliament? Worse still, under the premise of saving time, money and efforts, maybe just 10 Members will be elected by the people.”
“As for the accommodation of constructive dissent and other views, if the Government is sincere, then it should encourage the various professional bodies and community organisations to express their political views in the names of their respective organisations, and should not amend the law to restrict them from expressing their views. For example, Parliament passed the Legal Profession (Amendment) Act, restricting the Law Society in their rights to express their views. Is this the Government's policy of embracing divergent views? I believe that by allowing the professional bodies and community organisations to express their views, the Government will definitely benefit much more. Political participation will be more active. There is no need to go through the process of appointing NMPs. At that time, Prime Minister Goh mentioned that there were only two Opposition Members in Parliament then, and by adding six NMPS, there will be eight non-Government MPs in Parliament. This would have been quite a lot - equivalent to 10% of the total number of Government MPs. However, the fact remains that the Nominated MPs were MPs nominated by the Government. Mr Speaker, Sir, in this present Parliament, there are four bona fide non-government MPs, albeit still short of Prime Minister Goh's target of having eight non-government MPs in Parliament. I must say it is such a pity! However, if Prime Minister Goh is sincere, then may I suggest to the Prime Minister to create some opportunity at the coming by-elections, so that there will be more elected non-government MPs in Parliament to present divergent views to the government? Would this not be more perfectly justifiable? Mr Speaker, Sir, now let me talk about parliamentary democracy and Nominated MPs.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, first of all, let me respond to the question raised by the Member for Mountbatten. He asked, "What is wrong with Members of Parliament being admitted to Parliament without having gone through the General Election, and what is wrong with the Constitution providing for Nominated Members of Parliament?" Of course, the question lies with the fact that the People's Action Party has an overwhelming majority in Parliament. It can amend the Constitution any time it likes. So long as it is necessary, it is, of course, legitimate to amend the Constitution. It can even amend the Constitution to such an extent that it may not have to win a General Election to form the Government. Then, in accordance with the Constitution, it is also legitimate! Mr Speaker, Sir, when the then Deputy Prime Minister, Mr Goh Chok Tong, introduced the Bill on Nominated MPs in Parliament, he gave the basic principles and needs of the Bill. Two of the basic principles were: first, promote political participation and contribution by encouraging talented people who have ideas on how to run the country better to come forward and render their service; secondly, to accommodate constructive dissent and other views. My doubt is: By appointing six NMPs, can it really encourage political participation? Can it spur our Singaporeans into coming forward to serve the people? If the people who are accepting the appointment to be NMPs are sincere in wanting to serve the people, then they should dedicate themselves to the nation, face the people, stand for election, and let the people themselves return them to Parliament directly to be their representatives to serve the people.”
“Sir, would the Minister say that after some time, the HDB would have recovered the construction cost of a multi-storey carpark? And by then, would he reduce the parking charges for multi-storey carparks?”
“Sir, will the Minister consider charging only a nominal charge for families living in HUDC flats which do not have void decks and who need to use carparks for funeral wakes? Right now, they are being charged at market rates. It means that they have to pay full-day carpark fee plus night parking fee which I think is very high.”
“Sir, will the charges of Alexandra Hospital increase again after the upgrading?”
“Sir, what evaluation was done before a decision was made to invest in these ventures?”
“Sir, since the money comes from the Government, would the Minister not think that the investigation report should be made public, so that it is accountable to the public, or at least to Parliament, for the money that is being invested?”
“The money invested in these ventures, ie, the loss incurred, where did this money come from? Did it come from part of our national reserves as well?”
“Sir, would the Minister make available the relevant investigation reports to the public or to Parliament?”
“Sir, is there any investigation done, or ordered into the losses incurred?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, does this amendment Bill indicate future plans of the Government to further increase the size of GRCs from the present four constituencies to six constituencies?”
“Sir, I share the concern of Dr Tan on the upgrading of HDB flats, especially the cost after upgrading which the Town Council will have to bear. In so far as I know, the cost has not been spelt out clearly, ie, how much or what percentage the Town Council will have to bear. Secondly, I would like the Minister's view on whether it is prudent to allow HDB to execute contractual instruments on behalf of purchasers who fail to execute the legal documents.”
“Sir, would the Minister of State consider clearing the land in view of the overgrowth of the bushes and the environmental problems faced by the residents around there? There is always a fear of bush-fire during the dry season and it is also a breeding ground for mosquitoes.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I take that as an assurance. Mr Yeo Cheow Tong: Sir, the other question he asked is: why is it a private company? This is a legal term. The hospital has to be out of the civil service, and the only way to get the hospital out of the civil service is to form it as a private company, but a company which is owned by the Government and also supervised and monitored by the Ministry of Health. So we coordinate. We also monitor them to make sure that they are cost effective. Because, as he has rightly pointed out, if they are not effective, who pays? Yes, patients pay 20%, but remember, Government has to absorb 80% of the cost of inefficiency. The Government does not want to do that. So we will make sure that our restructured hospitals remain efficient, fees are affordable to both the patients as well as to the Government in terms of subsidies and ultimately to the people. The subsidies are paid through the Government, but actually these are funds which we collect from taxpayers. So it is in everybody's interest that we continue to make sure that they are cost-effective and efficient. Mr Low Thia Khiang rose -”
“The fact is that the hospitals are called "Private Limited". I wish to draw the Minister's attention to how Singaporeans describe the state of health care here as one that is haw see, mor pan, which means that one can die but cannot afford to be sick. Will the Minister assure this House that the Government will pay the medical bills of Singaporeans who cannot afford and who are admitted to C class wards?”
“No. ESTIMATES OF EXPENDITURE FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR 1ST APRIL, 1992 TO 31ST MARCH, 1993 Order read for consideration in Committee of Supply [6th Allotted Day]. [Mr Speaker in the Chair] Head P (cont.) - Resumption of Debate on Question [17th March, 1992], "That the total sum to be allocated for Head P of the Main Estimates be reduced by $100." - [Mr Loh Meng See]. Question again proposed.”
“Sir, is the Minister aware that one way of getting the MP's office is to set up a community foundation as the PAP has done. My question is: is the Minister aware that, to set up such a foundation as the PAP's, it requires $5 million paid-up capital? What is the rationale behind this requirement of $5 million? Would the Minister, upon my request, give me a loan of $5 million?”
“Besides tender, can the Minister enlighten me how I could get an MP's office?”
“Sir, does the Minister agree that it will be a waste of precious natural resources if these premises intended for social and recreational purposes, which have already been allocated, have not been put to optimal use?”
“Sir, is the Minister aware that my constituents complain to me that neither social nor recreational activities are organised in the premises at Block 136 which was allocated to the Advisor of the CCC since last year?”
“Sir, is the Minister of State aware that the main primary schools in Hougang, namely, Holy Innocents and Xinghua, have problems in admitting students because they are over-populated? Will the Minister of State assure me that the children of Hougang will be able to be admitted to the schools in the vicinity of Hougang within 2 km from their residence?”
“Is the Minister implying that for those students who are not doing well, their parents are not interested?”
“I do not believe that class size has nothing to do with the quality of education. Because if you have a small class size, the teacher will pay more attention and he has more time to cater for individual students.”
“What is the turnover rate of teachers in the Ministry of Education?”
“Sir, may I clarify with Dr Tay? He mentioned that value-added in schools is a criterion for assessing whether it is a good school. How does the Ministry of Eduction ensure that good pupils are equally distributed in all schools, and not concentrated only in independent schools?”
“May I clarify with the Finance Minister. The moment you estimate more for this, it means that we have less to spend in the budget estimates for the other sectors.”