Michael Palmer
Singapore
“For example, if a points system is to be implemented for continuing professional development, can lawyers be given credit for this, say, up to a maximum of 20%? This is one way that we can credit lawyers who are already doing pro bono work and encourage lawyers who are not doing pro bono to do some pro bono work.”
“Mr Chairman, Ms Jessica Tan seems to have taken the words out of my mouth, and said inflation is on the rise in Singapore and various other parts of the world, particularly so with the cost of crude oil going up per barrel to over US$100.”
“Within ASEAN, the ASEAN Leaders’ Meeting, the ASEAN Defence Ministers’ Meeting and the ASEAN Foreign Ministers’ Meeting continue to keep the channels of engagement open between ASEAN member countries.”
“Mr Chairman, I would like to thank the Minister for his very insightful and clear analysis of the relationship of Singapore and ASEAN in the region and the world for various foreign matters. With that, Mr Chairman, I would like to seek leave to withdraw the cut. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.”
“It is very heartening to hear our improved relations with Malaysia. But Prime Minister Najib is about to embark on a nationwide tour which has raised talk of elections across the border. As usual, Singapore takes a few shots every time a political activity heightens in Malaysia.”
“In the last two years, retirement ages have been increased in the SAF and a new scheme known as the Military Domain Experts Scheme (MDES) allows officers with special skills such as Engineers to convert to MDES officers and retire much later.”
The complete record
Every one of 201 lines we hold for Michael Palmer, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 3 of 5.
“They were concerned that any other form of assessment which might depend a lot on the teacher would be subjective and might not be an accurate gauge of their child’s progress. Given these concerns, could I ask the Minister: If mid-year and end-of-year examinations are replaced by a continuous form of assessment, what kind of assessment method is envisaged? Would the method of assessment be left to each individual school to devise or would it be a method devised by MOE and implemented by the schools? How would the MOE ensure that the method of assessment is objective so as to allow parents to know how their child is progressing within the cohort? How frequently will parents receive feedback on the progress of their child under this system? 5.00 pm The last area which I would like to highlight is the move towards single-session primary schools. The concern expressed by parents was that while some schools have already gone single-session or partially single-session, many primary schools have not. With the new policy of all Government schools going single session by 2016, this would mean fewer places in some schools, particularly the popular ones. Parents expressed concern that there would be an increase in the already very competitive system of getting one's child into the better schools. Would going single-session really mean fewer places in all primary schools? Parents were also concerned that single-session schools would mean that students would have to spend more time in school. Would the Minister please let us know whether the implementation of single-session primary schools would result in fewer places in primary schools in general? If so, what will be done to ensure that the more popular primary schools at least maintain the number of places in their schools?”
“May I therefore ask the Minister to answer the following questions, please: How does the Ministry intend to select graduates and those who will be graduates for the teaching profession? How will the Ministry ensure or safeguard against graduates joining the profession as a last resort because their options are limited? How does the Ministry assess the aptitude of an applicant to determine that he or she does in fact have what it takes to become a teacher? Will the Ministry consider applicants who may not have university degrees or those who have not qualified for undergraduate degrees for teaching positions, particularly when these applicants may show a great aptitude for teaching? Aside from university degrees, will the Ministry consider any other type of qualification, such as those with years of experience in a particular field and have excelled in that field, but who may not have a university degree? Another issue which drew quite a lot of feedback was the suggestion that the mid-year and end-of-year examinations in Primary One and Two be replaced with a system of on-going assessment which would provide feedback on a child’s skills and development in non-academic areas. The reactions were mixed to this issue. Some heaved a sigh of relief and others thought that there was some cause for concern. The concern centred around wanting to know whether their child was learning and progressing as he or she should be, and would be prepared for major examinations such as the PSLE in Primary Six. They felt that without examinations in Primary One or Two, there would be no objective way of assessing how their child was performing and whether he or she had learnt everything that they needed to at those levels.”
“Many parents whom I spoke with were of the view that the emphasis ought not to be on a university degree. They were of the view that it was more important for a teacher to have the aptitude and passion for teaching, rather than just the paper qualifications. They said that they would prefer a diploma holder teacher teaching their child if he or she had the right attitude, passion for teaching and compassion for their child. They preferred teachers who had the interests of their child at heart to those who might have the correct degree or qualifications but lack these qualities. I then painted a scenario for the parents and asked for their views. I said that there were two applicants for a teaching post. One had a university degree and the other did not. But both were equal in their soft skills, ie, their passion and aptitude for teaching. I asked which they would prefer to teach their child. The response from the parents was that they would prefer the one who had more passion and an aptitude for teaching, regardless of their qualifications. Some even went on to suggest that recruiting teachers when the economy was not doing so well was not really a good idea. They felt that such a strategy would only serve to attract people who did not really want to teach but who had no other choice but to do so, because they could not find a job in their preferred field. They expressed the view that recruiting these people into teaching was a waste of resources, because while they would have the requisite qualifications on paper, time and money would be wasted training them to become teachers only to see them leave when the economy turns for the better. And in the meantime they would have little conviction or passion to teach.”
“I would like to correct that slightly – there were at least two views for every issue. Ultimately, the Committee has made various recommendations that we believe to be the right step in enhancing our primary education in Singapore so as to better prepare our young for the future. Some of the main recommendations are: The use of more effective and engaging teaching methods; the introduction of a new Programme for Active Learning (PAL) which will make Sports and Outdoor Education and Performing and Visual Arts part of the Primary One and Two curriculum; the introduction of "bite-sized" topical tests in Primary One and Two rather than semestral examinations to provide more regular and qualitative feedback to parents on the progress of their child; the recruitment of more graduate teachers or those who qualify for an undergraduate education by 2015; and the move towards all primary schools being single-session by 2016. Now that the Committee has made its preliminary recommendations, I feel it is important that in the implementation of those recommendations, the Ministry be mindful of the spirit in which they were made. As they say, the devil is in the details. I would like to highlight some of the feedback that I received during the dialogues and the focus group discussions that I attended. I would like to seek the Minister’s views on how his Ministry will take these views into account when implementing the recommendations of the PERI Committee. The suggestion that graduate teachers or those who qualify for an undergraduate education be stepped up and implemented by 2015 was a somewhat sensitive point during the feedback sessions. To my surprise, the strongest views against the suggestion came not from those within the teaching profession, but from parents.”
“Sir, the Preliminary Recommendations of the Primary Education Review and Implementation (PERI) Committee were released very recently. Several recommendations are contained in the paper aimed at improving the quality of primary school education in Singapore. To that end, I declare my interest as a member of the PERI Committee. The Terms of Reference of the Committee were to consult stakeholders on the philosophy and desired outcomes of holistic education at the primary level; and study and recommend strategies to enhance primary education in Singapore. In studying strategies to enhance primary education, the PERI Committee was also tasked to look in detail at 3 areas. They were: the roll-out of Single-Session Primary Schools; the move towards a policy of recruiting teachers that are all graduates by 2015; and to rebalance the learning of content knowledge; and the development of skills and values to prepare our young for the future. Let me begin by saying that my experience on the PERI Committee was a very enriching and rewarding one. The Committee conducted extensive dialogues and focus group discussions with a cross-section of the various stakeholders. In total, more than 600 people contributed their views and suggestions. These people consisted of Principals, primary school teachers, parents of children presently in primary school, parents of children who have already completed their primary education, couples who had yet to have children or whose children were not yet in primary school and private tutors, to name a few. The feedback that the Committee garnered was wide-ranging and as can be expected, many of those giving the feedback spoke with passion. As the Minister has said there were two views for every issue.”
“Will Singapore continue to play that same role under the new President? Will the US-Singapore ties grow and improve under President Obama's presidency? Are there other areas which Singapore should be concerned about with the new US President in office? Our Relationship with China and Taiwan”
“On 20th January 2009, the 44th President of the United States of America was sworn in. President Barack Obama was sworn in before a crowd of nearly two million people gathered in Washington. President Obama is the first of African-American to hold the office of President of the United States of America and his election into the office was a milestone of not only for America but for many countries around the world. Until the start of his presidential campaign, we had heard very little if anything about President Obama. In fact, he was only elected as a junior United States Senator in 2005 and served only three years as a Senator before resigning to run for the office of President. His connection to Asia emanates from the time he spent in Indonesia as a child. President Obama attended local schools in Jakarta until he was 10 and then returned to the United States. In respect of foreign policy, President Obama has said very little about his position with regard to ASEAN, or any of the ASEAN countries. Thus far, the bulk of his foreign policy position has been dedicated to the US troops in Iraq and their systematic withdrawal, the fight against terrorism and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in Gaza. I do not believe he has publicly stated his position on ASEAN or Southeast Asia. May I therefore ask the Minister to share his views on the following issues: How does he think US-ASEAN relations will develop under President Obama? While Singapore shared close ties with the US during President George W. Bush's administration, will ties remain close under the new President? Singapore was regarded as a hub for ASEAN during President Bush's term of office, with the President visiting Singapore three times while in office.”
“But I would encourage the Government to find ways to get the message across that consumers must play their part in the effort to revive the economy. Mr Speaker, Sir, I do not think that we should sit and wait for the rest of the world to recover and come to us. We should take our own steps to drive up demand and initiate our own road to recovery. Even though local demand may be small compared to our export sales, I feel that we must begin our own healing process. Mr Speaker, Sir, with that I declare my support for the Budget Statement.”
“In December last year, the UK announced a 2.5% reduction in their GST equivalent of VAT. The primary purpose of the reduction was to boost consumer spending. If we were to temporarily lower GST by, say, 2%, that would be tantamount to a 28.5% reduction in our GST. In my view, that would have a considerable impact on the consumer psychology. I would also ask the Government to consider a temporary suspension of GST on a basket of essential items. This, I believe, would have a two-fold effect. First, it would further relieve pressure on the lower-income families and make essential items more affordable for them. Secondly, it would have a similar psychological impact as the reduction in the rate of GST. As to what to include in the basket of items, perhaps we can consider the items that other countries, like Australia, the UK, Canada and some European countries, have exempted such as healthcare, education, basic foodstuffs, clothing and footwear for children. Grave times call for bold measures. Just like the Jobs Credit Scheme and the decision to delve into our reserves, I would urge the Government to consider a temporary reduction in GST and a temporary suspension of GST on essential items as possible off-Budget measures to stimulate consumption demand. While I realise there is justification to maintain GST at the current level, I would ask the Minister to waive that justification against the benefits that may be reaped from boosting demand. As I said earlier, because stimulating consumption demand is very much a battle of the mind, I believe that, concurrently, there must be steps taken to promote local industry. One example of a good push for local shops and restaurants is the Great Singapore Sale. Of course, we cannot be having a sale every other month.”
“With the number of tourists visiting Singapore on the decline, we cannot afford for local demand to drastically drop as well. How then can we stimulate local demand? I thought about this question long and hard. I realise that it is not as easy as managing the supply side, because you cannot just give a rebate or money to lower the cost of an item. It involves changing people’s minds and convincing them that while they should not over-spend, they should not stop spending altogether. I believe that there must be a combination of measures. These measures must be bold so as to have the necessary psychological effect on the local consumer. One possible measure that has been suggested is the temporary reduction of GST. The Government’s position has always been that it will provide targeted assistance to those that need help to cope with GST and GST increases. In fact, in this Budget, the GST credits that each household will receive this year has been doubled. This will be paid in two tranches, in March and July this year. Lower-income families will receive more credits. While GST credits will help families, particularly lower-income families, to cope with likely reduction in earnings this year, I do not believe that it will do much to stimulate spending. A large proportion of GST credits will go to lower-income families. It is likely that they will spend this on essential items. Those with higher incomes may or may not spend the amount. But even if they do, it is only paid in two tranches and therefore will have a momentary effect on the spending as and when it is paid. If the Government were to lower GST temporarily, I believe that this would create the impact needed to stimulate more spending. If we do this, we will not be the first country to do so.”
“One question that I would ask is whether enough provision has been made to at least generate consumption demand in Singapore. I accept that the demand for our goods and services from other countries has fallen. I also accept that there may be little that we can do about that for now because the world is in a downturn. But I would urge the Govern- ment to consider whether more can be done to generate consumption demand in our local economy. There is no shortage of doom and gloom in the local media about the global financial crisis and the difficulties that we must be prepared to face in Singapore. Every time one turns on the radio or television and listens to the news, or reads the newspapers, the message comes across clearly. I fully support the fact that we must be kept informed about the true state of affairs. We should not pretend that everything is all right or going to be all right when there are tougher times ahead. Nevertheless, all this bad news has a psychological effect on the consumer and discourages spending. I was talking to one of my grassroots leaders the other day. He runs his own business and he is fortunate as he tells me that his business has not really been affected by the economic downturn thus far. Yet, he tells me that every time he reads the newspapers or listens to the news, he feels the need to stop spending and to cut costs, notwithstanding that his business is still flourishing. Other people have expressed similar sentiments to me. While it is important that Singaporeans are prepared for these hard times, I believe that we should not allow consumption demand to dwindle. Our shops, restaurants and the service industry all need to survive.”
“Such rental could be for office space, shop space or factory space. The complaint from tenants of shop and office space over the last one or two years has been the escalating cost of rent. While rental rates have gradually come down over the last few months, they have not decreased to a level that corresponds with the state of the economy. Businesses are finding it hard to cope with the cost of rental at the rates that landlords are continuing to ask for. The Government hopes that savings garnered from the 40% rebate in property tax will be passed on by landlords to their tenants, perhaps in the form of rental rebates. JTC, HDB and SLA have committed to a 15% rental rebate as a result of the property tax savings. This is to be commended. But what of private-sector landlords? I read with interest the comments of some developers in an article in the Straits Times yesterday. These comments were made on the sidelines of the Real Estate Developers Association of Singapore lo-hei lunch. The message to the tenants appeared to be that while developers would pass some savings on to the tenants, the tenants had to be realistic and the total savings that would result from the tax rebate would be far less than the 40% property tax rebate. It remains to be seen how much of these savings will, in fact, translate into benefits for the tenants. In this Budget, a lot is being done to "stop the bleeding". My question is whether the Budget has gone far enough in order to "start the healing". Yes, this Budget has broken new ground in its measures to ease the burden for viable companies and to save jobs. Provisions have also been made to retrain workers and invest in research and development so that we have a head start when the next economic upturn comes.”
“The cost of labour is one of the largest cost components for many companies. The Jobs Credit Scheme helps to make a worker more affordable to employ. A direct cash handout might provide more immediate relief, but that relief would be too temporary to make any long-term impact if the worker loses his job as the crisis deepens. Better that we help to keep him employed so that he can continue to provide for his family. In the case of the SRI, the Government is answering the call of many companies who have had great difficulty obtaining loans from banks as the banks have become far more conservative in their lending policies. With the support of the banks, the SRI will allow companies to obtain the much-needed trade financing, thereby allowing them to remain in operation and to continue employing our workers. Again, the ultimate effect of such a measure is the continued employment of our workforce. I noted with interest that in his Budget Speech, the Minister mentioned that positive feedback on the SRI scheme had been obtained from the banks, and that the Government expected the banks to take advantage of the SRI scheme. This augurs well for the scheme achieving its intended effect. But there is still some reluctance on the part of banks to lend, and when they are willing to make the loan, I have heard from some companies that there is considerably more "red tape" and paperwork, because the Government is now guaranteeing the loan. I hope that we do not lose the intended effect of the SRI scheme in the course of its implementation. In the case of the 40% rebate on property tax for industrial and commercial property, the position is not as clear. The intention behind the rebate is to lower a major cost item for a business – the cost of renting its premises.”
“Even from the beginning of the year to the time of the Budget Statement, the economic situation had changed. Since the global financial crisis is so mercurial and unpredictable, I think that we must accept that this Big Bang Budget may not be the definitive "bang". In fact, it may only be the first "bang". We should not expect this Budget to be the panacea or magic pill for all the problems we are facing now. In fact, this Budget may only be one of the many analgesics required to help us along the road to recovery. The Minister has said that this year’s Budget is a supply-side Budget. It addresses the fundamental concern of saving jobs or holding off retrenchment for as long as possible. Many critics of the Budget have said that the Budget is too business-centric – that most of the measures are for the benefit of the companies and that there is too little for the individual. I disagree. In my view, the overall aim of the Budget is clear – to save as many jobs as possible so that individual workers and their families will not suffer. It is true that on the face of it, the Jobs Credit Scheme and the Special Risk-Sharing Initiative (SRI) appear to be for the benefit of companies as opposed to individuals. So too are the property tax rebates for industrial and commercial property. However, one must look at the bigger picture. One of the fundamental requirements, both for our long-term survival and to ensure that all Singaporeans pull through this crisis, is to make sure that our workers stay employed. If they have a job, they will have an income and will be able to provide food and a home for their families. It is with this in mind that measures like the Jobs Credit Scheme have been put in place.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, thank you for giving me this opportunity to speak on the Budget Statement. Several phrases and adjectives have been used to describe this year’s Budget. "Bold", "Decisive", "A Big Bang Budget" are but a few. I agree with all these descriptions. I think that this year’s Budget has gone beyond what the Government has done in previous years and rightly so, because the state of the economy calls for it. Hence, I cannot understand why Mr Low Thia Khiang and Ms Sylvia Lim appear to question the dipping into our reserves. If ever there was a time to do so, I believe that time is now. The world is in an economic downturn, the likes of which have not been seen in a very long time. Some even say that we have never seen anything like this before. As the Minister for Finance himself said, there is a simultaneous recession in all major regions of the world. In this present age where the economies of the world are so inter-connected, every country has been affected. A country like Singapore, with an export-driven economy, cannot help but feel the impact, and acutely so. We rely on other countries to buy the goods that we produce and the services that we provide to them. This is how we make our living. As a result of this global financial crisis, demand for our goods and services has fallen drastically. This is likely to continue to be the case for some time to come. What makes this global downturn distinctive is not merely its depth and breadth but the speed at which it has metastasized and continues to advance. The situation changes on a weekly, if not daily, basis. This is illustrated by the fact that our growth forecast for this year had to be revised downwards from -2% to 1%, to -2% to -5%, all in the space of less than a month.”
“In the light of the last two answers from the Senior Parliamentary Secretary, would the SPS consider moving the SDSC out, from under the auspices of the SSC to a separate stand-alone council? Secondly, given the sterling results of our Paralympians, would he consider increasing the funding correspondingly?”
“Sir, given the emphasis on safety, could the Senior Parliamentary Secretary please explain why lights at night are required by law but helmets are not?”
“Under the section 86(7) of the LPA where the Inquiry Committee finds that the complaint should be referred to the Disciplinary Tribunal for investigation, the Inquiry Committee will now be required to frame the charges that are preferred against the lawyer in question. Would this not impose considerable constraints on the lawyer appointed by the Law Society to prosecute the case before the Disciplinary Tribunal? What if, during his preparation of the case, he feels that the charge ought to be a different one? Is he bound to prosecute the precise charge drafted by the Inquiry Committee or is he or the Law Society at liberty to amend the charge? Under section 93(3) of the LPA, the Disciplinary Tribunal has six months to conclude its investigation and submit a report to the Council of the Law Society. If it fails to do so, the Law Society can make an application to the Chief Justice for directions to be given to the Disciplinary Tribunal. But what happens if the Council does not do so? What recourse is open to the lawyer against whom the complaint has been made? Again, my thrust is to ensure that justice is done and seen to be done expeditiously. Sir, with that, I support the Bill. 4.44 pm”
“If the Review Committee finds that there are prima facie grounds for the complaint, they can then recommend to the Law Society that the complaint be referred to a prosecutor. The prosecutor will proceed to gather all the relevant evidence and statements with a view to advising the Law Society on whether the complaint ought to be prosecuted before the Disciplinary Tribunal or dismissed outright. If the recommendation is to prosecute, the same prosecutor is used to prosecute the case before the Disciplinary Tribunal. This process will save not only time and cost, but also place the burden of inquiry on the shoulders of only one party. It will obviate the need for an Inquiry Committee to gather and review evidence with a view to making a recommendation. It also avoids any duplication of work that now takes place when the lawyer appointed by the Law Society to prosecute at the Disciplinary Committee stage repeats much of the work that the Inquiry Committee has done. I would also like to ask the Minister to consider these other areas of concern that I have. As I mentioned earlier, the Inquiry Committee has a maximum of six months to complete its report. However, I have seen cases where the Inquiry Committee has taken in excess of six months to render its report. There is no recourse in the LPA for the lawyer against whom the complaint is made. Its only recourse is to take the matter to Court. Of course, by the time that application comes on for hearing in Court, the Inquiry Committee is likely to have rendered its report. Will the Minister consider providing some recourse for the lawyer against whom the complaint is made in such a situation?”
“However, where the Inquiry Committee feels that it cannot complete its inquiry within the three months, it can make application to the Chairman of the Inquiry Panel for a further three months to complete its task. This means that the whole Inquiry Committee process may take a total of six months to complete. There are arguments which both support having what is in effect three separate investigative stages and arguments which would advocate against it. Those that support such a system argue that the more investigative stages you have, the more likely investigations will be thorough and frivolous complaints will be thrown out early on. In reality, that is not the case. I say this because the subject of each stage of investigation is the same in that each committee is looking at the complaint and the evidence surrounding that complaint. More often than not, the easiest option for the lower Committee, such as the Review Committee and the Inquiry Committee, is to simply refer it to the Disciplinary Committee for investigation. Once that occurs, the Law Society appoints a lawyer to prosecute the case and that lawyer effectively conducts another thorough review to prepare his case and advises the Law Society on the charges to be brought and the best case to prosecute. In effect, this turns into an unofficial fourth stage of investigation. [Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Matthias Yao Chih) in the Chair] 4.41 pm In my view, a better approach to the disciplinary process would be for the Review Committee to review the complaint when it is received, with slightly wider powers. These wider powers would enable the Review Committee to consider the complainant's evidence and the defence evidence.”
“The Disciplinary Committee, to be renamed the Disciplinary Tribunal, will consist of only two people as opposed to the present four. Any judicial reviews or procedures are reserved to after the Disciplinary Tribunal has made its final decision. At inception, the Law Society can require the complainant to support the complaint with a statutory declaration. Finally, where a complaint is found to be frivolous by either the Inquiry Committee or the Disciplinary Tribunal, the complainant may be ordered to pay the cost of anyone involved in the process. I am certain that these amendments will make a difference to the overall proficiency of the process. In that same spirit, I would like to request that the Minister consider certain other possible changes which may make the disciplinary process more just and efficient. My first suggestion is to consider the abolition of the Inquiry Committee stage of the process. In so doing, there is a potential to save about six months of time and a considerable amount of duplication of work in the investigative process. Presently, there are three stages when an inquiry or investigation is carried out into the complaint. It begins with the Review Committee. If found to have merit, an Inquiry Committee is convened to inquire into the complaint. And then if so recommended, the Inquiry Committee refers the complaint to the Disciplinary Committee for investigation. Pursuant to the amendments, the Review Committee will now be given four weeks to review the complaint and make its recommendations. However, the provisions relating to the Inquiry Committee remain substantially unchanged. Under the present regime, the Inquiry Committee is given three months from the time it is constituted to complete its inquiry and submit its report.”
“The Council of the Law Society then considers the report and may refer the matter back to the Inquiry Committee if the Council disagrees with the report or requests the Chief Justice to appoint the Disciplinary Committee to investigate the complaint. The process before the Disciplinary Committee is a formal, adversarial hearing where the Law Society appoints a lawyer to prosecute the case, and the lawyer against whom the complaint is made may be represented by Council in his defence of the charge. At the end of the investigation by the Disciplinary Committee, the Disciplinary Committee may acquit or convict the lawyer against whom the complaint is made and impose a penalty or refer the matter to a Court of Three Judges. If the matter is referred to a Court of Three Judges, the lawyer against whom the complaint is made appears before the Court of Three Judges at an appointed date to show cause why he should not be punished. In my, what you may call, brief description of the process, I have spared Members from a description of the various permutations which the process may take, depending on the various findings with each of the Committees involved may make. These permutations, in turn, cause the whole process to become somewhat cumbersome. I note that the proposed amendments to the LPA will facilitate a tighter disciplinary process by reducing the minimum years in practice to seven. The Inquiry Panel will gain a greater pool of lawyers, from which it selects its members. Complaints will have a limitation period of six years from the date of the alleged misconduct. The Review Committee is given a guillotine of four weeks to complete its review.”
“I realise that we are one of the few professions that remain self-regulated. With that privilege comes great responsibility. I am not for one moment advocating that we deal with a complaint against a lawyer in a manner which is not just or fair. In fact, I advocate exactly the opposite. I say that all complaints should be dealt with in a just, fair and efficient manner. The unfortunate reality, however, is that under the present provisions in the LPA, the whole disciplinary process, in my view, takes far too long and is rather awkward. For the benefit of Members who are not familiar, I will attempt to give this House a brief description of the process. A complaint is made by the complainant and submitted to the Council of the Law Society. The Council refers the complaint to the Chairman of the Inquiry Panel. The Chairman of the Inquiry Panel constitutes a Review Committee to review the complaint. There is no time limit for the Review Committee to conduct the review but it can interview the complainant and the lawyer against whom the complaint is made. The Review Committee can dismiss the complaint or refer the complaint back to the Chairman of the Inquiry Panel. If it is referred back to the Chairman of the Inquiry Panel, the Chairman then constitutes an Inquiry Committee to inquire into the complaint. In the course of its inquiry, the Inquiry Committee can interview the complainant, the lawyer against whom the complaint is made and any other relevant witnesses. At the conclusion of the inquiry, the Inquiry Committee may dismiss the complaint, impose a penalty that commensurates with the misconduct found to have been committed or recommend the matter to be referred to a Disciplinary Committee.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, thank you for giving me an opportunity to speak on this Bill. Unfortunately, I am not as forgiving as the hon. Member, Mr Christopher de Souza, and I echo the sentiments of the Members who spoke before against the state of the profession as suggested by Dr Teo Ho Pin. We may have some naughty lawyers but we are not a naughty profession. Before I begin, let me declare my interest as a practising lawyer and a partner in a local law firm. In my speech, I would like to deal with some of the amendments to the Legal Profession Act (LPA) in so far as disciplinary proceedings are concerned, I have had the benefit of reviewing these amendments and I am heartened to find that there are three main thrusts to these amendments. Firstly, the amendments aim to make the disciplinary process more efficient in terms of time and costs. Secondly, the aim to put in place measures which would discourage frivolous or vexatious complaints. Thirdly, upon a finding of guilt, they provide a more varied range of penalties which may be handed down and which can be more commensurate with the nature of the misconduct. I said that I was heartened to find that the amendments had these three main thrusts because I believe that the amendments will make the disciplinary process more just and efficient. This is important for all lawyers. No lawyer relishes a complaint being made against him. When a complaint is made against the lawyer and he is notified of it, his life and practice are gravely affected. The weight of the complaint hangs heavily over his head constantly. For all intents and purposes, he finds it difficult, if not impossible, to carry on with his practice. Therefore, the speedy and efficient disposal of the complaint is crucial.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, just three supplementary questions. First, what steps are we taking, going forward, to make sure that this does not happen again, because the next time it may not be a trace leak? Second, why is it that nothing abnormal was picked up by MINDEF's monitoring system even though there were leaks? Is that because it was so low? Third, are we sure that it will pick up any leaks that may occur in the future and has the US assured that none of their other nuclear-powered ships are leaking?”
“I believe that we need to assist our NSAs to learn how to organise and professionalise so that they can stand on their own, thereby reducing their reliance on the Government for funding. This must be our long-term goal. May I ask: is the outcome-based funding model the best model to apply to every NSA and athlete? Why is it that funding of NSAs and athletes is determined by their performance in only the four Major Games, and not other internationally recognised tournaments? What steps are being taken to develop our NSAs so that they become more independent and less reliant on Government funding? What steps are being taken to improve our NSAs so that they are run more professionally, transparently and independently? Aside from physical infrastructural development, what plans have been made to ensure that the Sports Hub will be used regularly for regional and international events, so as to boost Singapore's efforts to become a Sports Hub? How can we be certain that the winning consortium can deliver the events that we have been promised? What guarantees do we have and what if they do not deliver? What steps are being taken to encourage local companies to take part in the Sports Hub by way of sponsorships, naming rights and the like? Will we end up with a national stadium that bears a foreign company's name? Athlete Development”
“Singapore's recent victory in our bid to host the first ever Youth Olympic Games bodes well with our plans to make Singapore a Sports Hub in the region and ultimately the world. I congratulate the Minister and his team. Now that the victory party is over, there is much work to be done. The Government has embarked on a massive project in partnership with the private sector to provide physical infrastructure for a Sports Hub and the events to fill in. The total cost for this is $1.87 billion to be paid over 25 years. In order to make Singapore a true Sports Hub, developing hardware alone is not enough. We also need the software. We need the right people in each National Sports Association (or NSA) to ensure that sports is given every opportunity to develop. We need to provide the right environment and devote a sufficient amount of resources to ensure that each NSA is given opportunities to grow. In 2007, a total amount of about $31.9 million was made available to NSAs for FY2007 in direct grants. Even if we annualise the $1.87 billion being spent on the Sports Hub over 25 years, that works out to more than $74 million a year. Are we putting enough into the software? Further, the sum of $31.9 million is given to the NSAs on an outcome-based funding model. This supposedly encourages NSAs to be more disciplined and purposeful. However, an outcome-based funding model favours those NSAs and athletes who are more successful in terms of medal tallies at four Major Games. The less successful NSAs and athletes find their funding reduced. It is also important that we realise that money is not the only solution to the difficulties faced by many NSAs.”
“At last year's Committee of Supply debate, the Senior Parliamentary Secretary (Education), Mr Masagos Zulkifli said that the Government has set minimum requirements for the qualifications of pre-school principals and teachers and has also formulated the kindergarten curriculum framework which almost 90% of kindergartens have adopted. On 15th of February sitting this year, Mr Masagos added a few more areas to the list of support which the Ministry gives to pre-school education, including promoting kindergarten's self-appraisal. I echo the views on quality assurance stated by Mrs Josephine Teo and Dr Amy Khor. I would like to ask what steps does the Ministry intend to take to improve the quality of pre-school education and ensure that those levels of quality are either maintained or further improved. Why does the Ministry not impose a compulsory and stringent appraisal system for pre-schools rather than the present self-appraisal system? As the Minister has said, we hold our schools accountable to the highest standards, why not our pre-schools? Will the Government consider introducing an accreditation programme for pre-schools much like the EduTrust for private schools? If so, will it be a one-off accreditation or one that is reviewed on a periodic basis, and will it be compulsory? If not, why not? Aside from requiring pre-school teachers to meet minimum standards in English, what other measures are being introduced, and what has the kindergarten curriculum framework introduced - was it revised? And how does the Ministry ensure that all pre-schools adhere to that framework. Kindergarten”
“Sir, the Government has continually upgraded our education system at the primary, secondary and tertiary levels. I applaud the changes that the Ministry has made in our education system over the years. The most recent ones are very exciting - the focus has shifted to quality and diversity, with the goal being to develop the potential of every child to the maximum, such that we attain many peaks of excellence. More choices are being introduced for students so that they can develop their strength and interest in sports, the arts, and many other intellectual endeavours. At the highest level, the Government is considering establishing a fourth university. However, I believe that education does not and should not begin only at Primary One. It is during the first six years of a child's life that they develop most of their neuro pathways. It is during this period that the child is most eager to learn, and most open to stimulation. It is during this period that children develop the ability to take part in their own learning. If a child receives good quality education in pre-school and is given the correct environment to develop his or her path in primary, secondary and tertiary education, it will be much more fruitful and enriching. Given the profound impact that a child's pre-school education can have on the growth and development of that child, I ask whether it is not incumbent on us to ensure that pre-school education that we provide to our children should be as good, if not better than the primary, secondary and tertiary education that we offer our children today. If we are to maximise and harness the potential of every single child, why not seize the opportunity to nurture them during the most crucial years of development.”
“There has been much speculation with regard to the positioning of the fourth university. Minister of State Lui has been quoted as saying that it could include a Liberal Arts College, whilst Minister Teo Chee Hean has said that the fourth university should lean towards being science and technology based. May I ask the Minister: (a) Whether a Liberal Arts College is still on the cards? (b) If so, will it be part of or separate from the fourth university? (c) Whether the Minister feels that Singapore is ready for a Liberal Arts College given that it may espouse radical views and ideas, some of which may be highly critical of our society, politics and philosophy? Tertiary Education for Athletes”
“Sir, I fully support the Government's plans to enhance the university sector by establishing a fourth university in Singapore. This has been a long time coming. I look forward to the report that is currently being prepared by a committee chaired by the Minister of State, Lui Tuck Yew. With the establishment of a fourth university, the cohort participation rate, which is the number of students in Primary 1 that will receive a subsidised university education, will be increased from 25% to 30% by 2015. This means that almost one in three Primary 1 students will go to one of the four universities. This clearly fits with our efforts to ensure that we have a highly skilled workforce at all levels. I mentioned that the fourth university was a long time coming because in December 2000, a similar committee was formed and chaired by then Senior Minister of State, Mr Peter Chen, to consider various matters including possibly establishing a fourth university. In its interim report submitted in July 2001, Mr Chen's committee said that Singapore needs a fourth university with a strong practical and technical focus. This was reaffirmed in its final report submitted in February 2002. Following that, a new inter-Ministry panel headed by then Minister of State, Dr Ng Eng Hen, was formed to review the proposal for a fourth university. In January 2003, Dr Ng's panel dropped the idea of a fourth university. It instead proposed that NUS and NTU be expanded. Could I ask the Minister why there was this change in direction? What has changed between then and now so that a fourth university is back on the table? Could I also ask the Minister to update us on the progress that has been made by the committee chaired by Minister of State Lui?”
“Sir, I thank the Minister for his answers to my queries. He gave a very good sense of the defence diplomacy and relationships at the Ministerial level. Could I ask the Minister to perhaps elaborate on the defence relationships at the commander level of the countries in the region? That would give us a sense of how the troops on the ground are actually relating to each other.”
“Is our 3G SAF operationally-ready? If not, when will it be? What is required to complete the transition? What difficulties have been encountered in the transition? What is the total amount that has been spent on this transition? In the event of a failure of the technology or network, is there a back-up plan so that the SAF's integrity and effectiveness are not compromised? Will our Forces still be able to operate? Defence Research and Technology”
“Sir, a few years ago, the SAF embarked on moving from a second generation armed force to a third generation armed force. The key to this change was a concerted effort to network and connect each different component part so as to enable all parts to work as a whole. This change would not only include upgrading our machinery and equipment, such as acquiring new F15s, unmanned aerial vehicles, naval helicopters and Leopard tanks. It would also include making use of electronic and computer technology under requisite training to achieve an integrated knowledge-based command and control (IKC2). During last year's Committee of Supply debate, the Minister was asked by Ms Indranee Rajah to describe the elephant. His reply was this: "What we are trying to do in the Third Generation SAF is to harness all their vital qualities, bring them together, make them work together in a networked way so that we can draw on all their capabilities together to defend Singapore." I believe that these changes are both desirable and vital. Those of us who have served in the Armed Forces or who have had to take command of any large body of personnel and equipment will know that the more information that can be shared and the faster that information can be shared, gives the Armed Forces a clear advantage over their enemy. Having any army with IKC2 means more efficient use of resources, thereby maximising command and control that ultimately results. The change to a 3G SAF is to be commended. It will ensure that our SAF remains a force to be reckoned with, thereby achieving its objective of deterring the enemy. However, given the huge amount of money that we are spending on this transition to a 3G SAF, may I ask the Minister the following: What is the status of our transition to a 3G SAF?”
“Out of goodwill, we made a proposal for a way forward on 22nd May last year. Since then, we have heard nothing and no progress appears to have been made. May I ask the Minister to give us an update on the state of defence relations with Indonesia? What is the present status of the DCA? Is there any prospect of getting Indonesia to comply with its obligations under the DCA? What are we doing about it? What has been the response, if any, to our proposal for a way forward which we made on 22nd May 2007? Security of Straits of Malacca”
“Sir, Singapore has good relations with Malaysia. Of course, there have been ups and downs but, of late, relations have been rejuvenated and have improved. Our defence relations with Malaysia, in my view, are equally strong. I accompanied the Minister on a recent bilateral visit to Malaysia and I came away with the impression that bilateral relationship with our neighbour is healthy. May I ask the Minister to give his views on the bilateral defence relationship with Malaysia? Notwithstanding the close bilateral relationship and the fact that Singapore takes part in Five-Power Defence Exercises with Malaysia, I understand that restrictions still apply to our aircraft flying in Malaysian airspace. In fact, I understand that even during the combined exercises, such as the Five-Power Defence Exercises, restrictions are imposed on our aircraft only. There are no restrictions placed on aircraft from other countries taking part. In the face of the good relationship, this is an odd position for a friendly country to take. May I ask the Minister to clarify what the current airspace restrictions are that are imposed by Malaysia in respect of RSAF aircraft, and whether we intend to take any steps to correct this position and, if so, what steps? Turning to Indonesia, our bilateral relations with Indonesia appear also to be on a firm footing. However, the Defence Cooperation Agreement, as Ms Indranee Rajah has mentioned, appears to have been put in cold storage, with no sign of implementation in sight. The DCA, together with the Extradition Treaty, was finalised on 23rd April last year. After the signing of both agreements as a package, the Indonesians raised various issues concerning the DCA which I can only surmise as being a tactic aimed at scuttling the implementation of it.”
“Sir, I thank the Minister for his answers and clarifications. I just have one issue in relation to Dr Ong's point about the Charter having teeth. I was just wondering whether the Minister had a sense from other Foreign Ministers that if a member country of ASEAN came to a point where they did not recognise or did not comply with the obligations under the Charter, would ASEAN go to the extent of either suspending or expelling a country?”
“And even if they do, will they abide by its terms? After all, it was about seven months before Indonesia signed the Charter that they signed the Extradition Treaty and Defence Cooperation Agreement (DCA). The Indonesians subsequently raised various issues concerning the DCA which I can only surmise as being a tactic aimed at scuttling implementation of the DCA. What makes us so sure that they will not do the same with the Charter? More importantly, does the ASEAN Charter contain any mechanisms which will encourage its signatories to abide by its terms and any decisions made pursuant to it? This brings me to the last issue which I would like to raise - Article 14 of the Charter - the Human Rights Body. The Charter has resolved to create an ASEAN Human Rights Body but the Charter does not contain very much detail about the Human Rights Body, unlike the provisions relating to the ASEAN Community Councils. More significantly, it does not contain any provisions for enforcing human rights standards or any indication of what those standards may be. Could I ask the Minister when the Human Rights Body is likely to be established? How is this body going to be positioned in ASEAN and whether it will be given any powers? ASEAN and Myanmar”
“Sir, the ASEAN Charter is a milestone in the development of ASEAN. This House was recently told that in order to ensure that ASEAN realises its whole potential, we need to bring the Charter into force as soon as possible and that is a key priority. Three months on, I believe that only four countries have ratified the Charter, including Singapore. Some countries like the Philippines have said that they will not ratify the Charter until Myanmar embraces democracy and releases opposition leader, Aung San Suu Kyi. Could the Minister please tell us which countries have yet to ratify the Charter? What is the timeline for the ratification, whether there are any countries which he envisages may not ratify the Charter, and if so, why? Does the Charter come into effect if any of the member states fails to ratify it? One of the aims of the Charter is to transform ASEAN into a more effective and rules-based organisation, thereby leading to greater ASEAN integration. A key instrument in the integration process is the Charter. We are told that ASEAN has made good efforts in its integration process because the leaders share a common view that each member country is better off with a strong ASEAN. But then, we have Myanmar. When civil unrest broke out in Myanmar last year, ASEAN made attempts to help Myanmar. All attempts and approaches by ASEAN were rebuffed. Myanmar chose only to deal with the United Nations. Unfortunately, the position and attitude of Myanmar throughout has not shown any desire on its part to be integrated with ASEAN. Could the Minister share his views on how does the experience with Myanmar square with the efforts to make ASEAN more integrated? I would also like to ask the Minister his views on Indonesia signing of the Charter. Will they ratify it?”
“For access to counsel, the Law Society has been informed. We have had a pilot, and we decided this can happen and this will happen for a very small minority of cases, 10%. In fact, only 10% of arrested persons remain in custody beyond 48 hours and 1% beyond one week. But, now, towards the end of one week, even though investigations may not be fully completed but nearing completion, instead of the one-week remand period being taken to the full, Police is at least prepared to consider letting the accused know that he has counsel and letting counsel see him.”
“Madam, just two issues. The first one is on the pre-trial discovery process, whether the Senior Minister of State is considering providing consequences for failure to give pre-trial discovery. Will there be any specifications? And the second point is this. I believe he mentioned something about the Police introducing a trial process where the lawyer was allowed to see his client in remand before the end of the week, on condition that the accused did not discuss the case. I am a bit puzzled because I cannot see any other reason why the accused would want to see his lawyer but to discuss the case. Could he clarify on these two points? Assoc. Prof. Ho Peng Kee: Again on the CPC, we are looking at the details and my understanding is that there will be provision for consequence if there is non-disclosure of documents. On the other point, it is a movement on the Police's part. We do not go all the way, as in other countries. But, in good faith, we have opened up the process so that the accused person at least would have sight of his lawyer and the accused person would know that a lawyer is helping him. We want also to avoid a situation where the accused discusses his case with his lawyer. That may constitute interference with the investigation, because coaching can take place. That is something that we do not want to happen. The presence of the lawyer will be a calming factor for the accused. And basically, like I have said, the requirement is for the accused to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth, and we go on the premise that the Singapore Police Force will not tolerate rogue officers and will be very hard on those who do wrong and abuse the process. We should let the system run, a system which has worked.”
“Madam, I echo Dr Teo Ho Pin's views. The gap between those eligible for legal aid and those that can afford private legal representation in court is widening considerably. The legal clinics run by the Law Society are well patronised. The problem is that the lawyers at these clinics can only advise the people they see but cannot represent them in court. Legal costs continue to rise. An uncontested divorce costs about $3,000. The total cost of a divorce and ancillary matters can exceed $10,000. Legal aid cases can be generally divided into two categories. The first concerns all types of monetary claims. The second category includes matrimonial proceedings, adoption, accident claims, claims for outstanding salary and probate matters. The cases in the second category are usually unavoidable. While I realise the means test was only reviewed last year, I propose having different means test for different types of cases. For example, where cases concern the second category, the means test can allow for higher limits, particularly where disposable capital is concerned. $10,000 in disposable capital can be the total cost of a divorce. Where monetary claims are concerned, eg, a claim for a debt, lower limits may be imposed. May I also ask the Minister to clarify the scope of the discretion exercised by the Director of Legal Aid where an applicant does not satisfy the means test and the types of situations where such discretion will be exercised in favour of the applicant?”
“Whatever the case, whatever the formula, if we want to encourage businesses to be innovative and competitive, we need to help them keep their costs down. Rent and salaries are usually the two major cost items in any balance sheet. I urge the Government to consider providing tax relief to firms and companies to help them tide over this period of high rental costs. Conclusion We have ended the fiscal year with a very healthy surplus. We are in the process of investing huge amounts of money to transform Singapore into a vibrant and trendy city. A total of $50 billion to overhaul and improve our land transport system; $1.8 billion to build a sports hub; close to $100 million for F1. I believe that these and other investments will certainly make Singapore one of the most sought after places to live and work in the world. But in the face of all this, we are experiencing one of the highest spikes in our cost of living in the last five years. I believe that the Government should not stop at the direct assistance that is currently available. I urge the Government to monitor the situation and provide inflation assistance, if necessary. I also ask that some consideration be given to providing short-term relief to businesses to help them stay competitive in the face of high rents and other rising business costs. Mdm Deputy Speaker, I thank you. 5.28 pm”
“This is significant for foreign businesses in Singapore that have to house their foreign employees or local businesses that want to attract foreign talent. Rental increases for shop spaces were a bit more moderate: from end-2006 to end-2007, shop space rental increased 18.2%. According to the Ministry of National Development, this office space crunch and resulting rental spike should not be a long-term problem. More office space will be on-stream by 2011, which should ease the sharp rise in office rent. In the interim, plots of land and old buildings that can be converted to office space have been tendered out to ease the space shortage. But looking at the figures, these measures have not had the desired effect. I believe that it will be a great help to a great many businesses in Singapore if some tax relief could be given to firms and businesses for the rent that they pay. This would go some way towards easing the burden of the rising cost of doing business in Singapore. Such relief need not be a permanent one, and can be reviewed annually. If, indeed, rental costs soften by 2011, such tax relief would be needed only for the short term, but would give a much-needed boost to businesses at a time when they need to stay competitive. In the implementation of any such tax relief, the Government could consider giving different rates of tax relief depending on the type of industry and the location of the premises rented. For example, greater tax relief could be given to businesses that are willing to move non-core departments outside the business district. The relief need not be for the whole amount of rent paid - it could be capped.”
“We should not shy away from helping those in need when we have the resources to do so because we are afraid that we will create an expectation of handouts. If explained correctly and given in a targeted and timely manner, the Government will not only be seen as one which is brave enough to impose charges and raise taxes in the face of criticism when it deems such action to be necessary, it will also be seen as one that is caring, that knows the ground and is willing to act swiftly when help is needed. Rental cost for businesses I now turn to my second point, which concerns the rising cost of doing business - specifically, rental costs in Singapore. In the Budget Statement, the Minister said that the Budget for 2008 was centred on four key thrusts. Two of these have to do with spurring growth of innovative enterprises and adjusting our tax policies so as to stay competitive. Unfortunately, I did not see anything in these measures which will help address one of the main heads of cost for most businesses and therefore one of the main problems faced by businesses at this time - the cost of rent. Over the last two years, both commercial and residential rates of rent have been on the rise, with especially sharp hikes in 2007. We generally like to see Singapore moving up in international rankings, but not when it comes to reports showing Singapore among the cities with the most costly office space in the world! The Department of Statistics provide these figures: From end-2006 to end-2007, rent for office space went up an astounding 56.1%. In Raffles Place, office space rental has reached a high of close to $20 per square foot. From end-2006 to end-2007, rent for private residential property increased by 41.2%.”
“It was meant to help low-income workers level up, and not to cope with the recent sharp increases in living costs. A large part of WIS is also paid into the CPF and is rightly meant as savings for retirement, so that does not help with what is happening today. The other more specific assistance measures, such as the Post-Secondary Education Account, the 20% income tax rebate, the $40 increase in the Public Assistance Scheme, the ComCare Fund top-up and the Medisave top-ups are to be commended but are very specific and limited in effect. Not everyone in the lower and middle-income group benefits from all these measures; only some do, and then they only benefit from some of these measures. So which measure is of immediate benefit to the average Singaporean who is feeling the sting of price hikes? The surplus-sharing Growth Dividends. The majority of Singaporeans will receive outright payments of between $300 and $400. This will cost the Government about $865 million. But bearing in mind that we had a $6.4 billion surplus, I believe we can do more. We need to keep a close watch on the situation on the ground. We should earmark and set aside enough for a contingency fund to provide inflation relief packages, similar to the GST Offset Package, as and when required. They should be specifically targeted at the low- and middle-income earners, with the most needy receiving the most help. The speed at which costs have risen in the past year alone has left many trying to catch their breath. Having a designated inflation relief fund will enable the Government to act nimbly, for assistance needs to be timely, given the fast-changing trends in the cost of living.”
“In November, petrol and diesel pump prices rose again and rents across all sectors continued to increase. In December, the price of luncheon meat went up from $1 to $3, taxi fares went up, school bus fares went up and even the Opposition’s Potong Pasir town council added to the list with an increase in its S&C charges. The effects of these and other prices increases are being severely felt on the ground. They all have either a direct or indirect effect on the cost of living. The Minister has outlined a 5-plank strategy to combat inflation. I support the strategy. I am convinced that we are doing the right thing in not going down the road of fixing the prices of certain essential goods, which could create an artificial economy. I would like to focus on the fourth plank outlined by the Minister - direct assistance. This is the most immediate and direct way to help cushion the adverse effects of the rising cost of living. Can we afford to give Singaporeans a little more? With the surplus we have, the answer must be “yes”. Should we consider giving more as and when necessary? In my view, the answer should also be “yes”. The Budget Statement sets out several measures to provide direct assistance to help those who are having difficulty coping with inflation. Included in this bundle of assistance are some of the packages that were already given out last year, such as the GST Offset Package and the Workfare Improvement Scheme (WIS). I note, however, that at the time these packages were announced, they were not specifically for the purpose of helping people cope with inflation. The GST Offset Package was given to help Singaporeans cope with the 2% increase in GST. The WIS was aimed at helping those affected by the widening income gap.”
“We expect inflation to rise between 4.5% and 5%. That represents at least a 900% increase from the 2005 figure and a 450% increase from the 2006 figure. If inflation hits 4.5% this year, it will still be more than a 200% increase from last year. So when the Minister said that "inflation today is higher than what we have been used to in Singapore for many years" , in my humble opinion, that may be understating the matter somewhat. To be fair, the Budget Statement acknowledges that inflation “is a major concern for the Government” and that prices of certain essential items have gone up significantly. Let me touch on a few more items that affected us in 2007: In February, KK Hospital increased its ward treatment charge fees. In May, public hospitals and polyclinics upped their fees. More significantly, the price of various basic food items went up in markets, supermarkets and hypermarts. In July, HDB rents hit a 10-year high, oil companies raised pump prices, NETS announced a fee hike, the price of HDB resale flats went up, Starhub increased its cable TV charges, electricity tariffs went up, hospital bills went up 10% to 20% across ward classes, and GST went up by 2%. August saw ERP rates go up for certain locations; it was announced that car insurance premiums were likely to rise, more ERP gantries were installed and hours extended. In September, employers were told that they would have to buy medical insurance for foreign workers from January 2008 and electricity tariffs rose again. In October, the public transport fare increases took effect, petrol and diesel pump prices rose again, the price of flour went up 30% and therefore so did noodles and bread. Rent also continued to rise.”
“Madam, I rise in support of the Budget Statement. Singapore did very well last year. That is the message that comes out of this year’s Budget Statement and the figures clearly support it. Our real growth rate was far higher than the initial estimate of 4.5% to 6.5%. Instead of a budget deficit of $0.7 billion, we ended the year with a budget surplus of $6.4 billion - an impressive turnaround. Even if we discount the higher-than-expected revenue from stamp duty due to the sizzling property market last year, the remaining $4 billion plus in surplus is impressive by any standards. What challenges will 2008 bring for Singaporeans? Everyone knows that costs are rising. In view of the signs pointing towards this trend of continuing and, very possibly, accelerating, can we give more back to those who need it? I am mindful that it is not desirable to create an expectation of every budget being a “Hong Bao”. However, I am of the view that, given the surplus that we have generated, and the fact that inflation is a serious issue that will continue to affect every Singaporean, we should consider doing more to help the less well-off if things get worse during the course of the year. Mdm Deputy Speaker, there are two issues which I will cover in my speech. The first is inflation, and whether we can do more to help Singaporeans cope. The second concerns the rising rental costs facing businesses. Again, the question is, whether we can do more to help businesses. Inflation In 2007, overall inflation was 2.1%. If we look at inflation over the last five years, last year was the highest in a long time. In 2003, inflation was 0.5%; in 2004, 1.7%; in 2005, it went back down to 0.5%; and in 2006, 1%. The estimates for this year do not look any better.”
“May I offer some humble suggestions. Firstly, we can look at publishing some real sample cases (while maintaining their anonymity) of elderly people who have not provided for their retirement at later years and highlighting the difficulties that they have faced and will face, and how these difficulties can be avoided. We can work with the Ministry of Education to spread the message of providing for one's retirement and old age in schools so that the message is driven home at a young age. I associate myself with Dr Ahmad Magad's call for resurrecting the squirrel saver, but I ask for more education in terms of retirement planning. We also need to explain the rationale for the changes made and new legislation implemented in dialogues with workers and employers. As Ms Denise Phua highlighted yesterday, various channels and portals of communication will be necessary. An improved CPF system and new re-employment legislation are essential. But as the Minister highlighted, the changes that have been made are basic measures. If we are able to change the thinking of Singaporeans, then not only will there be a basic minimum provided for but also a concerted effort on each individual Singaporean's part to ensure that we have more than the minimum for our later years. I hope that we can reach a situation where we will have a healthy number of Singaporeans over 67 who remain willing and able to work, and that there will be a healthy number of employers ready and willing to employ them. I hope that we can reach a situation where each Singaporean will be confident that he or she has enough for their later years. 4.34 pm”