Ng Kah Ting
Singapore
“Mr Speaker, Sir, before I ask my supplementary question, may I declare, on behalf of the Member for Kebun Baru and myself, that we are both involved in the building of Montfort Secondary School and Montfort Junior School both of which are Government-aided schools. My question now, Sir, is: when will this take effect?”
“But, Sir, at the end of this debate on the Second Reading and the Bill committed to a Select Committee, I sincerely hope that all those who have the interest of Singapore at heart should come forward and make their contributions, be they critical or ways and means on how better we can improve upon this Bill.”
“But the basic foundation, I submit, and that is, the political stability-honest, efficient and an incorruptible political leadership-is paramount to the future well-being of Singapore, and that is, if we are to continue to enjoy our good standard of living, our good government and of course as an independent, sovereign entity or nation.”
“Sir, I knew that the NCMP would come out and say that-don't mix up the ISA with PPSO because basically it is the same. I say, no. Because in 1958, PAP was not in power. It was the Lim Yew Hock government. That is the difference I am trying to make. So let us not go around in this wild political rhetoric. I understand that.”
“Sir, before I make my observations, I just want to make a couple of points in reply to the Non-Constituency MP, Dr Lee. He said that in 1958 when he was asked to stand as a PAP candidate in Kallang he was afraid of the ISA. I do not think that is quite correct because in 1958, Sir, there was no ISA.”
“We should take advantage of the present political stability to provide for the future. In conclusion, Sir, let me draw an analogy. With Singapore being the No. 1 port in the world, this analogy is not inappropriate.”
The complete record
Every one of 1,870 lines we hold for Ng Kah Ting, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 14 of 38.
“Sir, I am not being childish when I talked of plans. I do not wish to split hairs. I know what are the plans I am talking about. Maybe the Minister does not understand the kind of plans I have in my mind. I am not at all satisfied with the answer given by the Minister. He can share my sentiments but I want my amendment to be put to the vote. Question on the amendment put, and negatived.”
“Let us put sentiments one side. If the Minister builds the station, then there can be no quarrel. Mr Chua Sian Chin: If we had got approval for the funds, then we would have built the station.”
“Far from it, Sir. I must put things in the right perspective. If there are no plans, how can he ask for money? That is the question. So where are his plans? That is another question. The Minister has not answered my question at all. He said he has got plans, but where are they? 3.15 p.m.”
“On a point of clarification, Sir. In Punggol, the crime rate is very low, if not negligible. I am proud of Punggol. The Hon. Minister can bear me out on the crime rate in Punggol.”
“Sir, I am not only not convinced, I am also not satisfied with the replies of the Hon. Minister. As the hon. Member for Jalan Kayu rightly pointed out, the small police station along Yio Chu Kang Road was transferred to Ang Mo Kio. We know the place very well. What can the small police station at Ang Mo Kio do? Ang Mo Kio has hundreds of blocks of flats. What about the Hou Kang New Town? So it is not a question of understanding the feelings or sharing the sentiments. My question is: what plans has the Minister got? He has got no plans. It is not a question of having no funds. Is the Hon. Minister aware that if he were to go through the Hansard he will see that way back in the 70's. there were plans for the construction of the F Divisional Head- quarters. I would like to know what has come out of these plans?”
“They can pass the bucket or whatever it is, I am not at all interested. What I am interested, Sir, is a new divisional police headquarters for F Division to be built as soon as possible. Let him not take years after new towns have come up and then say, "Oh, owing to a shift of population, the station has to be relocated." Please answer the question. How long did it take for Too Payoh Police Station to come up? Sir, may I repeat, unless I get a satisfactory answer, I will not withdraw my amendment. An hon. Member: Do not withdraw!”
“And Punggol. So many constituencies are served by F Division, Sir. I understand that it was not until some seven months ago that the Paya Lebar Police Station was provided with modern sanitation facilities. So I hope to get something concrete from the Hon. Minister and he should not pass the buck just because the Hon. Minister for Finance is here.”
“There is no credit at all. I fully agree with my good Friend, the hon. Member for Khe Bong. It is no use seeing part of the plan. The building of the F Divi- sional Headquarters was raised many years ago. I think the site was somewhere at the junction of Upper Thomson Road and Yio Chu Kang Road. I hope to get a satisfactory answer which will satisfy the needs of the people in the constituencies. I will name the constituencies. They are Sembawang, Nee Soon (which is having a new town), Thomson, Braddell Heights, Serangoon Gardens, Jalan Kayu, Upper Serangoon, Paya Lebar - An hon. Member: Punggol.”
“As for Paya Lebar Police Station, Sir, the widening of Upper Serangoon Road has not gone that far as to necessitate the shift of the Station. When the Minister talks of Orchard Road Police Station, the answer is the same. Sir, it boils down to one thing. It is because of urban renewal, road or canal widening that police stations standing in the way have to be relocated. When they have to go, surely alternative sites must be found for them.”
“Sir, it is not a question of satisfying me at all. The Minister must satisfy the needs of the people. That is important. Coming down to his answers, I cannot accept them. First, he talked about the B Division. Why should the Kandang Kerbau Police Station be shifted? The reason is that it has got to make way for road widening at Rochore Canal. So it has got to give way. Secondly, in the case of the Geylang Police Station, it has got to be shifted because of the road widening, not because of a shift in population which is not the reason. I think hon. Members will see my side of the story. 3.00 p.m. Some hon. Members: Hear, hear!”
“Yes, maybe in Thomson, if it pleases the Member for Thomson. I raised this matter with the previous Minister for Home Affairs many years ago, long before we have the present Minister for Home Affairs. Some kind of a promise was given that this matter would not only be looked into but a site had already been chosen for the F Division Police Head-quarters. But this has come to naught. And worst of all, the facilities at the Paya Lebar Police Station are inadequate. I must make it clear that the police officers in the Paya Lebar Police Station are not in cahoots with me in raising this issue in Parliament, I have visited the Paya Lebar Police Station many times and I am surprised to see that until seven months ago there was not even modern sanitation. There was only the bucket system. I have taken up this issue many years ago, at least ten years. With such conditions, surely the necessary facilities should be provided for the police officers. Although there have been some improvements to the Paya Lebar Police Station by way of renovations, nevertheless, I still feel that there must be plans in hand to build the F Division Police Headquarters somewhere in that area for the reasons that I have mentioned. As I said, there is a provision of $1.55 million for the Divisional Police Headquarters Stations at Napier Road and Jurong Town. This is needed, of course, but there is a greater need for an F Division Police Headquarters. I hope the Minister would not reply by merely saying, "We will consider it. We will draw up plans", but let us see that these plans come to fruition.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head Q be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead Code QD-02 of the Development Estimates. Sir, in the Memorandum on the Budget, under "Development Estimates", it is explained that: 'The provision of $1.55 million under the Crime Control Programme is for the construction of the Divisional Police Headquarters Stations at Napier Road and Jurong Town.' I am surprised that there are no plans for the construction of the F Division that is now situated at the Paya Lebar Police Station. For the information of Members in this House, the F Division covers a very wide ares with a few constituencies under its charge. It stretches from Sembawang down to Tampines constituency. The population of this land area is also very large. Moreover, the Hou Kang New Town is being developed. Therefore, my question is: why are there no plans for the building of a Divisional Police Headquarters for F Division? It is not necessary that it should be in Punggol, but it must be centrally located.”
“No, Sir. Even if we are in the process of metrication, it should be measured in terms of cubic metres for quantities of sand. That is the point I want to make to the Hon. Minister.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I believe that sand is measured in terms of cubic yards and not in tons. Mr Teh Cheang Wan: Sir, I think we are in the process of metrication.”
“It, therefore, makes me wonder as to how far up we will keep on going to and whether we can have time to reflect on our ambitions and short-comings, Here, I am not being pessimistic but merely wish to voice my concern in that, all else considered, our Ship of State must maintain a steady course in the uncertain years ahead. For this, I am quite positive that Singaporeans will rise to the challenge - we dare to achieve and think ahead. On that note, Sir, I support the motion moved by the Minister for Trade and Industry. 3.55 p.m.”
“I am gratified to note that we are not allowing any closed shop practices of professional cartel. We must also bear in mind our limited human resources. At the moment, we have a full-employment economy. Moreover, our birth rate is low. In short, every male or female Singaporean counts. What I wish to emphasise here are the kind of problems we will be encountering if we are over-zealous in making the grade for a much better life. Whilst we scale to greater economic heights, we will definitely face more pressures because of greater expectations. A case in point is the demand for better housing and amenities. Just now my good Friend, the Member for Moulmein, made the point that all the HDB estates look like concrete jungle, devoid of aesthetic values. The low-cost housing policy has to be radically changed, not because of escalating costs in building alone but because of the demand for better design and quality housing. As a result, better and more spacious flats have to be built cum a more congenial and tranquil environment. And when we talk of reviewing policies to attract more females to take up employment as well as to encourage older people who are still fit to remain in employment, the problem of providing children with the best education and the caring of the old and infirm will be formidable. These are problems of our own creation. Without doubt, our economy cannot be allowed to stagnate. In conclusion, this go-getter Budget must be go-getting all the time.”
“Conversely, there has been a steady increase in the number of trading companies set up in Singapore in the last two years. I am told that they are well-supported by manufacturers in their own countries in the export promotion of their products, culminating in some of our local trading agencies losing out their agencies. Hitherto these local agencies helped to build up the markets for their products. I am told that some have lost the agencies because of these foreign trading companies taking over from them. This is, therefore, unhealthy for Singapore and I would like the Hon. Minister to look into it because I believe our trading agencies have done a good job and can do the some job as well. In fact, our trading agencies have proved their ability to sell foreign products. A good number of products selling well in Singapore today resulted from this - the ability of our local trading agencies. Finally, Sir, I would like to touch on manpower development, The Hon. Minister discussed the question of availability and quality of manpower in the 80's when we must need an abundant supply of skilled, technical and professional manpower. I am not entirely in full agreement with him in his observation, as I have my own reservations. Whilst we rapidly expand our university and technical institutions to increase the output of technicians, engineers and higher-skilled personnel, nonetheless there is a limit to the number that can be produced. After all, how many can we produce each year? If we take an aggressive step by expanding the courses and churning out more, there is still a limit to the number that we can produce. I would like to suggest that we adopt an open-door policy in the recruitment of professionals, be they architects, engineers or technicians, for their expertise.”
“Here, a complementary role can be played by our local institutions of higher learning, namely, the University of Singa- pore, the Polytechnic, Ngee Ann Technical College and the VITB where courses can be tailored to meet the demand. These institutions should react quickly by expanding their courses and intake of students. Hers, I would like to know whether a manpower resource unit has been set up to look into manpower needs and distribution. Next, I would like to touch on trade development. In reply to my question on the setting up of the Trade Development Council, the Hon. Minister stated the reasons against the setting up of such a Council. I accept the wisdom of his argument against this. However, I still %el the need to strengthen and expand the Trade Development Committee in the Trade Department. In this respect whilst I welcome the setting up of two new trade offices in the EEC, making a total of six and the possibility of setting up of trade offices in the People's Republic of China, I cannot help but wish to suggest a more aggressive trade development policy. We have to be realistic about the competitiveness of trade, in particular, the export trade. Trade has always been one of the most important factors contributing to our GDP According to the Economic Survey of Singapore 1979, it was the third largest source of growth, contributing 18% of the overall increase in GDP. The Minister attributed our export success to the ability of the multi-national companies (MNCs) in Singapore to sell their products in international markets through their own distribution outlets. Similarly, the Trade Department can more than assist our local manufacturers rather than to just state that the Government has been doing all it can to guide and assist them to increase their exports.”
“Talking of workers, if we are to have new investments with higher value-added per worker, the House would be grateful to the Hon, Minister if he could also elaborate on the plans to find or recruit such workers. For these industries which need to be upgraded like having to automate, mechanize, or to produce high-valued products, I would imagine that assistance can be given to them now that the Skills Development Fund has been set up. I can only hope that applications for such assistance will be expeditiously dealt with and are not bogged down by bureaucratic procedures. This is to ensure maximum utilisation of the Fund because the very purpose of setting up the Fund is to upgrade skills; and I for one do not wish to see an overwhelming accumulation of the Fund. I make this point because the Hon, Minister for Finance in reply to my question mentioned that a sizable amount has already been collected in the Skills Development Fund. Therefore, I would like to urge that the blue print of the 80's be published in order to give both the local and foreign investors and local entrepreneurs the kind of middle technology and higher technology that Singapore would prefer in the 80's. The Hon. Minister did not elaborate nor specify this. He merely pointed out"we would like the manufacturing sector to become even more dynamic and lead the economy through consistent high productivity increases." This is a bit vague. In any case, if we can achieve this in the next decade, then I am quite optimistic that the stage can be set for advancement into higher technology in the 90's and beyond. In which case, I would suggest that the Government should set the pace by venturing into areas that are both capital intensive as well as their need for higher skills.”
“Minister mentioned that as at 31st December 1979, there were 389,387 individual taxpayers, representing an increase during the year of 30,459 taxpayers. I am quite positive that more can be brought in, provided the Inland Revenue Department is more alert and vigilant. With per capita income growing bigger, taxpayers must surely increase. I fully agree with him, Sir, that it is not fair for technicians, engineers, managers, professionals and civil servants to carry the bulk of the tax burden. I am, therefore, pleased to note that the Minister has realised this and I would very much like to see that he does something about this. May I, therefore, add to my earlier remarks by urging the Hon. Minister to seriously consider them in the light of his own observations? Touching on the development strategies for the 80's, the Hon. Minister spoke of the need to develop skills, to quickly upgrade and restructure our industries and services to produce higher value-added products. Speaking of the blue print for middle and higher technology is one thing but to draw it up and to carry it out is another. I am aware that some of these are in the pipeline, like the petrochemical plant which is going to cost us billions of dollars, but there are those industries which are both labour-intensive and low-skilled and which are difficult to upgrade. Therefore, such industries which are unable to upgrade themselves would definitely suffer. I would be grateful if the Hon. Minister would enlighten the House as to how such industries can be helped along and the number of workers involved. Or would these industries eventually have to fold up voluntarily? Then what would happen to the workers?”
“" At the moment, employers have to deduct their employees' CPF contributions to pay the CPF: not to mention the Payroll Tax and Skills Development Fund tax deductions. The Hon. Minister made mention of the advantages the self-employed have over the wage-earners. He cited examples of doctors, lawyers, the successful hawkers, restaurateurs, property brokers and the like. He lamented that it would be many years before we could insist on proper bookkeeping and accounting for this group. I would suggest that for this varied group, the Comptroller insists that they keep a proper account of their income. Frankly, I see little or no difficulty at all. For if companies and wage-earners are required to submit their income tax returns, then may I ask why can the same not be applied to the self-employed? Surely there must be a way. Yes, legislation is one means to the solution of the problem. But I would very much like to hope that it will not have to take many years, as pointed out by the Minister. The Minister also mentioned that, "The more citizens we have paying income tax, the more voters there are who understand that welfare programmes which sound such attractive giveaways from some magic cornucopia conjured up at election time, must mean an increase in their income tax." I would like to see that he follows the precept he preaches. May I add that the greater the spread of shouldering the tax burden by the people, the greater it would help to make the voters understand their share of their well-being as well as the nation's. In other words, they will realise their stakes and become true Singaporeans. Since efforts have been made to enlarge the tax base, I would like to know how many more taxpayers will be added. The Hon.”
“Therefore, their CPF balances, though sizable in some cases, cannot be used at all until they reach the retirement age of 55 years. I would like the Hon. Minister to do something about it, bearing in mind the weakening in the purchasing power of the dollar. Could he not consider allowing this lot to invest their CPF balances? After all, he has allowed the use of CPF contributions to purchase SBS shares. I would now like to refer to a suggestion I made last year, i.e. the pay-as-you-earn scheme for the taxpayers. This is made with a view to enable the taxpayer to make regular payments of his income tax liability through his employer. In short, income tax deduction at source. Although I understand that such a mode of payment is allowed by the Comptroller of Income Tax, I am informed that not many people are aware of such a scheme. Nevertheless, I believe it would be worthwhile to consider introducing such a scheme. I am aware that the smart taxpayer likes to pay his tax dues long after he has collected his wages for the year. However, I believe there are advantages in adopting such a scheme. After all, many countries have adopted this scheme. All that is required to do is quite simple. Instead of the Comptroller of Income Tax getting employers to submit individual income returns in respect of their employees for tax assessment, why not ask the employers to deduct the tax due from their employees and pay to the Comptroller at the same time? The Hon. Minister in reply may state that there is such a scheme and therefore a choice is there. Of course, but I would still say to him, "Think it over as this will relieve the Comptroller of a lot of work and, therefore, give him time to go after those self-employed who are still outside the tax net.”
“However, this loss can easily be recovered from the hefty increases in additional registration fees for motor cars and pick-ups/vans, the new registration fees on motor vehicles and the increases in road tax as well. I am reliably informed that the estimated revenue would be between $50 million and $60 million. Here is a case of robbing Peter to pay Paul; take from the left and pay to the right! But, Sir, in any case, a tax concession means less tax to pay even if the range varies from $12.60 to $3,266 for those in the chargeable income group of $2,500 to $100,000. The Minister stated that the average reduction in tax is 16.1%. Hence the savings. This is to be welcomed. Nevertheless, if the Hon. Minister's intention behind the across-the-board tax reductions is primarily aimed at spreading the tax rates more equitably in particular for those in the annual income bracket of $20,000 to $100,000 whom he described as "carrying the greatest burden of income tax", then I would like to pose him this question. As incomes grow higher, the contributions to CPF become bigger. Yet the maximum allowed for tax exemption for both CPF contributions and life insurance premium remain unchanged at $5,000. I would, therefore, suggest that he gives this matter serious consideration because he spoke of Government's intention to spread the tax rates more fairly so that "the young will be encouraged to acquire skills and knowledge to earn more income" and at the same time repeated that "our people are our only resource." I would imagine that there must be many in this income bracket who would have life insurance policies besides contributing to CPF. A good mumber of them do not qualify for HDB or HUDC flats.”
“I do not think so. Then what about tax on luxury items? I ask these questions not because I want to be impertinent, Sir, but because of the Minister's emphasis that "these reductions are given not because we are elated over our good economic performance, or because the Treasury coffers are overflowing, but because we anticipate some very difficult years ahead, including this year." I suspect that the Treasury coffers are indeed overflowing if one takes into account the surpluses of revenue. Sir, the Hon. Minister is advocating thrift and frugality in spending the extra dollar. But he went on further to state that "the primary objective of the tax liberalization this year is to create maximum room for Singaporeans to exercise their enterprise to the utmost so that they are better prepared to cross the treacherous waters ahead." And then he concluded by saying that "our economic prosperity today is achieved through a partnership of government and individual effort, public and private savings. Present-day Singaporeans must, therefore, save a part of their earnings to secure their own future, and their children's. They must at all time avoid waste. They must not squander their tax rebates." However, I am unable to reconcile this statement. In sum total, the tax rebates are generous in terms of percentage, but in real terms they are not that much. One has only to take a cursory glance at Appendix Ill of his Budget statement relating to the proposed reduction in individual income tax to fully comprehend what I mean. For all these, the loss in revenue is estimated at $45.5 million out of a total estimated personal income tax collection of $476 million. This represents 10.46% of revenue loss in personal income tax collection.”
“Is it really healthy when there are sicknesses like cirrhosis of the liver due to heavy drinking? I suppose the hon. Member for Kampong Chai Chee takes to that. God bless him then.”
“Or more, that is right. Then the Minister mentioned that the increase in building costs is about 30%. I am just wondering how the prices will be adjusted. I hope the HDB will not square up the price hike. I was, therefore, not surprised when some of my constituents whom I spoke to, welcomed the hand-outs, the so-called hand-outs but at the same time they were equally quick to point out that the pains had been inflicted earlier on. In any case, they are happy that they are not further taxed. They expressed a sigh of relief on this point. But, Sir, before I go on to the specifics of the Budget, may I touch on some other aspects which I think the Hon. Minister did not refer to. He increased the duties on cigarettes and tobacco, yet he missed out the hard drinks - liquor and wine. This is indeed a surprise, Since the intention is to discourage smoking, then may I ask, what about drinking?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise to join my colleagues on the Backbench in congratulating the Hon. Minister for Trade and Industry for presenting another Budget which he himself described as a go-getter Budget. His tax cuts across-the-board brought cheers to many, but his imposition of higher excise duty on cigarettes as well as higher import duty on tobacco brought tears to the smokers. His other giveaways brought cheers too. Anyway, the Hon. Minister was quick to add a word of caution to all. However, this Budget cannot be described as totally painless if we are to take into account the pains inflicted earlier. This point has been made by many Backbenchers and making it again will I think bring home the point that it is not at all a painless Budget. Up the tariffs on public utilities or PUB charges; up the ARF (additional registration fee) and registration fees for now cars and pick-up vans; up the road tax, and up the hospital charges. Coming up on the list is the price increase in the Housing Board flats, as mentioned by the Hon. Minister for National Development, and he urged applicants to quickly make up their minds to take the flats now or face an increase in prices after two months. I am told that the price increase for flats will be in the region of 10 to 15%. Some hon. Members: More.”
“In this case, would the Hon. Senior Minister of State inform this House as to the number of schools that are being expanded so that pre-primary education can be provided in those schools?”
“No, Sir, I am thinking in terms of availability of space. The Hon. Senior Minister of State mentioned that the schools will be expanded. In other words, we must find sufficient space for the expansion of the schools in order to provide pre-primary education.”
“Sir, in that case, does the Ministry of Education have plans to ensure that there will be sufficient places in the schools?”
“Sir, I do not see how the figure of 260 teachers to be trained in pre-primary education can be realistic enough if we take into account the number of parents who are anxious to see their children receive pre-primary education.”
“Sir, would the Hon. Senior Minister of State for Education care to comment on the reply he gave to this House when I sought information on the question of providing pre-primary education to children in Singapore? If my memory serves me right, he said [Hansard, Vol. 38, col. 740] that this programme would be fully implemented by 1983, but now he says that it will be "by the end of this decade." Does that not seem to be a contradiction? Dr Tony Tan Keng Yam: Sir, originally it was envisaged that we would be able to expand the pre-primary classes to cater for all five-year old children within the next few years. However, I did say that this would be subject to teachers being available. And now that we have been able to quantify the need more accurately, we are able to make a more realistic estimate.”
“Whilst I am quite satisfied with the answer given by the Minister for the Environment, I would also like to draw the attention of the Minister for Trade and Industry to the kind of tight budgetary control that the Minister for the Environment has over his Ministry, thereby increasing productivity and wise spending of public funds. On that note, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment by leave, withdrawn. The sum of $3,948,000 for Head N ordered to stand part of the First Supplementary Estimates of Expenditure for the financial year 1st April, 1979 to 31st March, 1980. Question, "That the sum of $25,721,200 shall be supplied to the Government under the heads of expenditure for the public services shown in the First Supplementary Estimates of Expenditure for the financial year 1st April, 1979 to 31st March,1980 contained in Paper Cmd. 3 of 1980", put and agreed to. Resolution to be reported Thereupon Mr Speaker left the Chair of the Committee and took the Chair of the House.”
“Thank you, Sir. In moving this amendment, I merely wish to seek further elucidation from the Minister concerned as to the need for supplementary provision of some $760,000, although the reason given is "the higher costs of public utilities, fuel and lubricants." My question is, why was this not foreseen? Is the sum needed for the entire Ministry? If this is the case, other Ministries could likewise incur additional expenditure but this is not indicated in the First Supplementary Estimates of Expenditure (Paper Cmd. 3 of 1980). It is because there are no contingencies, such as virements, in the Ministry of the Environment which, as I understand it, some other Ministries have?”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head N be reduced by the whole sum in respect of Object of Expenditure NC 03-2141. Sir, with your permission, I would also like to range my remarks over amendment (2), standing in my name.”
“Sir, I thank the Senior Minister of State for Education for his kind reply, and I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment by leave, withdrawn. The sum of $21,374,000 for Head J ordered to stand part of the First Supplementary Estimates of Expenditure for the financial year 1st April, 1979 to 31st March, 1980. Head N -”
“Sir, what is the percentage of this increase against the total amount budgeted for last year? According to my calculation, it is more than 10%.”
“Thank you very much, Sir. I have just a simple question to ask of the Hon. Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Education that apart from the supplementary expenditure required to meet the increased expenditure arising from the payment of the 1979 National Wages Council awards and higher CPF contributions for staff, have there been other forms of supplementary grants made to the Government-aided schools and junior colleges? If so, may the House be informed what they are? 3.00 p.m.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head J be reduced by the whole sum in respect of Object of Expenditure JB 01-3111, Sir, I would like to ask your permission to range my remarks over the other three amendments standing in my name so that I need not move them.”
“Sir, I would be much obliged if the Hon. Minister for the Environment could supply the House with such information. Since the Minister has given the assurance, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment by leave, withdrawn. The sum of $399,200 for Head F ordered to stand part of the First Supplementary Estimates of Expenditure for the financial year 1st April, 1979 to 31st March, 1980. Head J -”
“This augurs well as the Government has always been helping the needy, those who are bright enough but are unable to pursue higher education due to financial hardship. I would like to urge that more bursaries be given to this lot of students. I would therefore seek information as to the number and type of bursaries awarded; better still if comparative figures covering the last three years could be given, Sir, I am of the view that those given bursaries would appreciate the opportunities given to them to enable them to pursue tertiary studies and thus would contribute more to the country. They would also help to contribute to form a bigger pool of manpower resources for leadership tapping. Finally, Sir, I would like to know the number of ASEAN Pre-University scholarships that have been awarded and whether such scholarships, apart from others, for tertiary education are being given. If so, what are the courses and how many have been given so far? We have done pretty well in many areas and we can more than promote the spirit of ASEAN solidarity if we impart our expertise to them, say, in the fields of low-cost housing and port facilities.”
“Thank you, Sir. The explanatory note simply states: "The supplementary provision is required because of the enhanced terms of the ASEAN Pre-University Scholarship and Merit Scholarship/Bursary Schemes." A further sum of $84,500 is required to meet the scholarships, fellowships and training courses for students in local institutions of higher learning. In this respect, Sir, I would like to enquire of the Hon. Minister concerned as to the number of scholarships, fellowships and training courses that have been awarded for the financial year 1979-80 and what are the disciplines. I would like to believe that, with enhanced terms, the brighter students would be more attracted to apply for such scholarships. Also, what are the criteria and whether the standard has been further raised? Are we getting more of the brighter students to opt for studies in the humanities? Sir, sometime ago, mention was made that the scholars preferred engineering and science courses to the humanities which were ultimately taken up by the less brighter students. I hope that the brighter students would not think of their own job security and prospects in the pursuit of higher studies by making a bee-line for the more preferred courses. This would be selfish thinking if at all they could at the end of their successful tertiary studies settle down to a comfortable job. We should encourage a greater spread of talent which is quite limited in such a small country like ours and which is still develop- ing. I would like to remind them that the future is entirely in their own hands and it is left to them to make out what they want it to be. Sir, on the question of bursaries, I am glad to note that the additional sum of $215,700 is further required.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for head F be reduced by the whole sum in respect of Object of Expenditure FA 03-3317(c). Sir, with your permission, may I range my remarks over amendment (2) so that I need not move the amendment?”
“Sir, I would just like to ask one last question. Since the Hon. Minister for Trade and Industry has clearly stated that the Trade Development Committee has proved very useful in trade development, my question is whether it will continue to be part of his Ministry.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, since 29% of our exports are not undertaken by the MNCs, will the Ministry of Trade and Industry consider some form of assistance to help exporters export their products?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, may I know from the Hon. Minister what is the percentage of units that will be given for rental.”
“Sir, if it is a question of travel demand, then the success of the Hong Kong MRT system will be greater than that of Singapore because the volume of our commuters in the public transport system is far less than that in Hong Kong, in which case we should not go ahead with the MRT.”
“Sir, there are MRTs in some other parts of the world. Did the Ministry look into those systems as well? If they did, maybe we could have saved a lot of money, bearing in mind that these studies have taken several years.”
“Sir, Phases 1, 11 and Ill of the feasibility studies have entailed public expenditure to the tune of $8.4 million. Would the Hon. Minister for Communications assure this House that not much more will have to be spent with the setting up of the Mass Rapid Transit Authority - he is moving the Bill at a later stage - and that these feasibility studies on all aspects of the system, be it the detailed planning or engineering designs, will not incur extra expenditure before a decision can be made?”
“Sir, according to the reply of the Hon. Minister for Finance, it appears that the manufacturing sector has not made any application for assistance for the upgrading of manufacturing skills. Would the Minister care to comment on this?”