Ong Chit Chung
Singapore
“Sir, the SAF may buy the best aircraft, best tanks and the best ships, but the real core of the SAF remains its officers and men. Without the commitment of the officers and men, the SAF would be nothing. Besides the full-time and Operationally-ready Servicemen, the SAF has to attract and retain good career officers and men.”
“Sir, I know that in geopolitical terms, it is better to keep Myanmar within ASEAN than to leave it out. It may help to prevent Myanmar from being too drawn into or be dependent on China, but there is a limit to the price for keeping Myanmar within the ASEAN fold.”
“Have we rushed into such a proposal without taking into full consideration the internal dynamics of Indonesia? What are the prospects of such an agreement to be accepted? How would the anti-competition charges against Temasek Holdings affect bilateral relations and the future flow of investments into Indonesia?”
“Sir, I wish to seek some clarifications from the Minister on Myanmar. Many of us feel that ASEAN has no teeth, but the Minister clearly thinks that ASEAN has a tongue. I would rather describe it as a tongue-in-cheek way of explaining how ASEAN deals with Myanmar.”
“Sir, I would like to ask the Senior Minister of State whether the Extradition Treaty will undermine or, to use his own word, compromise Singapore's position as an international financial centre, and whether Indonesians will hesitate to invest, put their money or buy property in Singapore because of this.”
“Mr Chairman, Sir, I will leave the Minister to describe the elephant, but I would say that the SAF has embarked on what some call a "Revolution in military affairs", employing IT and state-of-the-art technology to transform the SAF into a 3G fighting force: I believe, a decisive force, an effective deterrence against any would-be aggresso…”
The complete record
Every one of 575 lines we hold for Ong Chit Chung, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 2 of 12.
“Mr Sepaker, Sir, I am sure we all want to thank DPM for doing a good job of coordinating National Security. In this regard, I wish to ask DPM, in view of the recent survey, what more could be done to increase individual Singaporean's preparedness and ability to respond and react to any terrorist attack. Dr Tony Tan Keng Yam: I thank the hon. Member for his very kind words regarding my service as Coordinating Minister for Security and Defence. I think we can do a lot in order to increase Singapore's awareness of the need for National Security and of the threats which face Singapore. This can be done at our schools, for example. That is why I met with the teachers and students from junior colleges last year to impress on them that this is not a problem for their parents. This is a problem which they will face when they grow up, to be prepared. It is not going to go away, and it is a threat which all of us, adults and children, would have to be prepared to live with for many years. We can also do so at community functions, and it is where Members of Parliament can play a major role in organising their grassroots leaders, participating in events which bring home to Singaporeans the need to be aware of the threats and how they can help in order to mitigate these threats and, very important, that one day, when there is a terrorist attack in Singapore, that would be the real test. Can we respond as a people quickly, efficiently, effectively and get over it? Then we will succeed. Sir, a terrorist attack in Singapore does not mean the end of the world. That is something which we have to bear in mind. If there is an attack, we will get over it, Singapore will go on. Life does not end. So long as we have that confidence, no threat can destroy Singapore.”
“If something goes wrong with these taps, it will have a significant impact on the continual water supply when, at that time, we will no longer be getting water from Malaysia. Any stoppage of the plant for more than a month, Singapore will face a water crisis. I can easily think of a way that can cause the plant to shut down for a long period of time by some form of stubborn contamination. Sir, some of these may cause permanent stoppage of the plants. Sir, the deep sewerage tunnel system is not pressurised and the sewerage flows through gravity. Foreign materials could easily be introduced into the tunnel and eventually arrive at the treatment plant through all the possible openings, be it the manhole, the sewer collection and pumping stations, and even the toilet bowls in our homes. So, if one could contaminate the system and pose potential security risks to our water supply system, it is because waste water is used as feed water for the production of NEWater and recycled water. What precautions has the Ministry taken or will take to minimise such a potential risk?”
“Mr Chairman, Sir, for many years, Singapore has been working for self-sufficiency in water resources. We have a breakthrough with NEWater and embarked on desalination. I understand that our reservoir capacity has also been enlarged to contain and store more water. This has made us less dependent on Malaysia for supply of water, which has always been a point of friction between Singapore and Malaysia. The Singapore Government has announced that it will not seek to extend the first Water Agreement when it lapses in 2011. I would therefore like to ask the Minister whether there are any new initiatives to enlarge our water supply and capacity. Will he be able to assure Singaporeans that we will have a constant supply of water and our taps will never run dry? What else is being done to ensure that we make the best possible use of our limited water resources? Once the Marina Barrage is constructed, what would the Ministry do to ensure that the water of the new reservoir will be kept clean and unpolluted? Would the Ministry also work closely with the private sector to promote Singapore as a water hub and export our water processing technology overseas? Deep Sewer Tunnel Assoc. Prof. Low Seow Chay (Chua Chu Kang): Mr Chairman, Sir, I would like to talk about the deep tunnel sewerage system. The centralised deep sewerage treatment plants, one in the east and a future one in the west, make waste management easier and they are also likely to reduce the cost of treatment. The two sewerage treatment plants are also the future NEWater and industrial water production plants. It will be one of the three important water taps in our water self-sustaining strategy.”
“Sir, a point of clarification. Earlier, the Minister mentioned my name together with Dr Amy Khor that I asked for a housing grant for those going for private property. Although it is a privilege to be associated with Dr Amy Khor, I did not say that. My position is quite different. I asked whether we could consider making grants portable; in other words, making it applicable to first-time buyers of HDB new flats, resale flats or Executive Condominiums. It is just a point of clarification. May I ask the Minister whether reverse mortgages are working well in other countries? If they are working well in other countries, why not in Singapore?”
“This is a very good scheme and the idea could be extended to first-time buyers of HDB new flats or resale flats or Executive Condominiums. The Government could make such grants portable and give a much wider choice for first-time buyers who qualify. Affordable Public Housing”
“Mr Chairman, Sir, in terms of public housing, the Government has done remarkably well in providing affordable public housing. But HDB has many rules. For example, if one were to buy a flat from the resale market, one could not sell the flat until a stipulated time. But, at the same time, one may not qualify for a HDB preferential loan and would have to obtain a commercial loan from the banks. Currently, those who buy resale flats and use commercial loans have to wait for one year before they could sell. Why not allow them to sell freely in the market as they have to use commercial loans? We should make it easier to buy and sell in line with market forces and conditions. It should be quid pro quo for the use of commercial loans. Some of the residents also need to sell the flats earlier because of financial distress. I have the following points to raise. Why should we insist on 20% down-payment by cash or CPF for the purchase of HDB flats? Many young couples, and those of lower income groups, will find it painful to cough up 20%. Why make it more difficult for us to promote home ownership, particularly for first-time buyers? High down-payments would inevitably delay marriage plans for young couples and further delay in them having babies and would act against our national procreation policies. Why not cap it at 10%? Sir, in an economic downturn, some of the poor and the elderly are finding it hard to provide for their old age. In such a situation, would the Government seriously consider launching reverse mortgages? Reverse mortgages have been brought up many times before but there was no real follow-up. The Government grants $30,000 in CPF for first-time buyers of certain flats.”
“Sir, we know for certain that the SAF takes its training very seriously. Over the years, SAF conducts full-scale exercises with live ammunition, be it a battalion live-firing, tank live-firing, air bombardment, artillery live-firing or missile tests for our naval ships. It is, therefore, paramount that we give the highest emphasis to training safety. Every time there is a training accident or mishap, our hearts sink, because our National Servicemen are our own sons and family members. Each incident is a tragedy. Despite our best efforts, incidents do happen from time to time and, at times, there are abuses, as described earlier by Mr Tan Soo Khoon, during training that lead to tragic loss of lives. I would like to ask the Minister whether MINDEF continuously reviews the training methods and tightens up on safety measures, and whether better systems of checks and audits are in place, and adequate manpower is being deployed to ensure safety in training. May we know whether the service inspectorates, including the General Staff Inspectorate, have been strengthened to conduct surprise checks, not just routine checks, to ensure that the safety measures are applied strictly, and thus help to weed out any potential abuses?”
“Sir, I am sure all agree that SAF did very well during the tsunami mission. But there are some people in Singapore who spoke to me and said that we sent so many ships, helicopters, men and equipment, and they were worried that Singapore's own defence would be weakened and, in an emergency, we might not be able to cope. Would the Minister care to comment?”
“Sir, I want to ask the Minister whether he cares to comment on the prospect or possibility of an arms race in Southeast Asia.”
“Would our training schools, staff colleges and top MINDEF planners be ever mindful that technology by itself will never win war or deter war? Good strategy is still the key for ultimate victory or deterrence. Sir, the recent tsunami humanitarian rescue mission demonstrated that the SAF is operationally ready and is able to move at short notice. This is well and good. Many foreign observers are now sitting up and noticing the SAF's operational readiness and capacity. The downside is that some countries now realise that their armed forces have fallen far behind the SAF. They have waken up and decided to increase substantially their defence spending. I would like to ask the Minister whether this would lead to an arms race, with each country trying to catch up, overtake or outdo the others. Budget”
“Mr Chairman, Sir, much has been made of the SAF being transformed into a 3G armed forces. What we lack in space and manpower, we make up in terms of technology, firepower and mobility. Sir, the SAF is in the process of selecting and deciding on the next generation of fighter aircraft, which will have a major impact on our operational readiness. I wish to ask the Minister whether a decision has been made on our next generation of fighter aircraft and when they will be ready for deployment. Sir, in this IT and electronic age, I am glad that the SAF is giving special emphasis on command and control, communication network and cyber warfare. These are moves in the right direction. However, I have the following questions to ask: (1) Whether our ordinary National Servicemen understand and are well-trained to use technology and high-tech weapons - the best weapons will come to nought if the soldiers do not know how to apply or deploy them effectively. (2) Have we made good provisions or measures for biological and chemical warfare or terrorist attacks? (3) What will be our reaction if a civilian aircraft is hijacked while flying towards Singapore airspace, with some prominent Singapore landmarks or housing as potential targets? I join my colleague, Mr Sin Boon Ann, in asking whether the SAF is operationally ready and equipped to deal with terrorist maritime attacks in the Straits of Singapore and the sea lanes around the Port of Singapore. We all know the economic importance of the port and the vital importance of the sea lanes to us. While focusing on technology and the 3G transformation of the SAF, we must not forget or neglect strategy or tactics, or what is termed as the art of war.”
“Sir, can I ask the Minister for clarification on the proposed Singapore-Indonesia extradition treaty? I want to ask the Minister whether he is aware that many Indonesian businessmen invest in Singapore, put their funds in Singapore and buy properties in Singapore. Will this proposed extradition treaty frighten them off and they may be worried that wrong charges will be preferred against them and therefore they may hesitate to invest or come to Singapore with their funds? This will have a negative impact on our economy. Will he care to comment or clarify?”
“Thank you. Sir, Singapore has firmly, consistently and clearly supported the one-China policy. Singapore was amongst the first to make it a policy to recognise Beijing as the rightful and only authority for "one China". Come what may, Singapore has not shifted from this position. We have never been swayed by Taipei or the pro-Taipei lobbyist groups throughout the world. We were therefore perplexed by the storm created over an unofficial private visit by our then Deputy Prime Minister to Taiwan. Sir, both Singapore and China have much to gain through close economic cooperation and investments and mutual understanding and respect. We are a small country compared to the PRC, which is a rising economic power. But countries, big and small, should always respect each other's sovereignty and interests. I am therefore glad that the storm has subsided and calm has prevailed. I read recently that the PRC Ambassador to Singapore commented that the Singapore-PRC relationship is back to normal. I hope that the relationship is not only back to normal, but will grow and deepen over time. Singapore can invest further in the PRC, leveraging on the PRC's resources, manpower and markets, and thereby help to create more jobs in the PRC, while PRC can send thousands upon thousands of their tourists to Singapore, which I am sure we would all welcome. I wish to ask the Minister on his reading of Singapore-PRC relationship, how we can manage this relationship and move forward. Are there any concrete or practical plans to deepen the relationship between Singapore and PRC?”
“Even the opposition PAS commented that the bridge was a wasteful project and was not necessary at all. I would like to ask whether the Minister agrees with Datuk Shahrir and lends his important support to such a sensible move. May I carry on, Sir?”
“Sir, Singapore-Malaysia ties constitute a very important component of our foreign relations and our relationship with Malaysia has taken a positive turn after the assumption of leadership by Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi. Water, Sir, is no more an intractable problem or issue as far as we are concerned. We can move ahead on this. The reclamation issue at the Straits is largely settled. The Pedra Branca issue is brought to the International Court of Justice. However, there is still a host of issues to be negotiated, for example, CPF payments to Malaysians, the use of Malaysian air space by the Singapore Air Force, the Malayan railway land and the bridge at the Causeway. I would like to ask the Minister how these issues are to be tackled and what is the timeframe he has in mind. Will they be negotiated item by item or will they be negotiated as a package? Is the Minister hopeful that these issues will be concluded amicably and in good time? What is the outcome of Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong's recent second meeting with Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi? Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi said that there are some low-lying fruits which are easy to reach and should be picked first. May I ask the Minister what, in his view, are these low-lying fruits, and on whose trees are these low-lying fruits? And who are going to pick them first? Are they ripe for the picking? A veteran Johor politician, Datuk Shahrir Abdul Samad, has recently suggested that the Malaysian proposal for the crooked bridge, which was Dr Mahathir's initiative, be dropped. But he was immediately attacked by his fellow politicians. In my view, Datuk Shahrir Abdul Samad's position is logical and very sensible, and very much what anyone with some common sense would support.”
“In short, an undertaking with all the trappings of a wartime operation could, at the same time, be a manifestation of the finest human qualities of grace and empathy." This is from a critic of Government. She said, "Here is deeply felt compassion but without any sentimentality of high sounding moral assertion. The Prime Minister simply said that Singapore, being a small country and dependent on the world for its living, might need the same kind of help some day." Sir, Singapore's image in the region has changed for the better. We are a caring nation, small but great in spirit. As Dr Catherine Lim ended, she said, "The real greatness of Singapore may be a totally different kind and lie outside itself. It may be a greatness of spirit and may be showing itself in a unique blend of effective action and graceful empathy." Sir, I think this is a good time for Singapore to move forward and engage its neighbours and really strengthen our relationship with our neighbours.”
“By this swift and decisive action in organising relief and dispatching our servicemen, by his care and concern, by empathising with our neighbours, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong has strengthened his authority and made his mark as our national leader and he has bonded with Singaporeans. Prime Minister's Lee international stature as a statesman has grown. In Aceh, I met with Sergeant Irene Ng, a medic in the SAF. I found out that her husband, Mr Lim Yick Chong wrote a letter to the Straits Times on 12th January. I can do no better than to read Mr Lim's touching letter which empathises the response of all Singaporeans. He said, "It is painful for me being apart from my wife after only two months of marriage. But I realise my pain is nothing compared to the suffering of the people in Meulaboh and that Irene is there to help those who have literally lost everything. People there have lost their families, properties, wealth and livelihood but they have not lost one thing - hope. Hope that their families can be found, hope that their injuries can be treated, hope that there will be a future. Singaporeans are giving hope to the people of Meulaboh. I am proud of the people of Singapore, the SAF, the Government and my wife for giving hope to those whose lives have been destroyed." Sir, even Dr Catherine Lim, a very well-known long-term critic of the Government, praised Singapore people and the Government for doing a great job in this disaster rescue. And she wrote in Today newspaper of 7th January, volunteering her comments, and I quote from her again, "I am most impressed by how a massive relief operation, unprecedented in the urgency of its timing and planning, the scale of its mobilisation on manpower and other resources and the enormity of its logistical problem.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I support the motion. Last Thursday, Sir, I had the opportunity to visit Aceh and Meulaboh with some of our parliamentary colleagues. We met up with the Indonesian parliamentarians and visited our servicemen in the field who were there on a humanitarian assistance mission in the region. Sir, we saw for ourselves the utter destruction and devastation. It was an eye-opener. An estimated 110,000 perished and another 10,000 missing. Houses were flattened. Whole villages disappeared. And it happened so suddenly, so fast. Our hearts went out to our Indonesian neighbours. They have suffered so much. But the Indonesians are pulling themselves up, recovering and overcoming the odds. It is a testimony of their resilience and strength. Sir, it is heartening to note that in this crisis, Singaporeans of all walks of life have come forward to donate spontaneously and generously to the disaster relief fund. Some Singaporeans have volunteered to serve in Aceh, Phuket and Sri Lanka. The Government has promptly dispatched an SAF humanitarian contingent to Aceh, including logistical and medical teams, LSTs and heavy duty Chinook helicopters. The SAF servicemen were amongst the first to arrive on the scene. The SAF wisely assessed that the best thing to do was to establish landing sites in Meulaboh so that supplies could come through. Indeed, the Asian Wall Street Journal of 6th January praised the SAF's methods and operation. And I quote, "Singapore's innovative performance showed that pinpointed doses of limited aid can yield disproportionate benefits." Our Prime Minister, Mr Lee Hsien Loong, personally visited Aceh and spearheaded an international summit on disaster relief held in Jakarta. Sir, in a crisis, leaders are made.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, the welfare and well-being of the SAF regulars are close to our hearts. They are our frontline defenders and guardians of our national sovereignty. We must, as a nation, look after our regulars. Hence, in this context, any move to protect their terms or interests will be most welcomed. I, therefore, support this amendment. However, I wish to ask the Minister of State two questions. First, is he absolutely sure that such changes are in the long-term interests of our service regulars and there will be no unnecessary changes after this? Second, will MINDEF take extra care and trouble to explain these changes in full and in detail to all our regular servicemen, so that there will be no misunderstanding and they have comfort that we are taking extra care for them and that all changes are indeed in their long-term interests? Sir, I support the Bill.”
“Sir, my question is: will LTA quickly considerputting up barriers atopen platforms?”
“Sir, I would like to ask the Minister of State whether she would agree that safety is paramount, regardless of inconvenience or cost. And I want to thank the Minister of State for giving the pros and cons of putting up barriers at the open platforms of MRT stations. But whatever the pros and cons, I think we need to consider it seriously and urgently, because there is a need to address this problem. It would be better, in my view, to err on the side of caution rather than to wait and see and prolongthe problem.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I welcome this integrated and coordinated approach to our national security. I would like to ask the Deputy Prime Minister and Coordinating Minister whether the National Security Coordinating Secretariat would have additional budget to give it the bite and also to influence the other Ministries. Although now that you have a Permanent Secretary based in this Coordinating Secretariat, I wonder how influential this Permanent Secretary will be in motivating the other Ministries and agencies to come and work together. Will he, for example, be able to influence its budget? Can he influence, for example, the appointment and promotion of civil servants working in different Ministries, because these are critical elements for them?”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I am puzzled that this misimpression has been created, that we are in actual discussion when this is not the case. May I ask the Minister what is their intention? Is it to pressurise Singapore to agree or is it all part of politicking? What will happen if, at the end of the day, no agreement is reached on this issue?”
“With our National Servicemen who are highly educated, well motivated, we are confident that they will be able to master these new technologies and systems and deliver for Singapore a defence which is even more capable than the one that we have today, notwithstanding the reduction in National Service period. In fact, what I do hope is that with this period of National Service of 24 months, our servicemen doing their full-time National Service will be even more motivated to give of their best during this period. What was the turning point? There was a confluence of two factors. The 3G SAF is the driver for this change which leads us to this reduction in National Service duration and a leaner SAF. The enabler was the surge in the National Service intake which will be taking place in the next 1-2 years lasting for 10 years. This allows us to do this transformation while maintaining the operational readiness of the SAF. And with the confluence of these two factors, we decided to proceed.”
“Sir, this is indeed good news for the National Servicemen. I am sure it will be welcomed by all Singaporeans. I want to ask the Minister whether this move will adversely affect the operational readiness of the SAF, especially now when we are in an era of conflict and terrorism where more demands than ever are being made on the SAF, and whether the National Service reduction will give the wrong signal to others that we are going soft on defence, and whether the Minister can assure us that we will do whatever it takes to maintain a strong defence force and defend Singapore's sovereignty. Sir, the Minister is well aware that MINDEF is very cautious about the length of National Service. We wonder what made MINDEF reduce the length of National Service. When was the turning point for such a decision? RAdm Teo Chee Hean: Sir, Dr Ong asked what motivated the change in National Service duration. I would like to reassure Dr Ong and Members of this House as well as the public in general that our commitment to defence remains strong. And I would like to thank Members of this House also for their continued commitment to defence. The transformation to the 3rd generation SAF will make the SAF more capable of defending Singapore, and will make it more capable while at the same time making the SAF leaner. What motivated this change is that the transformation that we have been making in the SAF over the last few years has begun to bear fruit. We are more confident that the technologies available, the systems that we have fielded, will be able to give the SAF that edge as these technologies unfold and become fielded over the next 10 years.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, a point of clarification. I did not ask whether the Auditor-General was consulted in drafting this amendment. My question was: in the process of consultation between the Minister for Defence and the Auditor-General on the appointment of an external auditor, if the Auditor-General disagrees with the proposal, will the Minister for Defence proceed with such appointment? And, secondly, it is also a point of clarification. Of course, I agree that big auditors have global reach and they are desirable. But in this case, the Auditor-General could also, on his own, approach and somewhat pass some of the work to the big four or five international auditors who have global reach. So it is not necessary to be appointed by MINDEF. They could be appointed by the Auditor-General.”
“Again, here, I see that MINDEF is working on a change for a single audit on account of administrative efficiency and convenience. I doubt whether it is always the best thing to do. There is no harm in more audit. It may discover and surface interesting items. Sir, more to the point, the Auditor-General can also do audit on an accrual basis. In fact, the Auditor-General has done such audits on a number of statutory boards. So there is really no need to appoint an outside auditor. The Auditor-General can do both kinds of audits.”
“We save the time and pay of two officers. I am sure that justice and the well-being and interests of our soldiers are worth more than that. Further, who actually decides whether the soldiers will be tried in a single judge court or three-member court? What are the so-called selected classes of offences that will be dealt with by a single judge court? This is not spelt out clearly in the amendment. May I also ask what is the role of the MINDEF Director of Legal Services in all these? Is the Director of Legal Services the one to recommend the appointment of the judges? Is he the one to recommend or decide on which cases go to the single judge courts martial and which cases go to the panel courts martial? He is also, I presume, the chief military prosecutor. It will be odd for the prosecution to determine the composition and type of tribunal. Will there be a conflict of interests, I wonder? Sir, on the MINDEF SAVER-Premium Fund, it is stated that the Minister for Defence may appoint an outside auditor in consultation with the Auditor-General. What if the Auditor-General disagrees with such an appointment during consultation? Can the Minister for Defence still proceed with such an appointment? It was pointed out that the audit of the Fund by the Auditor-General on a cash basis and the commercial audit is on an accrual basis will lead to overlap or duplication of audit coverage. May I point out that such cross audit normally happens in business companies where we have external auditors and internal auditors, as well as the appointment of auditors for specific audit or for due diligence purposes. To some extent, such duplications are unavoidable and sometimes it is good to have cross checks or cross audits.”
“In the military chain of command, commanders are personally responsible for the men under their charge, in war as well as in peace. When their men are being charged, commanders or senior officers of similar background should sit in as members of the panel of judges. They may have better understanding of the situation of the soldiers. In contrast, in a single judge court, judges may not understand the military background or ethos. In some of the single judge courts, judges may have served national service in a non-combat role or they could be holding junior ranks in service. Sir, the existing general courts martial panel has worked very well over the years in the SAF. There is no compelling reason to change it. If it ain't broke, why fix it? We must not try to just go for administrative efficiency or expediency. Justice must not only be done but also seen to be done. Participation of the officer in military justice also would help them understand the system and, very importantly, have ownership of the system. Even soldiers, who are being charged, will feel better if they are being tried by judges who are experienced military officers. They will feel that they are given a fairer hearing. Sir, currently, NUSAF officers (non-uniformed SAF - today, they are called Defence Executive Officers) will be tried by a judge with two other NUSAF officers on the panel. The thinking is that this will give a chance for the NUSAF officers to be tried by their own peers. Now, the NUSAF officers may be tried by a single judge. Does this mean that the principle of trial by their own peers is being thrown out unceremoniously? If the reason for such a trial was valid, then why is it invalid now? What do we save by taking out two officers from the panel of judges?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I welcome the establishment of a permanent general courts martial panel, from which members could be drawn to hear court martial cases. This Bill will make it easier for the convening authority to constitute the court martial. In this manner, it helps to institutionalise the system and maximise our resources. Members appointed will also know in advance that they will be called upon to serve on courts martial. However, I have some reservations and questions on the institution of single judge courts, which will be presided by NSman judges. I urge MINDEF to think very carefully before putting aside the present three-member court in some cases, and substituting it with a single judge court. The military law regime provides for the maintenance of good order and discipline amongst members of the Armed Forces. It supplements the ordinary criminal laws in Singapore with a special code of discipline and a special system for enforcing it. The idea of having a panel consisting of a presiding officer and two members on a general court martial, rather than a single judge court, goes back a long way in military history and military justice. It was indeed to ensure trial by your own peers, your peers who understand the military chain of command, your peers who understand military discipline, your peers who understand military convention, ethos and practices. In the three-judge panel, the other two members are experienced military officers who will bring with them deep insights into military practices, regimental ethos and the understanding of how men behave and conduct themselves in the field. Such empathy and insights cannot be taught in law schools, or gained from experiences in civil courts or civilian life.”
“Sir, I wish to take this opportunity to thank the MINDEF Ministers for their clear and comprehensive answers to the clear and present threat to our security and, in particular, to thank Minister Teo Chee Hean for reviewing the compensation for our National Servicemen. Sir, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.”
“Sir, I join my colleague, Dr Maliki, on this item. For the Ministry of Defence there are reports by the Auditor-General and the Public Accounts Committee of irregular medical claims, over-consumption of leave, over-claims of subsistence allowance, disappearance of $14,000 in a mess fund, and at least $100,000 from two accounts could not be accounted for, and over $600,000 were wrongly credited to the Retirement Premium Plan of servicemen. Sir, although these figures are small in comparison to the overall budget of MINDEF, it is nevertheless an important concern to all of us. Such irregularities should not happen so often. I wish to ask the Minister whether more stringent control could be put into place and, whether the staff will be drilled on financial procedures. I believe all staff should be made aware of the appropriate penalties as well. MINDEF should be strict and firm in such matters.”
“Sir, recommendations of RECORD III which was convened in the year 2000 were accepted by the Ministry of Defence. I wish to ask the Minister on the progress of the implementation of such recommendation, in particular, how many National Servicemen benefit from the award of bonus points for admission to NUS and NTU. Is it time now to convene a new RECORD IV to further review the needs of the National Servicemen and to further recognise their contributions?”
“Sir, some years ago, the SAVERS Scheme was introduced by MINDEF with much fanfare. The SAVERS Scheme aims to give flexibility and a good return to the regular officers of the SAF, upon their retirement or completion of service. I understand that some regular officers have lamented that they are not getting good returns from the SAVERS Scheme. They feel let down. I also wish to ask the Minister if the SAVERS Scheme has lived up to its expectation, and whether the SAVERS Scheme should be revised in view of the recent results. The point is: what can the serving officers in the SAF look forward to in the future?”
“I also wish to ask the Minister whether our field or back-up medical facilities are adequate for the type of training they are undertaking. Further, whether compensation for our NSmen is adequate. If not, whether they should be revised to recognise the sacrifices of our NSmen.”
“Sir, in the past year, the SAF has unfortunately, suffered a number of deaths in training incidents. I would like to ask the Minister what lessons are being drawn from such incidents and what safety measures have been put in place to prevent the recurrence of such incidents. And despite all these measures on safety, another unfortunate explosion happened at the Armour Training Centre at Sungei Gedong in February this year. According to reports, an ammunition was stuck in the machine gun. The officers and men should have left the machine gun at the range and asked for a weapon specialist to deal with the problem. Instead, they brought it back to the barracks and foolishly tried to deal with the problem themselves. Again, the safety measures were there, but the men did not follow the safety measures nor did they exercise good judgment. This illustrates the point that you can put all kinds of safety measures in place, but it is even more important that the officers and men abide by them and constantly cultivate the habit of safety. You can put in a good system of safety, but quite often, it is not a system failure at all, but failure on the part of the men in implementation, in forging a safety culture and in having the habit of safety. This culture of safety must prevail and permeate throughout the SAF. Thus, besides instituting safety measures, the SAF should do much more to promote safety awareness and instill in each and every man, the importance of safety right from the very beginning of their recruit days. It should become second nature to the men. We must do everything possible to uphold safety, as the lives of our sons and loved ones are at stake.”
“Sir, while other Ministries' budgets are being cut as a percentage of GDP, MINDEF's budget is not suffering a cut at all so that MINDEF will sharpen its cutting edge. We wholeheartedly support the MINDEF budget, as we place the highest priority on the nation's security and sovereignty. However, we would like at the same time to highlight the importance of prudence and frugality. We want the SAF to be a strong and mighty stallion, guarding the gateway to Singapore. We do not want a runaway horse galloping in the wrong direction and allowing the costs to escalate and spin out of control. For example, to save cost and manpower, we should outsource as far as possible. We want the defence dollar to be stretched, and be value for money.”
“In the new strategic landscape, the SAF has to contend with biological and chemical attacks, low intensity operations and terrorist attacks. I therefore wish to ask the Minister whether the SAF is prepared for such unconventional threats and how far is the SAF transforming itself in view of the changes in technology and the strategic landscape. 1.15 pm”
“Sir, technology is an important strategic factor in warfare. Advances in technology will have a profound effect on the future of warfare. It has been said many times that generals invariably fight the war. For example, based on the First World War experience, the Polish generals sent their horse cavalries against German tanks at the outbreak of the Second World War, and the French generals defended France by building an outdated Marginot defence line, which was easily breached by German tanks punching through selected points in blitzkrieg attacks. More recently, the first Gulf War in 1991 and the second Gulf War in 2003 highlighted to all of us the immense changes in warfare. This led to a revolution in military and strategic thinking and a fundamental review of weapon procurement and military doctrines. Such paradigm shift is now termed as revolution in military affairs (RMA). Likewise, we need a paradigm shift in the SAF. I hope the SAF is not being tied down to old-fashioned warfare of the past, and is not bogged down by the baggage of our experience in World War II, the Malayan Emergency or even confrontation. More to the point, what happened to the two Gulf Wars demand a total review of the force structure, strategic concepts and operational doctrines of the SAF. Sir, even the US Secretary for Defence, Mr Donald Rumsfeld, is shaking up the American armed forces with an ongoing review of the way the forces are trained and deployed. Old fashioned generals weighed down by old concepts are being replaced with forward-looking commanders. Are we in the SAF prepared to change and ride the tide of such unprecedented technological advances and changes? At the same time, SAF is facing new threats.”
“Sir, over the last few years, MINDEF has sent a number of contingents overseas. In particular, we participated in UN peacekeeping missions in a number of countries. An example was the peacekeeping mission to Timor-Leste under the sponsorship of the United Nations. And we also sent a small contingent to Iraq to help maintain security. May I ask the Minister what are the criteria for deciding whether we should undertake such missions? What are the factors for determining the force structure of our troops in such missions? Do we deploy both regulars and National Servicemen? At these missions, are our troops fulfilling the purpose? Are the missions worth the commitment of precious manpower as well as military resources? What do our officers and men learn from such missions and whether they share their experience with the rest of the SAF upon their return?”
“In these uncertain times, Sir, and with the stark strategic realities before us, we have no choice but to build up the SAF as a strong and capable deterrent force. We must keep the predators at bay and protect our homeland against terrorism. We must not forget that we are a trading nation. We import our food from overseas. We need to keep the vital sea lanes around us open, and check and deter piracy. For this, we need a strong SAF. I therefore support the increase in the Defence budget. We must spare no effort nor hold back any expenditure on defence. Without a strong SAF, Singapore will be at the mercy of others. Without a strong SAF, there will not be an independent Singapore. We are prepared to spend the money, Sir. The SAF on its part must make good use of the funds. I hope therefore that the SAF will be trained and ready for the new conventional and unconventional roles it has to play against a spectrum of threats. I would like to ask the Minister if the SAF is combat ready to defend Singapore and Singaporeans.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the total sum to be allocated for Head J of the Main Estimates be reduced by $100. Sir, Asia-Pacific is a region of uncertainty with underlying currents and fault lines. It is even more so after 911. We now know that the JI network has been built up over many years in many parts of the region, including Singapore, Malaysia, Indonesia and the Philippines. Religious extremism has harnessed terrorism, making the threat even more immediate and real. Bombs have gone off in Bali, Jakarta and Manila. There is increasing political uncertainty on the ground. Many of the countries are in the throes of election. In Malaysia, the new Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi is battling against PAS and religious extremism. All are watching whether UMNO could win the Malay votes and hold Kedah against the PAS onslaught. In Indonesia, no one is sure who will emerge victorious in the presidential election, though President Megawati has the advantage of incumbency and the mantle of Sukarno. But one thing for sure is the rising tide of political Islam. We view with dismay and concern the early release of Abu Bakar Bashir. In the Philippines, there is going to be a fierce fight between President Arroyo and Poe. In Taiwan, President Chen Sui-bian is fighting a neck-to-neck race against Lien Chan and is playing with sensitive issues like independence and referendum. And we watch with concern the series of fanatical bombings and attacks in southern Thailand and the motives of the perpetrators are not clear. Further north, the North Korean leader is playing poker with nuclear weapons and the South Korean President is impeached.”
“Madam, I want to thank the Ministry of Foreign Affairs Ministers for their clear and comprehensive answers, and I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.”
“Madam, Singapore has excellent relationship with Indonesia under President Suharto. After Suharto, Singapore has to deal with a series of Presidents from Habibie to Gus Dur to Megawati. And now, Indonesia has another presidential election. I wish to ask the Minister whether our relationship with Indonesia under President Megawati is significantly better than that under Gus Dur. Further, whether Singapore has broadened its relationship base so that our state of relationship will not be so dependent on who is in power at the presidential palace. In times of controversy and crisis, a broad-based relationship will provide a balance and serve us better. We should therefore cultivate and nurture relationship across the board, for example, with parliamentarians, cultural activists, religious leaders, captains of industries, professors and editors. 4.45 pm Secondly, Indonesia has time and again complained about the release of statistics on trade between Indonesia and Singapore. Has this issue been resolved? Then there is the issue of sand export to Singapore. Indonesia has claimed that Singapore is not cooperative on this. May I ask the Minister on the latest on the export of sand to Singapore.”
“Madam, for the last few years, Singapore-Malaysia relationship has its ups and downs. It was never short of thrills and excitement and we heard much of it in this House. We have the water issue, the Malayan Railway land, Pedra Branca and the crooked bridge. This is not what we want or desire. We want a stable and positive relationship, a win-win situation, with maximum cooperation on both sides, in trade and investment. And I am glad that the new Malaysian Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Badawi is making a new start and had visited Singapore twice recently. In this context, I would like to ask the Minister whether Malaysia has come up with any new proposal regarding what the Malaysian Prime Minister called "low-lying fruits" and what is Singapore's position on these new overtures. Can we do more to speed up the process? Mr Ravindran: Madam, I share the same concern as the Chairman of the GPC and I would like the Minister to explain the queries raised by the GPC Chairman.”
“Sir, though a small country, Singapore has over the years extended assistance to a number of countries affected by natural disasters as well as other countries in need of technical training and assistance. We have also provided peace-keeping missions under UN sponsorship to various countries, like Timor-Leste. We have now reached a certain stage of development. May I ask if our participation in Timor-Leste makes a difference, for example? Was it worth the tremendous amount of resources deployed by Singapore? Have we done enough for the other less developed countries in South-east Asia? Further, are our assistance and missions welcomed and appreciated by the various countries? I hope that the money we spend and the assistance that we extend will help to enhance the image of Singapore overseas. [Mdm Deputy Speaker (Mrs Lim Hwee Hua) in the Chair] 4.30 pm”
“Sir, ASEAN was established in 1967 and it has indeed come a long way. Many fear, however, that the heydays of ASEAN are over. It is now in the doldrums. President Soeharto used to be the anchor man for ASEAN. He was the statesman who gave ASEAN the vision and cohesion. Before the rise of China and India, ASEAN used to be the top priority for other nations and investors. Now, most gravitate to China and India. Even in terms of trade, there is no common market like the European Union. For want of a better way, ASEAN countries, like Singapore, are trying to tie up FTAs with major trading partners, and we have done so with Japan and the USA. ASEAN has to get its act together and remake itself or reinvent itself. In this context, Sir, I wish to ask the Minister what he sees as the future of ASEAN. Is ASEAN a lame duck? Mr Ong Keng Yong, a Singaporean, is now the current ASEAN Secretary-General. Does this help to move ASEAN forward? I would also like to ask the Minister for his views on the ASEAN Security Community as proposed by Indonesia. Sir, ASEAN has convened a number of meetings on terrorism. May I ask the Minister on the outcome of such meetings? Further, what is Singapore's position on the early release of Abu Bakar Bashir in Jakarta? I think this is really a setback for all the efforts of the countries around the world to combat and contain terrorism.”
“Sir, I agree with my colleague, Ms Irene Ng, that the United States is the pre-eminent superpower in the world. Its presence is much felt in our region, in terms of economy and security. For Singapore, the US is our biggest export market as well as the most important source for foreign direct investments. In terms of security, we welcome US presence in the region as it provides us as a way of balancing power in the region. Singapore supported the coalition position on Iraq at the United Nations. Most recently, Singapore has sent a small military contingent to Iraq to help maintain security. Singapore also gives the Americans access to our air and naval facilities I understand that Singapore acts in our own national interests. In terms of geopolitics, trade and investment, it makes sense for us to align with the United States of America. However, in April last year, the Straits Times did an opinion survey on the outbreak of the Iraqi war. According to the survey, there were "fears about the possibility of revenge or of Singapore becoming a target for terrorists or others in the region because of its open support for the moves to remove the Iraqi regime." I wish to ask the Minister to give us the rationale for such close relationship and ties with the United States, and what does he see as the real benefits of such relationship. Are there also disadvantages? Will we, by association, be a prime target of opponents of the United States?”
“But there is now a glimmer of hope that there will be a settlement and I hope the North Korean Dear Leader will draw some lessons from Colonel Gadaffi of Libya. In terms of big powers, Sir, the USA remains the pre-eminent power in the region and beyond, showing her flag with the Seventh Fleet. And, we have a fast-rising and seemingly unstoppable China. The Chinese giant has indeed awakened and we have to live with it. From the South China Sea, let us move over to the Indian Ocean, where we have another big power - India. The Indian economy is being propelled into the big league by the power of outsourcing and computing, as well as the purchasing power of its growing middle class. 3.45 pm Sir, Singapore is being sandwiched between two oceans, two big powers, China and India. What do all these mean then for Singapore? We have to read and discern the power lines, the fault lines. We have to be nimble and adjust to the changes. We have to reposition ourselves. By our strategies and wits, we can ensure the long-term security and prosperity of our country. For example, we can leverage on our position as a strategic hub and make ourselves useful in business, trade and diplomacy. I therefore want to ask the Minister for his reading on the changes in the strategic landscape of the region, and what are the roles for Singapore in the world and the region.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the total sum to be allocated for Head N of the Main Estimates be reduced by $100. Sir, it has been two years since 9/11. Governments in many parts of the world are harnessing all their resources to tackle and combat terrorism. Religious extremism and terrorism have reared its ugly head in Southeast Asia. There was a series of bombings in Bali, Jakarta and Manila. War had broken in Iraq. The US-led coalition forces had ousted Saddam Hussein from power and a new Iraqi administration is being formed. Singapore has sent a military contingent to help maintain security in post-war Iraq. This year is a bumper year for elections in the region. The election fever is on. Malaysia is in the midst of a general election, with the major battle lines being drawn between the Barisan Nasional led by Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi and PAS. It is, indeed, a litmus test of the support for the new Malaysian Prime Minister. In Indonesia, President Megawati will have to campaign and campaign hard to win a new mandate. Likewise, President Arroyo of the Philippines is going to have a tough fight against presidential candidate Poe. Taiwan is also having one of its most hotly contested presidential elections ever, with President Chen Shuibian trading blow for blow with former Prime Minister Lien Chan of the Kuomintang. There is also the thorny issue of cross-straits relations between Taiwan and the PRC, with talks of independence and referendum threatening to disrupt the peace in the region. The region is indeed in a state of flux and change. The outcome of the elections will determine the future of the region. And in Northeast Asia, there is a potential flare-up with the North Korean Dear Leader Kim Jong Il, flashing his nuclear card at the world.”