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 4 of 12.
“We have contributed to the international missions in East Timor in both INTERFET and UNTAET. Peace and stability in our region is important for Singapore's security, and we are glad that we are able to make our contributions. Currently, the SAF has a platoon of peacekeepers in Fohorem in the western sector of East Timor, near the border. The deployment will soon go into its third rotation of six months. Our platoon is deployed as part of the New Zealand composite battalion, which includes contingents from Fiji, Ireland and Nepal. I visited our men in Fohorem. Their morale is high and they are doing their job well. The deployment is progressing well and we have had good reports from the UNTAET Headquarters in Dili on the platoon professionalism and operational readiness. The SAF has gained useful peacekeeping knowledge and experience from this deployment in East Timor. Singapore has committed to continue with our current deployment of a platoon of peacekeepers until this November. The UN Security Council is expected shortly to endorse the details of the composition and size of the peacekeeping force which will be established in East Timor after its independence day on 20th May. This will be UNTAET's successor mission, the UN Mission of Support in East Timor (UNMISET). When the details are announced, Singapore will assess the situation and determine what size force we will contribute. Our objective, as with all our commitments to UN peacekeeping operations, would be to participate in a manner whereby we can make a useful contribution.”
“The most serious problem for those who espouse the RMA is that enemies could counter or copy the capabilities so generated. Every breakthrough in offensive technology eventually inspires an advance in defence. My question is whether SAF is exploiting technology fully to give it the cutting edge and updating its strategy and doctrine accordingly. Next, SAF has been involved with UN peacekeeping operations for a number of years. Recently, we have sent SAF combat teams, as DPM has said, for peacekeeping missions in East Timor, besides medical and support group. In this context, I wish to ask the Minister for his assessment of the performance of our SAF contingents and the lessons we learn from such missions overseas. What are the reactions or state of morale of our troops in such missions? Are there plans to continue to send SAF teams to East Timor or to other peacekeeping missions elsewhere? The Second Minister for Defence (RAdm Teo Chee Hean): Mdm Chairman, I will deal with Dr Ong's question on peacekeeping and the Minister of State, Mr Cedric Foo, will deal with the subject of technology. About 900 SAF personnel have participated in UN peacekeeping missions around the world over the past dozen years. Today, there are about 75 SAF officers and men serving in three such UN missions - UNIKOM at the Iraq-Kuwait border, UNTAET in East Timor, UNMEE in Ethiopia and Eritrea. SAF officers also regularly participate in multilateral peacekeeping seminars and training programmes where they learn from as well as share the SAF's experience in peacekeeping with other armed forces. With regard to East Timor, SAF peacekeepers, as well as Singapore Police force personnel, were sent to support the UN efforts to bring peace and stability back to East Timor.”
“Mdm Chairman, compared with other armed forces, SAF is small. But, with technology, it can pack a powerful punch, maximising intelligence, mobility and firepower. Technology is the SAF's trump card in ensuring success in its strategy of deterrence and, if deterrence fails, in overwhelming the enemy with superior mobility and firepower. The rapid technological advances over the last 30 years have led to what is termed a Revolution in Military Affairs (RMA). Revolution in Military Affairs is broadly defined as a military revolution in which the entire armed force is transformed and renewed in terms of technology, organisation, strategy, tactics, training, doctrine and logistics. The RMA evolves around three advances. First, in terms of intelligence gathering, using sensors in satellites, aircraft or unmanned aircraft, which can monitor virtually everything going on in an area. Second, in processing intelligence through advanced command, control, communications and computing systems, known as C4, making sense of the data gathered by the sensors and displaying it on screen for target selection. Third, acting on the intelligence, for example, by using precision missiles to destroy enemy targets. The new warfare would be multi-dimensional, ie, air, sea and land operations would be increasingly integrated. Information and outer space would also be part of the modern war. Another important element of RMA is "information warfare", disabling enemy by wrecking his computing, financial, telecoms or air traffic control system with viruses, or electromagnetic pulses. There is indeed a serious concern that the "information strike" could crash one's computer system in the country.”
“Madam, National Servicemen are thankful indeed to the Government for increasing the NS tax relief by 50%, from $2,000 to $3,000 for active NSmen, and from $1,000 to $1,500 for inactive NSmen. Mindef has wisely chosen a national service armed forces over that of a standing regular force. All male Singapore citizens know that they have to do NS, and there is an element of sacrifice involved. If we do not bear arms and defend our own country, no one else would, and Singapore will perish. But NS allowances have been frozen for a number of years and have not been adjusted for cost of living or rising standards of living. Many parents do fork out extras to see their son through National Service. I did the same when my two sons went through NS. Do not mistake us. Parents do not grumble about such things, but it is high time that Mindef reviewed and readjusted the NS allowances. I am sure the morale of NSmen and their parents will go up. Any other ways for recognising the services and contributions of NSmen will also be much welcomed. NSmen do their best for the country. We should also do our best for our NSmen. I hope the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Defence will have some good news for NSmen today, this being the 35th Anniversary of National Service in Singapore. 5.30 pm”
“Madam, September 11 has changed the strategic landscape in Southeast Asia. Terrorism is global, terrorism is elusive. Southeast Asian nations are now challenged and targeted by amorphous terrorist groups. Unlike the open campaign previously against communist Vietnam at the height of the Cold War, it is difficult to ferret out and combat elusive terrorists. They seem to be everywhere. I wish to ask the Minister whether the SAF is ready and has contingency plans for dealing with outright terrorist attacks, hijacks, attacks on our computer information system, chemical warfare and biological warfare.”
“In fact, an American military chief recently voiced his concern over such developments in Manila, and this explains why the Americans are expanding their military presence on the ground, the Philippines. This brings me to what I think is the most dramatic change in the strategic environment after September 11: the frontline is no longer just something out there; it is right here within our shores. The frontline lies not in our military hardware or in our technical software. The frontline lies within our collective hardware. Do we feel, first and foremost, as Singaporeans committed heart and soul to the idea of Singapore, or are we being pulled apart from one another by a hundred different ideas? Sir, the potential for a mass exodus of people from a crisis-stricken Indonesia is another area of concern. Are there contingency plans in place if Indonesians were to fall again into a period of protracted economic crisis or protracted sectarian violence, thereby resulting in large uncontrolled population movements? Sir, after September 11, the nature of threats has changed. Not only have we to train and mobilise against conventional attacks, we have to give full attention to lower-intensity operations and terrorist attacks. Such low-intensity operations require highly trained personnel and specialised equipment. The SAF will have to be multi-tasked and there has to be close coordination between SAF, Police, Civil Defence and other related agencies. There is also the issue of privacy at sea, and the need for us, together with other nations, to ensure that the sea lanes of communications are safe. I therefore wish to ask the Minister whether the SAF has upgraded its capability and recast its strategy for the tasks ahead.”
“Sir, when we scan the security landscape around us today, the triangular relationship between US, China and Japan continues to be a focus of attention within the Asia-Pacific. The central issue here is how rising Japanese and Chinese national self-assertion mesh with each other as well as with the United States, the sole surviving superpower. While Chinese relations with US continue to be conditioned by the Taiwan issue, there is concern in the region over the increasingly evident desire of Tokyo to become a so-called "normal" state, able to fully exercise the political, diplomatic and military power commensurate with its economic clout. Across the Sea of Japan, the continued stand-off on the Korean Peninsula is another potential flashpoint, particularly given President Bush's recent identification of North Korea as one of the so-called "Axis of Evil" states. Closer to home, in the South China Sea, the Spratly Islands continue to be a contentious issue between China and several other regional states, including the Philippines, Malaysia and Vietnam. Sir, that brings us to the recent arms spending spree of Southeast Asian countries, for example, Malaysia. Some countries claim that their arms spending is to modernise, catch up and complete projects that were put on hold during the Asian financial crisis. However, given the historically competitive nature of the relationships within Southeast Asia, like between Thailand and Burma, Cambodia and Vietnam, Malaysia and Singapore, an apparent arms race is on. More than that, it is now becoming clear that following the ouster of the Taliban and the destruction of Al-Qaeda infrastructure in Afghanistan, Al-Qaeda operatives are seeking to set up new bases of operations in Southeast Asia.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the total sum to be allocated for Head J of the Main Estimates be reduced by $100. Sir, can I take items (a) and (d) together?”
“Sir, I wish to thank the Ministers for their full and comprehensive replies. I must say that we want to send a message out from here across the Causeway that Singaporeans are friendly, but we are resolute and determined to protect and defend Singapore's national interest. Moreover, I want to say that we do not wish to play a cat and mouse game with the Malaysian leaders. On that note, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The sum of $211,975,780 for Head N ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. The sum of $94,891,200 for Head N ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. Head J -”
“Sir, Singapore was privileged to be elected a non-permanent member of the United Nations Security Council. We are now three-quarter way through our term of office in the Security Council, and Singapore is again President of the Security Council this month. May I ask the Minister what valuable lessons have we learned in terms of the scope and operations of the Security Council, and whether such an experience is useful to a small nation like Singapore. For example, how do we give input and ideas in dealing with complex and difficult issues?”
“Sir, Indonesia is Singapore's biggest neighbour, and an important member of ASEAN. We wish Indonesia well. Jakarta's relationship with Singapore has vacillated from the affectionate Suharto, to frosty in Habibie, then the awkward in Wahid and now to cordial in Megawati, over the past few years. But I must say that, despite the stronger government-to-government ties that have accompanied Mrs Megawati's ascension to power, much needs to be done to broaden the web of relationship between the two countries. However, things are quite unsettled in Indonesia. Separatist movements are still active and there is fear of the Balkanisation of Indonesia. There are signs of factionalisation of the leadership, with the Vice-President doing his own thing and pulling in different directions. There is also concern that the leadership is not taking a strong stand on religious fundamentalism and terrorism. The sluggish handling of regional concerns over the terrorist links in Indonesia has undermined the credibility of the Megawati government. Islamic groups have gained influence and have asserted pressure on the government and increased their political demands. Singapore has offered to facilitate direct investigations by Indonesia to confirm that links exist between Indonesian suspects still at large in Indonesia and members of Jemaah Islamiyah (JI). Sir, what is the outcome of such Indonesian investigations? I wish to ask the Minister also for his comment on the political and economic situation in Indonesia and the state of our relations with Indonesia.”
“In other words, the water issue has been desecuritised. There is no need therefore for rhetoric and threats. No need for confrontation and conflict. There is no more the Damocles' sword hanging over our heads. Mr Long is indeed most perceptive. Sir, we remember that in this House on 5th April 2002, the Prime Minister confirmed that Singapore had called a tender for a desalination plant and has been operating a plant to produce NEWater using membrane technology with more NEWater plants to be built in the future. And the cost is indeed not prohibitive. The Prime Minister concluded that "it may be better for bilateral relations if we start to move a little away from our reliance on Malaysia for water." May I ask the Minister what is the reaction of Malaysia to our new found self-sufficiency in water? I also wish to ask the Minister to update us on the negotiations of the package of issues and whether the talks have resumed and whether Malaysia has sent a comprehensive note on their claims on the issue of land reclamation and the basis of such claims. The Minister may also care to draw some lessons on this roller-coaster up-and-down relationship between Singapore and Malaysia and put it in the context of history and politics for us.”
“Remember, earlier on in this House, BG George Yeo pointed out that our economic competitors are not only from the region, but from further afield, from China, for example. And its cost-efficient manufacturing capacities in China is one important area for us to look at. So we must thank Malaysia for giving us, indeed, a practice run. Sir, water has been a bone of contention between Singapore and Malaysia. Singapore is indeed deemed to be dependent on Malaysia for water and could be held to ransom. On the day of Separation, Tungku Abdul Rahman said that, "If Singapore's foreign policy is prejudicial to Malaysia's interests, we could always bring pressure to bear on them by threatening to turn off the water in Johor." And this Malaysian position has not changed over the years. Now and then, Malaysians have threatened to use water as a trump card against Singapore. Analysts and commentators have pointed out that this could lead to tension and open conflict. Even Mr Chiam See Tong, speaking in this House on 5th June 1997, declared that "cutting off the water supply is a very serious issue. It is like declaring war on Singapore." Lt General Zaini Mohd Said, a retired Malaysian General, wrote that water was a security issue that could lead to war. But the situation has changed. The first to pick this up amongst analysts is Mr Joey Long, a young researcher at the NTU Institute of Defence and Strategic Studies. Mr Long wrote a ground-breaking article on the water issue between Singapore and Malaysia in the December 2001 issue of "Contemporary Southeast Asia", a journal. Mr Long concludes that with the desalination and NEWater from recycling plants, Singapore has the means to achieve water self-sufficiency and is no longer held to ransom by Malaysia's use of water as a leverage.”
“Sir, following Singapore-Malaysia relations is like going on a roller-coaster ride. It zooms up and down, up and down, full of excitement and thrills. Never a dull moment, I must say. But, Sir, it is not good for the heart, not good for the heart of economic interests and not good for the heartlanders of both countries. Sir, we should all forget the past historical baggage of merger and separation and focus on the present business of a borderless new economy. In this regard, Singapore believes firmly in the "prosper thy neighbour" policy. But recently, the Malaysian Prime Minister, Dr Mahathir, was reported to have said that "there are many ways to skin a cat, and to skin Singapore, there are also many ways". This is a most unfriendly comment from the Prime Minister of a neighbouring country. We must remind the Malaysians that Singapore is no pussy cat. We are no pushover. They should jolly well know that it is not easy to skin a lion. And those who dare try will be badly mauled. So better do not try. Sir, this we can promise. The lions of Singapore will stand up and roar and defend Singapore, our homeland. Are all these Singapore bashings a preparation or prelude to the coming Malaysian election? I wonder. But we welcome fair competition, whether from Port Tanjung Pelepas, or KL International Airport, as long as it is done on a commercial basis. In this regard, there is no need for Singaporeans to moan and groan. No need to generate a climate of gloom and doom. Such competition helps us to sharpen our competitiveness and enhance our productivity. This is part and parcel of life. We need not be angry or resent such competition but welcome such competition positively. It makes us better. It makes us more competitive.”
“It is there. But ASEAN seems to have lost steam, lost its vigour - we can just carry on with a limping ASEAN - but for what purpose? But can we find a new sense of purpose, a new direction for ASEAN, a new lease of life for ASEAN? May I ask the Minister what role Singapore can play in re-engineering ASEAN, and making ASEAN relevant in the new scenario and the new strategic landscape. How can we strengthen ASEAN and create linkages with others outside the region, eg, the FTA with Japan and the USA? Sir, we are in the region, and would do our utmost to support ASEAN but, at the same time, we must not be boxed in, and should explore linkages globally.”
“Sir, over the years, ASEAN had earned its spurs and won recognition as a grouping to be reckoned with. ASEAN gave individual ASEAN nations a collective voice and a higher standing in international forums and meetings. Nations and agencies do factor in ASEAN in their assessment of geopolitics, as well as investments in the region. With President Surharto then at the helm of Indonesia, and playing a positive leadership role in the region, ASEAN surged ahead. But times have changed. The Asian financial crisis and recession hover over the region. Surharto is no longer in charge and Indonesia is beset with internal problems. In the meantime, ASEAN has grown to ten. My question is: is ASEAN becoming too large and too disparate, with nations as diverse as Myanmar, Cambodia and Laos, with varying degrees of economic development, and wide varieties of political cultures and systems? Myanmar, for example, attracts a great deal of attention from the international community and media over human rights issue. Myanmar recently released Ms Aung San Suu Kyi from house arrest. This is a right step and a good development. Would the Minister please give us his assessment of the latest development in Myanmar and whether it would lead to liberalisation and opening of the country for democracy as well as for foreign investment? The overall question is this: is ASEAN becoming unwieldy? It will be even more unwieldy if somehow East Timor is admitted to ASEAN. At the same time, the East Asian nations of China, Taiwan, Korea and Japan are pulling ahead of ASEAN in economic development and, in particular, in attracting foreign investments. ASEAN therefore faces the risk of being marginalised in the intense competition for investment, talent and entrepreneurship. Sir, we cannot do without ASEAN.”
“Japan, still struggling to recover from the long recession, is taking a new look at defence, seeking to pass new legislation for its defence forces and to play a larger role, and the Japanese Prime Minister even made a personal visit to the Yasukuni Shrine, despite international outcry. The US, for the first time, has committed a significant number of what is called "ground trainers" in the Philippines. This is the first time in years that American ground troops are back in the region. Sir, what do we make of all these? How do we manoeuvre as a small country? How do we navigate in the new uncharted and treacherous waters? How do we create space and advance our national interests when circumstances are clearly less than favourable? 2.30 pm Sir, can I continue with my next cut?”
“Religious fundamentalism and terrorism could be a volatile mix threatening the peace and stability of the region as well as the economic well-being of our people. The case of JI clearly confirmed the international dimension of terrorism. Singapore, KL, Manila and Jakarta need, therefore, to liaise closely on preventive measures and counter-terrorism. The Minister may wish to comment on the state of cooperation amongst the ASEAN partners on this issue and how we can further strengthen our security network in the region. Sir, the strategic landscape has indeed changed. September 11 has altered the triangular relationship amongst the US, China and Japan, and changed and altered the balance of power in this region. China's relationship with the United States has turned for the better after September 11. Both are now combating the common enemy in terrorism. China, as we know, has its own Muslim separatist problem in Xinjiang. Therefore, in this climate, the spy plane incident, the Taiwan issue and human rights are now put on the backburner and are not so contentious. And China glows in the limelight of WTO, the APEC Summit and the coming Olympics. It was, indeed, a good turn of events for China. After September 11, Malaysia also has a new beginning in its relationship with the US. All past frictions are happily forgotten, and Malaysian Prime Minister Dr Mahathir has found a new role as the moderate voice of Islamic nations. And this is much welcomed and appreciated by Washington, as some of us have seen last night on CNN.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the total sum to be allocated for Head N of the Main Estimates be reduced by $100. Sir, much has happened since the last Budget debate. It was a trying year; it was a watershed year. We watched in horror and shock as the World Trade Centre Twin Towers collapsed into a heap of rubble right before our eyes on television. Thousands perished. September 11 changed our lives. The world is not the same anymore. Terrorism looms large. Terrorism can strike anywhere, anytime at anyone. We have to be prepared. We have to be alert. Sir, nations have to sink their differences and unite in countering terrorism and preserve lives. Individuals, corporations and nations have, one and all, to redo their sums, reassess their positions and re-engineer their strategies and tactics. Being the prime victim as well as the superpower and leader of the free world, the United States takes the lead in combating and countering terrorism. Nations around the world have come together to share resources and intelligence in implementing counter-measures against terrorism. Terrorism is global, so must be the fight against terrorism. Likewise, Singapore has come out strongly against terrorism. We have worked with the United States and other nations to counter terrorism. It is the right thing to do. We have to stand up and be counted. It is also, Sir, in our interest, as a small nation, to do so. We are vulnerable. We need to work with other nations. If not, when we are in trouble and we ask for help, they will ask, "Where were you when you were needed most?" Sir, within Southeast Asia, September 11 has opened up potential fault lines of race and religion across the whole region.”
“Sir, I would like to say that I am personally satisfied that we, Singapore, are equal, fair and impartial. But I would like to ask the Minister whether he cares to elaborate that in our position in the UN Security Council, of which we are a member, whether we could draw any lessons from this very difficult situation and very difficult time, because we are a very small nation. And if the impasse continues in the Middle East, could we, as a small country, together with other nations, take any further steps to improve the situation?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the Minister has stated that a decision on such overstayer cases is left to the hospital doctors. But who reviews the doctors? Is there an avenue for a second opinion? As he said, doctors may differ in opinion. Will he care to put a mechanism for appeal or review of any cases? Where families are not happy, could they bring it up through some channel, rather than come to our MPS, then we appeal to the Minister? It will be too late, it will take too much time.”
“Sir, I would like to ask the Minister whether, under the 1995 agreement, or under any international law, is Singapore obliged to notify Malaysia, or consult Malaysia, when we want to do any reclamation.”
“I would like to ask the Minister how binding is this 1995 agreement between the two countries, and could any one party alter it unilaterally, or interpret it differently.”
“Sir, if the people do not understand the bigger scenario or support and trust the Government, the best-laid plan we have will come to waste. In this debate, it amply shows that we have to not only convince the people, we have to convince our own MPs in this House. We have to make a start. On that note, Sir, I support the motion.”
“It is only fair that Malaysia also respects our sovereign rights and national interest. It will be better for Malaysia to send Singapore a full and comprehensive diplomatic note on all issues of concern and we can respond accordingly, rather than talking or boxing through the press. Please hurry, send us a note. We want a diplomatic exchange, not a media exchange or an exchange through Parliamentary speeches. Notwithstanding this, I urge Singapore and Malaysia together to put the past behind us, put away the historical baggage of merger and separation, and work closely together for the good of the people on both sides of the Causeway. Sir, we cannot choose our neighbours. Geography and history have devised and placed us side by side. If we can choose, it would be easier. But we can choose to work towards a win-win situation, to the mutual benefit of both countries. This is all the more important and indeed imperative in this inter-dependent world. All the more, as ASEAN faces new challenges, stress and strains from the regional downturn and the new economic challenges from the fast growing East Asian region led by China. Sir, we can see the big picture, we can understand the strategic consideration and the global dimensions before us. But we must relate and explain this to our heartlanders, to our residents, to the man-in-the-street. We must carry the ground with us. Otherwise, in a crisis, we may fall apart or pull apart by external forces and internal divisions. In this, we must not talk down or talk over the heads of the people. We must make the effort to explain in clear terms to our residents, for example, through dialogues, presentations and skits.”
“3 is "Whatever Singapore has done, it is fair game for Malaysian politicians to criticise because, as always, the Singapore Government has failed to observe Rule No. 1". Rule No. 4 is "If the Singapore Government sticks to the letter of any agreement signed with Malaysia, it is branded as too legalistic and is accused of not upholding the spirit of Rule No. 1". Rule No. 5 is "Any comments on our policies by Malaysian politicians are to be treated as good neighbourly advice because of Rule No. 1". Rule No. 6 is "Any comments on our neighbour will be deemed offensive, intrusive and abusive because the Singapore Government will be seen to have failed to observe Rule No. 1". All this sounds familiar to us. It seems that only Malaysians have sensitivities. Mr Yu has hit the nail on its head. My GPC colleague, Mr Ravindran spoke with conviction on Singapore-Malaysia relations in this very Chamber last Tuesday. He must be right on target, but now he has the distinction of drawing fire from Malaysian Ministers and MPs in the Malaysian Parliament. Mr Ravindran, as Mr Yu predicted, was accused of being insensitive. More abusive words were used, but I would not care to repeat them because the Speaker might rule it unparliamentary. Mr Ravindran's only mistake was that he failed to observe Rule No. 1. Last weekend, to be sure and to satisfy myself, my family and I took a boat ride to the waters off Punggol, Pulau Ubin and Pulau Tekong. It was in good weather and my guide was a kelong owner. I can say that our land reclamation is well within our own territorial waters. And I assure you that I was not fishing in troubled waters. Sir, Singapore will be mindful of the concerns of Malaysia, our nearest neighbour.”
“There is no doubt that they will fight for Singapore and, if necessary, die for the country. Indeed, my second son, James, is studying overseas and one day he told me that at the first sign of trouble, he would fly back to Singapore to bear arms. I am very proud of him. Sir, in view of this supreme sacrifice, we must give due recognition to our national servicemen. But the limited national servicemen allowances have been kept frozen for a number of years. They have not kept pace with economic growth, cost of living or inflation. Some parents of NS men fork out money to help their sons with their expenses during NS. They do not mind but this is the hardest on parents of lower income groups. I believe that it is high time Mindef reviewed their NS allowances and give our NSmen their dues. Sir, recently, relations between Singapore and Malaysia have hit another rough patch. We are now quite accustomed to this roller-coaster-like relationship between Singapore and Malaysia. But what bothers me is that across the Causeway, Singapore is always seen to be at fault and Malaysia is seemingly blameless. This attitude is not helpful, to say the least. This rather unsatisfactory scenario is best summed up, in my opinion, by a reader, Mr Yu Kok Wah, who wrote in the Forum page of the Straits Times on 9th March this year. According to Mr Yu, the picture that emerged over the years was what he labelled as Rule No. 1, that is "The Singapore Government must always be sensitive to the needs of the Malaysian government and its politicians". And Rule No. 2 is "Before Singapore does anything, it has to adhere to Rule No. 1". Rule No.”
“Terrorists could well have detonated the bombs in Singapore. Buildings might have collapsed. Trade would be affected. There would be stupendous loss of lives. This would have scared off investors and tourists. MNCs might relocate their plants elsewhere. Jobs would be lost. The economy, already in recession, would plummet. Worse still, it would put a tremendous strain on our multi-racial and multi-religious harmony. Despair, anger and distrust would reign. It would be the severest test to our nationhood. That this did not happen does not mean that it would not happen. We have to be vigilant. We have to be prepared. We must therefore work even harder to promote multi-racial harmony and bonding. I applaud the Government's efforts to form Inter-Racial Confidence Circles throughout the island. Whether in our schools, our workplace or home, multi-racial harmony must be our motto and way of life. I therefore urge Singaporeans to invite their neighbours of all races to visit their homes and to join them in their celebrations and festivals, be it Hari Raya, Chinese New Year or Deepavali. Mr Speaker, Sir, the terrorist threat and the continuing instability in Southeast Asia underline once again the importance of security and defence, and the vital role of the Police and the SAF. Sir, in this connection, we are all well aware that the pillars of our defence are our national servicemen. We know that national service is a service to the nation and involves an element of sacrifice and indeed sometimes, supreme sacrifice. I would like to refer to the point raised by Dr Vivian Balakrishnan and Dr Wang Kai Yuen. I had done national service myself. I have two sons and both of them are Operationally Ready National Service officers.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, thank you for allowing me to join in the debate. Sir, September 11th was a turning point in the history of mankind. It was indeed a defining moment in our lives. Through CNN coverage, we watched in horror as the World Trade Centre Twin Towers collapsed right in front of our eyes. Thousands lost their lives in an instant. We were stunned. We were numbed. Was this the beginning of the end of the civilised world? Our lives have been changed. Terrorism can strike anywhere, anytime. It also strikes at the innocent. Terrorism has globalised. So must be the fight against terrorism. Counter-terrorism has to be global. The United States has taken the lead in this fight against terrorism. Singapore, too, must support the anti-terrorist measures in our own national interests. However, some may ask why should Singapore be so closely identified with the United States and seen to be supporting the forces aligned against terrorism. The answer is simple. It is the right thing to do. We must take a stand against wanton destruction of innocent lives. We must ensure safety in travel. It affects each and every one of us. If we do not stand up and be counted, who will come to our help, if terrorism rears its ugly head in Singapore? Others would then ask, "Where were you when we needed you most? Now you are asking for our help?" Sir, in this inter-connected world of security, trade and investment, we cannot fudge the issue or sit on the fence. It will be foolhardy to presume that the horrors of terrorism will not strike Singapore. Indeed, as the discovery and exposure of the JI plotters amply demonstrated, we have to be ever more vigilant against terrorist cells and the protractors of violence. Sir, Singapore has been lucky so far.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, it is my pleasure to support the nomination of Mrs Lim Hwee Hua. Mr Speaker: There being no other proposals, I declare that Mr Chew Heng Ching and Mrs Lim Hwee Hua to have been duly elected as Deputy Speakers of this Parliament. [Applause]. BILL INTRODUCED POLICE FORCE (AMENDMENT) BILL "to amend the Police Force Act (Chapter 235 of the 1985 Revised Edition)", presented by the Minister for Home Affairs (Mr Wong Kan Seng); read the First time; to be read a Second time on the next available sitting of Parliament, and to be printed. PRESIDENT'S ADDRESS Debate on the Address (First Allotted Day)”
“At the same time, the higher criteria for such permits will ensure better selection and give a balance to the situation. Finally, I hail the move by the Government for a voluntary monthly wage cut of 10% for senior civil servants, political office holders and Members of Parliament. I commend the Government for the sacrifice that it is undertaking for the common good of our people, and setting an excellent example of selfless service to the people. By this move, the Government demonstrates clearly that it understands the problems of the man-in-the-street, that it stands shoulder to shoulder with the people and bond with the people, in this moment of crisis. Sir, the Government has shown the way for us in this crisis. All Singaporeans must rally and unite as one people behind the Government. Then our future will be secured. Sir, Singapore has weathered many storms before, since our separation from Malaysia in 1965. This crisis is no different. We shall overcome, but we must keep faith and run the race. No problem is insurmountable if the people and the Government work closely hand in hand to face the challenges ahead. Sir, make no mistake about it. We, as a people, will emerge stronger from this crisis and we will have a deeper sense of common destiny and nationhood. 4.08 pm”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I believe that we must thank the Government for this very generous, comprehensive, bold and far-reaching package of $11.3 billion. I agree with my colleague, Prof. Low Seow Chay, that it is a good economic package. It is definitely not an election ploy, as alleged by the Opposition. I believe that this package deserves the support of all Singaporeans regardless of party line. Sir, we are facing a crisis of enormous proportions, and where the people are crying out for help, it would be wrong not to do something about it. It will be wrong not to support such a package. We should do what is in our national interest and what is good for the common good of all Singaporeans. I am therefore glad that the Government is leaving no stone unturned and taking all necessary steps to assist the lower income families, the unemployed and the elderly. In particular, I welcome the Economic Downturn Relief Scheme which I believe will bring immediate and practical assistance to affected families, and help them to tide over the current recession. The involvement of the CCCs and grassroots leaders is a plus point, as I believe that the grassroots leaders know the ground well and they can better administer such a scheme. They can follow up by visiting the families and take follow up action. I also welcome the more stringent criteria for the issue of employment passes and work permits. This will help to address the concern of some Singaporeans on the competition for jobs in the recession. However, we must bear in mind that there is no doubt that we need good foreign workers to ensure our economic competitiveness. The world is changing. If we do not have good foreign workers, we may not get the investments that we need to produce better results for all Singaporeans.”
“Sir, the GPC for Defence and Foreign Affairs supports this Bill. It is timely indeed to amend the Enlistment Act which was instituted in 1970. Since then, generations of national servicemen have been trained to bear arms. National service is now very much part and parcel of the Singaporean way of life. With our experience over the years and cycles of training, both locally and overseas, we are now in a better position to redefine and fine-tune the procedures for enlistment and national service. National servicemen and their employers would definitely welcome and embrace the streamlined and simplified method for claiming make-up pay. Such exemplary cut in red tape should be followed and emulated by other Government agencies. In particular, all national servicemen would welcome the redefinition of civilian remuneration to include bonuses and any relevant pay components. This ensures that Operationally Ready National Servicemen will not lose out when they go for their in-camp training. Sir, I also welcome the provision for compounding certain offences under the Enlistment Act. This will simplify the procedures, and save time and resources of the court and the personnel involved. I wish to ask the Minister for examples and categories of offences that will be compounded. Sir, I agree that a national serviceman called up to answer charges and attend trial for alleged offences while he was subject to military law should not be entitled to claim reimbursement or compensation for loss of civilian remuneration. But if the national serviceman is subsequently acquitted, will he be eligible to claim for loss of civilian remuneration for the time he spent in attending military court? Sir, I support the Bill.”
“Sir, first, a point of clarification. When I earlier talked about our agenda at the UN Security Council, I did not mean the formal meeting agenda, but what we set out to achieve and what we set out to do. In any case, we want to thank the Ministers and the Senior Parliamentary Secretary for their very comprehensive answers, and I am confident that our foreign relations are in good hands. On that note, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.”
“Sir, I do believe, in the case of Singapore, that small is beautiful. Notwithstanding our minuscule size, Singapore has clinched a seat in the United Nations Security Council. I am glad that our hopes and dreams over the last few years have been realised. I would like to ask what is the agenda of Singapore in the UN Security Council. What are our roles and priorities in the UN Security Council? To what extent will Singapore, as a representative, be able to reflect the security concerns of ASEAN and our region? Have we channelled more resources, including manpower, to our UN mission in New York, so that it can function even more effectively in the Security Council? Singapore has participated in UN peace-keeping missions since 1989. We had sent small contingents to UNIKOM in Kuwait and UNTAC in Cambodia. We have done well. The latest is the UN-sanctioned INTERFET mission in East Timor, where we have sent medical and logistical support teams. May I ask the Minister whether Singapore intends to increase the scope and quality of our participation in UN peace-keeping missions in the future, when opportunities present themselves?”
“Sir, I would like to thank the Minister for his reply on Malaysia-Singapore relations and am glad that progress is being made. Sir, we move on to Indonesia. Indonesia is our big neighbour to the south. Standard and Poor's, the financial agency, citing political unrest, has cut the long-term rating for Indonesia to negative. This downgrading reflects the increasingly uncertain socio-political situation in Indonesia and has negative implications on the economic performance of the country. The rupiah has also fallen to 10,000 to the US dollar, hitting a 29-month low. There are separatist movements in Aceh and Irian Jaya, and in Kalimantan, the Dayaks have massacred hundreds of Madurese. Law and order is breaking down in some parts, and there could be problems of refugees fleeing and seeking safe havens elsewhere. With such developments in Indonesia, Singapore has to be watchful and has to keep track of all these events. The golden days of Singapore-Indonesia relations, in retrospect, were when President Suharto was in power in Indonesia. Then we had President Habibie, who called us the "little red dot". We thought we would fare much better with President Abdurrahman Wahid, but it was not to be. There were also twists and turns. Sir, despite this, are there new areas in which the two countries can cooperate to our mutual benefit? Are there potential problems we are likely to encounter in the coming years? We wish Indonesia every success in its economic restructuring, and hope that Singapore and Indonesia can work closely together to our mutual benefit.”
“" I therefore wish to ask the Minister on the progress and outcome of such negotiations, and when does he expect the negotiations to be concluded.”
“Sir, Singapore and Malaysia are close neighbours. Some say too close for comfort. But we cannot escape the proximity imposed by geography nor alter our historical past. Willy-nilly, we have to live as neighbours, as best as we can be. Singapore-Malaysia relations have been characterised as two neighbours living in semi-detached houses, but separated by a common wall, as the Malaysian Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Badawi puts it. Or as Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong amplifies, it is like living in two semi-detached houses located within a condominium estate and sharing common facilities, with common responsibility as well. In such a setting, the neighbours get together to socialise and build up friendship and get to understand and appreciate each other better. Admittedly, relationship between Singapore and Malaysia has its ups and downs. The bottomline is that it is in the interest of both countries to work together to resolve any difficulty and build up our common ground and understanding. All can be winners together. It can be a win-win situation for both. In a recent visit to Singapore, the Malaysian Deputy Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Abdullah Badawi said, "Singapore and Malaysia should improve our trade relations, to prosper together and ensure peace in the region." In this context, we learn with great interest that Singapore and Malaysia are continuing the negotiation on the package of outstanding issues between the two countries, and Singapore has agreed to extend the 10th February 2001 deadline for the relocation of the Malayan Railway station in Tanjong Pagar. In a recent interview with the press, Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong said that "we have given our proposal to Malaysia and we have informal feedback that they are responding to the proposal.”
“My next question is: has political uncertainty impaired the ASEAN Regional Forum, the only multilateral platform in Asia-Pacific, to address security issues? Has the ARF been able to move beyond confidence-building to preventive diplomacy in its role? Is there still a role for the ARF to address the security issues and the problems of regional hotspots in the Asia-Pacific region? Mr R. Ravindran (Bukit Timah): Sir, many of the ASEAN members are still recovering from the 1997 economic crisis. There is still great disparity in social, economic and political developments in the various ASEAN countries. There is even a perception amongst observers that ASEAN lacks dynamism and unity of purpose because of members' internal problems and priorities. In addition, it has become clear that Northeast Asia has become the new centre for foreign direct investments. With China's entry into the World Trade Organisation, we can see a bigger pool of investments from Southeast Asia. Sir, I would like to ask the Minister for an update on the state of affairs within ASEAN. In particular, I would like to ask the Minister on how ASEAN is coordinating to attract foreign direct investments to the region. 2.15 pm Sir, I would also like to ask the Minister on the prospects for the ASEAN+3 process developing into some kind of an East Asia summit. In particular, I would like to ask the Minister whether ASEAN would lose its identity in such an East Asian summit where it can be overwhelmed by the larger East Asian countries.”
“Further, how can we share and educate Singaporeans on the dangers and pitfalls in the region, without alarming the public and the investors? Sir, ASEAN has featured prominently these last 30 years in matters of peace and stability in Southeast Asia. However, since the financial crisis, questions have been raised about ASEAN's very future. The frequent leadership changes in the ASEAN countries, and the rapid admission of new members into ASEAN, have prompted analysts around the world to doubt whether ASEAN itself will be able to act cohesively, and expeditiously. The domestic political stability and political transition in Indonesia, the Philippines, Thailand and, to some extent, Malaysia, have cast a shadow over the prestige, clout and capability of ASEAN and its ability to maintain regional stability and play a positive role in the international arena. Has ASEAN become too large with 10 members, though some may say it is perfect 10? The question is: is it increasingly difficult for ASEAN to speak with one voice in the world forum? ASEAN has been a useful vehicle for the countries in the region and it is imperative for all the 10 ASEAN countries to ensure that it remains so. The challenge is, therefore, on how to reinvent and reinvigorate ASEAN, so that it can play new roles in the new millennium, forge unity amongst member countries and work towards the promotion of peace, stability and economic progress in the region. I wish, in particular, to ask the Minister for his assessment on the outcome of the ASEAN Informal Summit held in Singapore recently and the recent ASEAN-EC meeting, as well as his comments on the ASEAN+3 formula, ie, ASEAN plus China, Japan and South Korea, whether ASEAN+3 will take off and become a platform for action in the future.”
“While the Singapore Government can manage the internal implications of this paradox, it can do little to alter the powerful political and social forces affecting such key neighbours as Indonesia and, to a lesser extent, Malaysia." The challenge for Singapore then is to balance the needs of foreign investors seeking a secure base in the region, while maintaining good relations with often difficult neighbours. Sir, Singapore is an oasis of peace and stability, but some neighbours are still reeling from the after-shock of the Asian economic crisis. The Chinese character for crisis, "wei chi", projects danger as well as opportunity. There are elements of opportunity of hope in the midst of danger. How can Singapore then minimise the impact of danger and maximise that of opportunity for progress? This is not dissimilar to the English proverb that every dark cloud has a silver lining. These axioms from both East and West are perhaps helpful or instructive when we view the regional turbulence swirling around us. In this regard, I would like to ask the Minister for his strategic overview and assessment of the problems and prospects in our region. I hope the Minister can give us a forecast of likely political storms, and tell us if there is any chance of sunshine or rainbow breaking out in the region in the coming years. I know that it is difficult to forecast the political weather. Political turbulence, by its very nature, is very unpredictable. It would be helpful, however, if the Minister can give us his assessment of the political weather and chart out for us the rocks and the shallow waters. How can Singapore sail through potentially dangerous waters? What can we do as a nation to promote peace, stability and security in our region?”
“Across the horizon, all notice that China is emerging as a great power, and the Americans are increasingly viewing Beijing as a strategic rival. Japan appears to be slowly, but surely, shedding its post-war inhibitions to play a larger role in the Asia Pacific region. Sir, what is the likely impact on Southeast Asia if all these great powers were to assert themselves? In Asia and Pacific, therefore, we will be affected one way or the other by any changes in this triangular relationship of the United States, China and Japan. In fact, China recently increased its defence expenditure by nearly 18%. The US expressed its concern, and said it would continue to sell weapons to Taiwan. How will China conduct its trade and foreign relations after its entry into the World Trade Organisation? The answer to this question would surely affect the power configuration in the region. Sir, we now have a new Republican President in the White House. Will President George W Bush and his team be more sympathetic to Taiwan and be more critical of the human rights situation in China? Will the US continue to be engaged in the region, maintain its military presence and fly the flag, and thereby play a role in the balance of power in the region? The Southeast Asian region is beset with economic problems and traumatized by internal upheavals. Governments come and go swiftly, and in some parts, no one is sure who is in power. Singapore is in danger, or in the unenviable position, of being the good house in a bad neighbourhood. The Control Risks Group, which assesses a country's security and political risks, reports that: "Singapore's economy and much of its prosperity is dependent on it serving as a haven between the increasingly turbulent region.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the total sum to be allocated for Head O of the Main Estimates be reduced by $100. Sir, from time to time, some of our neighbours have criticised Singapore for all kinds of things we have done or not done, eg, for not doing more in economic assistance and, for doing too much in maximising our position as the financial and communications hub for the region. For being the "little red dot" on the one hand, and on the other, of being the over dominant port. Sir, let it be known that Singapore has the interests of the region at heart. We cannot relocate and shift out of the region. We are here, for better or for worse, we are all part and parcel of the region. If the region prospers, we will also prosper. It is, therefore, in our interest that our neighbours prosper. It is a win-win situation. Our motto, therefore, is "Prosper thy neighbour". An important issue is the distribution and balance of power in the region. This is of key strategic concern to all the countries. There is consensus that in the post Cold War era, the strategic situation is not bipolar. There are two perspectives on this. One is that of an emerging multi-polarity, with the United States, China, Japan, Russia and India as players. In theory, China, Russia and others could form a coalition to balance the US-Japan alliance, should the latter grow too domineering. The other perspective is an American pre-eminence, which is the present trend, but one that is not accepted readily by China, India and Russia. There is, therefore, this tension which is manifested in the various diplomatic offensives in recent years, particularly by China and India, and more recently, by Russia, and the debate over the National Missile Defence (NMD).”
“Sir, I want to thank the Ministers for their very comprehensive answers and also the Minister of State for his assurances on the audit. And I hope that we need not raise it again next year and let the case rest. Thank you very much. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.”
“The Auditor-General highlighted that there were serious irregularities in advances given to a company and that between June 1998 and June 1999, the advance of $2.13 million exceeded requirements by $645,000 to $1.13 million. Sir, the Auditor-General reports that Audit test checks at three camps on records of meals supplied, revealed many discrepancies between the camps' records and the suppliers' invoices of the number of meals consumed. The Auditor-General further observes that there were many alterations to the camps' documents which were not properly endorsed. There was also over-payment for food supplied as a result of payment made on higher prices and not on tendered prices. There was also misappropriation for the sub-imprest at a SAF camp and misappropriation from a unit fund of a SAF camp. Sir, it is in the public interest to seek clarification from MINDEF on the report of the Auditor-General. Again, I urge MINDEF to take all the necessary actions and put in place preventive measures to ensure that all procedures comply with the financial regulations of the Government.”
“Sir, I want to thank the Minister of State for his reply. But just as a matter of clarification, under the law, allowances are CPF payable unless they are exempted. But I take the Minister's point that national service allowance is actually part of our service and duty, and that we should have an element of sacrifice. I do not agree with the Nominated Member that we use this to build up the CPF reserve of our national servicemen or to help start a family. I think they are quite different things altogether. The element of sacrifice should still remain. What we are asking is revision of the allowance to keep pace with inflation. Sir, in the 1999 and 2000 Budget debates, my GPC raised the issue of compliance with financial regulations and the Audit report by the Auditor-General on the Ministry of Defence. I am afraid this year we have to raise again the observations of the Auditor-General on MINDEF's financial procedures for FY1999/2000. Sir, according to the Auditor-General, there was inadequate control on advance payments to MINDEF's suppliers, resulting in a total of $1.1 billion advance payment not being reported to the Auditor-General's office. The Auditor-General states that he has no assurance that MINDEF has accurate information on the total amount of advances standing to its credit at any point of time. The Auditor-General states that MINDEF's accounting officer submitted a listing of 405 accounts in May 2000, but later changed it to a total listing of 411 accounts. Further, the Auditor-General points out that the opening fund balances of 70 accounts did not tally with the closing balances, with one account having a difference of $139,783.”
“Now, Record III has recognised this problem and has recommended a review of the NS training cycle for NSmen in local institutions of higher learning so that they will not be caught between the demands of academic studies and NS training. Sir, I would be grateful to hear the Minister's comments on these points and also to ask whether the Government has accepted all the other recommendations of Record III.”
“But I wish to ask the Minister if he would consider revising the NS allowance, to keep pace with inflation, and to help families who are hard hit by the economic downturn. Mr Charles Chong (Pasir Ris): Sir, thank you for allowing me to join in this debate. I would also like to thank Dr Ong Chit Chung for saying half of the things which I wanted to say in this topic. Sir, I support most of the recommendations of Record III, but would like to seek the Minister's response to a few of the recommendations. It was stated in the Report that the Committee was mindful that golf courses take up land in land scarce Singapore. Nonetheless, it went on to recommend that a new golf course be developed at a suitable site. It is my hope that this will not be done at the expense of more pressing needs for the land. Sir, the other recommendation, already mentioned by Dr Ong, was the need for clarification pertaining to the award of bonus points to deserving NSmen for admission into institutions of higher learning. While this proposal will provide some benefits and recognition to those who have performed well during National Service, will it place Singaporeans who are not eligible to serve NS, such as women, at a slight disadvantage? Finally, Sir, in-camp training for NSmen studying in local institutions of higher learning is currently conducted during vacation periods to minimise disruptions to their studies. With the education system now emphasising more project works and industrial attachments during the vacation periods, the current training cycle may need to be changed to accommodate this new situation.”
“Sir, I want to thank the Minister for his assurance that the SAF is fighting fit. Sir, I believe that all National Servicemen would thank MINDEF for convening Record III, the Third Committee to Recognise the Contributions of Operationally Ready NSmen to Total Defence. The recommendations of Record III are far-reaching indeed. Here, I wish to highlight two areas which I believe have practical significance. Top on my list is the exit permit control. Previously, NSmen have to apply for Exit Permits whenever they travel overseas. Now, with Record III's recommendations, NSmen need only apply if they travel overseas for more than three months. Moreover, a standardised multi-trip Exit Permit has been introduced to cut down red-tape, and applications can be done online via Internet. This would save us time and eliminate all the hassle. Sir, I know, as my sons now do not have to queue up every so often when they travel overseas for studies or holiday, and I do not have to follow them to CMPB. It is quite a great relief to us. The other recommendation of significant value to NSmen is the award of bonus points for entry to institutes of higher learning. Such bonus points are part of the point system for co-curricular activities (or CCA) and is in recognition of NS contributions and performance. May I ask the Minister to elaborate on how the bonus points will be awarded and when will the scheme be launched. Further, will such a scheme place the ladies who do not do National Service at a distinct disadvantage? With regard to allowances for full-time National Servicemen, we know that allowances are deliberately kept low and are not meant to be full-pay, but as part of the sacrifice, as part of their service.”
“We will also continue to work with the international community to ensure that such potential threats do not undermine our security. While our camps may look comfortable and our food may be good, though not as good as the home-cooked food of Dr Ong, which I had the opportunity to sample after his invitation last year, I must say that the standard of operational training and discipline is maintained. So while the camps are comfortable, they are designed for the soldiers to rest when they need to rest, so that they will be ready to train vigorously with full intensity and with full concentration when they need to do so. 4.30 pm”