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 9 of 12.
“I find that Mr Low's statement is incredibly naive and beyond comprehension. And I am sure that if he were not a politician he will not believe in himself either. Let us look at the Government's record. In 1987, the Government announced that its long-term goal was to cap civil service manpower numbers at the December 1986 level of 108,700. There will be zero growth in manpower numbers beyond that figure and the Government's aim was to limit the size of Government so as to release more manpower and financial resources for the private sector so that it could be the main engine of growth in the future. The Government has also embarked on a privatisation exercise in which all commercially viable activities of Government would be spun off as companies in which citizens will be shareholders. Do these actions suggest that Government is determined to grow larger and more powerful? Surely not. Since 1986, corporate and top personal income tax rates have been steadily reduced from 40% in that year to 30% and 33% respectively today, and will be further reduced to 27% and 30% respectively next year. In just about every year since 1986, whenever the Government budget has enjoyed significant surpluses, part of these surpluses have been returned to the taxpayers and the public by way of tax cuts or tax rebates. The Government has also committed to make, over the next five to eight years, transfers of $5 billion to an Edusave fund and $1 billion to Medifund. In addition, legislation has been enacted to place all the accumulated past reserves of Government under the supervision of an Elected President. Are all these moves the action of a Government determined to grow bigger and more powerful? Surely not.”
“The US does not have a GST or VAT system. Instead, the US operates a state sales tax system which suffers from cascading and is therefore highly regressive. Cascading takes place when tax is levied upon tax at all levels of the transaction chain. This does not happen for a GST system. In his Cost Review Committee Report, Mr Low inexplicably repeats his allegation that the GST tax could have a compounding effect. He illustrates this by calculation in which a 3% GST is applied to the schedule of polytechnic fee increases over the period 1983 to 1991. His calculations purport to show that the compounding effect increases fees by 57% or more than it should be over the 8-year period. Mr Low's allegation is identical to the statements he made in Parliament during the Second Reading debate of the GST Bill, at which time his calculations were shown to be wrong because he had assumed that the GST would cascade and that tax would be imposed on tax. It is wrong because the GST system is specifically designed to avoid cascading, as would happen in the case of a simple sales tax. The correct version of the calculation in Table 3.7 of his report has been included in Appendix 2 of the CRC Report. We have to ask ourselves why Mr Low has repeated his allegation although he has been told that he is wrong. It cannot be that he and his advisers do not understand simple arithmetic. And one is driven to the conclusion that he does understand but finds it politically expedient to repeat his allegation with the intention of confusing and misleading the public. Perhaps Mr Low would care to explain. Next, Mr Low also says that GST is a money machine that gives the Government enormous power to collect taxes and this will allow the Government to grow larger and more powerful.”
“Things given free are never treasured and are usually wasted. Witness the downfall of the largest welfare state of all, the Soviet Union. Sweden, the paragon of western democratic socialism, has also fallen off its pedestal and is now desperately trying to claw back welfare give-aways it can no longer afford. But the road back will be long and painful because once given, state welfare becomes embedded into the system and has to be pried out piece by piece like slivers of metal embedded in your foot. The Government's economic philosophy is well known. It abhors free hand-outs but it will spend heavily on education, training and on infrastructure. It will invest in the future but will minimise current consumption spending wherever possible. Its principal responsibility to its citizens is to create conditions which will allow them to get well-paid satisfying jobs so that they can stand tall and look after themselves instead of providing crutches for everyone. Next, Mr Low claims that all countries that have implemented GST or VAT have had to raise their rates because lower rates have proved to be uneconomical. He quotes the UK and the USA as examples. I am afraid that he has confused the symptoms with the causes. As I pointed out earlier, many countries, especially the United Kingdom, operate complicated GST or VAT systems with multiple rates and many exemptions which substantially increase administration and compliance costs. They have succumbed to pressures from well-intentioned political pressure groups. The UK government recognises this now and there are moves to simplify its VAT system. But VAT reform will not be easy because withdrawal of entrenched exemption privileges will be strongly resisted. In the case of the US, I am afraid Mr Low has got his facts mixed up.”
“Only the remaining three measures which were rebates on S&C charges for 1-, 2- and 3-room HDB flats, rent rebates for tenants of 1- and 2-room HDB rental flats and the special grants issued through CCCs are transitory. They will operate for five years in the first instance. They are meant to be transitional measures to help households tide over the introduction of GST. During these five years, income should grow in real terms of between 5-7% per year. This will be more than sufficient to offset the impact of the 3% GST which should only lead to a one-off increase of no more than 3% in 1994. Higher incomes will reduce the need for the three transitory measures and after five years, we will reassess the situation to decide whether to continue with a modified scheme. The Government has undertaken that nearly all households will be better off after GST than before. The full offset package fulfils this promise. However, Government cannot promise that households whose incomes are currently low and therefore pay little or no tax will never pay more tax than they do now, even after their incomes rise as a result of economic growth. The Government's fundamental tax philosophy is that everyone, except a few indigent and handicapped, should pay some tax, however small, so that all are conscious of and share in the cost of running the State. The tax burden has to be spread as broadly and fairly as possible so that it will weigh lightly on both invididuals and on the economy as a whole. We must avoid at all costs the introduction of a free buffet welfare system of government. This has wide popular appeal and wins votes, but inevitably leads to national bankruptcy. If a country is rich and large, inevitable bankruptcy can be postponed but never eliminated.”
“The money given goes directly to those who need it and is not dissipated through a generalised welfare scheme. People will have freedom of choice over what they want to spend their money on and we avoid quarrels over what is essential and what is not. For example, Mr Low says that clothing is a basic item of consumption which should be exempted. Does it mean that all clothing should be exempted including $100 designer shirts and jeans? Or should we draw the line at shirts, blouses, skirts and pants in plain white or blue cotton containing no more than 25% polyester fibre, fitted with no more than one zipper each, costing no more than $20 and sold only at HDB and NTUC outlets? I think Mr Low will get my drift. Secondly, he has said that the offset package proposed by Government should not be withdrawn as it is intended to reduce the burden of GST on the lower income groups and on retirees. In my Budget speech earlier this year, I announced a total of 12 measures designed to offset the impact of GST. Three applied to the tax-paying population as a whole and these were tax reductions of 3% on personal and company income tax and reductions in existing indirect taxes. The other nine measures were specifically designed to assist the lower income groups. Of the nine, six were permanent measures and these were: Increases in public assistance payments; Increase in the Singapore Allowance for Government pensioners; Property tax rebates on owner-occupied residential properties with annual values less than $10,000; Additional subsidy for health; Additional subsidy for education; Additional subsidy for town councils on Service and Conservancy (S&C) charges to offset GST.”
“Regrettably, many of the points made in his report were regurgitations of what he had said during the GST debates on the White Paper and the Second Reading of the GST Bill. This means that either he has not been listening to Government's explanatory responses to his earlier questions or that he does not understand them but, more probably, he has heard and understood but, nevertheless, has raised them again for political reasons. I will now take his points one by one. He has said that GST is regressive and affects the lower-income groups more because they consume a larger proportion of their income. Therefore, all basic consumption items like food, clothing, public transport, medical care, education, conservancy charges, etc, should be exempted or zero rated. We have explained, but I will explain again, that the experience of other countries has shown that exemptions and zero ratings of so-called basic items always result in endless quarrels over what comprises basic items and inevitably lead to higher administration and compliance costs, with the result that the GST tax rate on the remaining unexempted items has to be raised substantially in order to offset the exemptions. Much of the revenue loss through such exemptions do not benefit the poor but is enjoyed by the higher income groups who do not need it. We do not want to fall into this trap. Instead the Singapore GST will have few exemptions and zero ratings. It will be simple for Government to administer and will involve the lowest possible cost for businesses to comply. We prefer to address the issue of regressiveness directly by giving generous cash equivalent rebates and grants to the lower income groups.”
“If costs go up higher than the general level of inflation and higher than the general cost of living, I think we should apply this mentality of cost recovery selectively and flexibly. There is no rule engraved in stone that says that you must recover X number of dollars and you must recover it every year. Education, as has been pointed out by many other Members of this House, is not consumption. It is investment. And when you invest, you cannot say, "OK, this is the most that we want to do." In any particular year, let these subsidies fluctuate according to the circumstances. If you want to raise the fees, fair enough, but keep the fee rises small, keep them manageable, and do not be fixated with any one particular level of cost recovery. In some years, it may be that the recovery will be less than the desired subsidy. In good years, you may increase that recovery. But remember, for most Singaporeans, the education of their children is one of the most major things in their lives and people are willing to sacrifice for that. But I think a point will come when they think that really it is not worth the sacrifice any more because this place is being run by graduates for graduates and really the lower income group is not being taken care of. With these rather small caveats, I fully support the motion that is before the House. The Minister for Finance (Dr Richard Hu Tsu Tau): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, thank you for allowing me to speak at this time. Chapter 7 of Mr Low Thia Khiang's report on the Cost Review Committee's proceedings deals specifically with the GST. In it, he makes some recommendations to which I would like to respond. He also makes certain allegations which, if unrebutted, are likely to mislead and confuse the public.”
“So if costs go up 10 times and your subsidy is fixed, the cost to the end consumers also goes up 10 times. The response from this paper is that it is fair for graduates to pay 25% because they are going to get the benefit of the education. Unless things have changed drastically since I was an undergraduate, my impression was that it was usually the parents who paid and not the graduates themselves. A fee increase of $100 may mean very little to a parent who is a graduate himself and earning a four-figure salary. But it may mean a lot more to a person in the lower-income group whose hope for social mobility lies in his children. The children of graduates do not value tertiary education, I think, as much as children of non-graduates. You will very often find children of parents who are tertiary-educated wanting to do something else. They want to dance, they want to write plays, they want to go travelling. But those in the lower-income group, especially those more traditional ones, see education as a magic key that takes them into a new phase, for their children a better life. If you say that you cap the subsidy at a particular level and costs go up 10 times while income only goes up five times, this eats up more of your disposable income and that affects your lower earners much more than it affects your higher earners. It affects the people who need the help more than it affects the people who do not need the help. So it is rather unfortunate that the Government is unable to accept this. I urge them to reconsider. May I also say that the 79%, 75% or whatever percentage point we put down there should not be considered as a sacred cow. In some cases, we may find that the cost goes up. Nobody can help that.”
“These people who have moved out because they wanted a better life should be encouraged to keep their links with Singapore. And we have to remember that in our grandfather's time, it took eight hours to get from Singapore to Penang, which was part of the same political entity. Nowadays, in five hours, you can be in Australia. So the world has shrunk in that sense. If we treat the people who have moved out as traitors, then they are not going to come back. They and their children will be lost to us, their talents will be lost to us, their resources will be lost to us. I think we should accept that people are going to move in and out of Singapore. The trick is to encourage them to keep their links with Singapore. And to do that, we have to offer them something that other countries cannot offer - a better quality of life, a more gracious society, a place where people have intellectual space to hold different opinions, safe streets free from crime, a thriving art scene, pleasant environment, a Government that is not too intrusive into people's private affairs, a good place to bring up children. These are the things we should be concentrating on. And quality education, which brings me to the second point. Quality education is not cheap. I fully endorse the Committee's recommendation to keep tertiary subsidy at 79% and it is rather unfortunate that, in this paper we got today, the Government's response to that is that they cannot freeze the subsidy at 79%. If we want our university to be world class, you cannot have a world class university with cut-price lecturers and cut-price equipment. These things cost money. If you keep the subsidy at a fixed rate and costs go up, the cost to the end consumers also goes up proportionately.”
“We see the prices going up despite the fact that the Minister of State for National Development keeps telling us there is enough to go round and that land will be released. But property prices go in cycles. Other countries have seen booms turning into bust and I do not think we can feel that we will be immune from this. If there is a bust and a serious enough bust, there may be a situation where people who bought properties at high prices find that they have got negative equity, or that the loans they are servicing are way beyond what they can afford. But the only hope for many of those who seek to upgrade to private property is that there should be a price correction. I hope that the Government will not succumb to pressures to keep the prices up just because those who bought houses high later on feel that the Government owes it to them to keep the prices high. For many people, that would be totally unsatisfactory. One effect of these high property prices coupled with the strong Singapore dollar is that there are a lot more middle-class Singaporeans who will own properties outside Singapore. You can get a lovely house with a sea view for $350,000 in Perth and middle-class Singaporeans are moving out of the country, they are working out of the country. Chances are that some of these people will choose to stay out of the country. In the past, people who have moved out of the country, or worked outside the country have been treated as traitors. They have been treated like rats who have left the ship and, therefore, we should not welcome them back at all. But I think we have to face the fact that circumstances have changed. And that we should view this phenomenon constructively, and not treat these people as if they are traitors.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, in terms of health care, the public-funded hospitals should not go too upmarket. We should cut down on expensive buildings and expensive equipment. All public hospitals should have adequate numbers of class C wards. There is no point in going upmarket and being unaffordable. Finally, much has been said about the rising aspirations and expectations of our younger Singaporeans. It is true that we must all moderate our expectations. But at the same time, we must bear in mind that aspirations are the stuff that motivate and propel us forward. They are opportunities and problems one at the same time. In the final analysis, it is a fine balance or a difficult balancing act. Overall, Sir, I think this Report proves again that our Government is a caring, compassionate Government who delivers what it promises to do. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I support the motion. Assoc. Prof. Walter Woon (Nominated Member): Thank you, Sir, for letting me join in the debate. First of all, I think we should thank the Committee and the minority member who gave a separate report for the work that has gone into this Report. It is a very impressive piece of work and it clearly shows that they have put in a lot of effort. The main criticism, if you can call it that, is that it tells people what they do not really want to hear, that is, rising costs are an effect of growing affluence. For something like cars and houses, we just cannot keep costs down because of the pressure of supply and the pressure of affluence. But while the head can accept that, the heart is different, and we can only hope that people will act rationally. I have got two short points that I will make quickly. Firstly, the question of private housing.”
“After all, Executive flat residents are also staying in public housing estates. And such Executive flats will help to set the benchmark in the market. To meet the rising demand for housing, the Government should help increase the supply by building more HDB flats and releasing more land for residential development by the private sector. It is a matter of supply and demand. Increased supply may help to moderate price increases in the future. In terms of education, I support the CRC's recommendation to maintain the subsidy rate for university fees at the current 79% of recurrent expenditure. Education in a local university is the key to social mobility for many Singaporeans from the lower-income groups. We must do our best to make university education affordable. But university authorities and staff must play their part and do their utmost to increase productivity and cut down costs. More can and should be done in this direction. For example, a body can be formed to do an audit of university expenditures. Likewise, independent schools should be more conscious and stringent in their cost control. They must bear in mind that they receive substantial public fundings. The management of independent schools should think through long and hard on such matters as class size, staffing and their impact on cost increases. They should not be given a free hand to increase fees as and when they like. They should be subjected to some form of audit. Overall, in education, the Government and community organisations should review whether the number and quantum of scholarships and bursaries are adequate to meet the needs of the lower-income group as well as to promote our principle of meritocracy and social mobility.”
“If we do not keep up the pace and others around the region overtake us in terms of competitiveness and what they can offer to the world, then there will be no increases to debate about: no cost increase to complain about and no wage increase either. In this context, we have an urgent need, I think, to upgrade the skills of thousands of our workers at the lower end of the skills and income groups. Indeed, this is the crux of the matter. There should be a renewed sense of mission from the Government, unions and management to further pursue this important aim. If we can upgrade the skills of our workers, there will be higher productivity and Singapore will, on the whole, be that much more competitive. And these upgraded workers will at the same time enjoy real wage increases. Our target then is to expand our economic cake. Rather than arguing and fighting amongst ourselves over a shrinking cake, we should take the expanding cake approach. The Government, on its part, should take to heart the CRC's recommendation to maximise efficiency, keep costs down and to space out public sector cost increases. We all know that the public sector has a major part and impact on our lives. If cost increases in the public sector can be moderated, graduated and spaced out, then half the battle is won. In terms of public housing, I support the CRC's recommendation to concentrate the subsidies mainly on the 3- and 4-room HDB flats. However, we should rethink the move to phase out subsidies completely from the Executive flats. By all means, reduce the subsidies, but some small percentage should remain, lest prospective buyers of Executive flats feel that they are missing out on something, or that such flats are being priced out of their reach.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of the motion. The Cost Review Committee should be congratulated for its objective and comprehensive Report, for a job well done. The statistics cited present a fairly accurate picture of economic growth, cost increases and improving standards of living in Singapore. It is reassuring to know from the Report that during the period from 1980 to 1992, Singapore's inflation rate averaged 2.4% a year. Moreover, income growth has outstripped increases in prices. In fact, there is an increase in real wages. But how do these statistics impact on the ground? Not many, I gather, have read the original Report. Not many will be able to make head or tail out of these statistics. However accurate they are, some will still be sceptical. The point is, it is not just about facts, but perception. It is an emotive issue, especially when it touches the pocket. I am not suggesting for a moment that we leave the problem alone or hide our head in the sand like the ostrich. Far from it, the Government should mount a concerted and sustained effort to explain the market philosophy, pricing mechanism and economic growth. We must sell these policies in simple terms to the man-in-the-street, using the mass media, including television and direct person-to-person contact, speaking their lingo in the coffeeshops. CASE and grassroots organisations can, I think, play a vital role in promoting consensus and cohesion in our nation. We can also lift the discussion to a higher plane, by focusing on Singapore's position in an increasingly competitive world. We should not be parochial. Indeed, no man is an island, nor a nation.”
“Sir, we will convey this suggestion to the Ministry of Community Development and the Ministry of Education and the Police will give every possible cooperation. ANG MO KIO COMMUNITY HOSPITAL (Status and progress) 10. Mr Loh Meng See asked the Minister for Health what is the status and progress of the Ang Mo Kio Community Hospital; who will be managing it; and when will it be ready.”
“We want to assure Mr Zulkifli that his pleas and appeals will not fall on deaf ears.”
“Sir, we share Mr Zulkifli's concern on noise induced deafness among our workers and, as pointed out by him, it is the number one occupational disease in Singapore, in terms of the number of workers affected. However, Members will be pleased to know that the number of confirmed cases registered a drop from 842 in 1991 to 655 last year. Of these cases, nine were severe enough to qualify for workmen's compensation. The others were early cases detected upon medical examination, but with no significant disability. I would like to assure Members that my Ministry's Department of Industrial Health takes a very serious view of NID and has implemented various measures to protect the hearing of our own workers. These measures have worked well and they have contributed in part to the fall in numbers last year. The most important measure is the identification of noisy factories and the implementation of the In-plant Hearing Conservation Programme. Such a programme consists of several activities, for example, monitoring of noise levels, reduction of noise levels, where possible, health education to raise the awareness of this problem, provision and wearing of hearing protectors, medical surveillance of workers which is an ongoing thing, and we are very stringent, in terms of requirement for medical check-up of workers who are exposed to excessive noise. And we wish to advise all employers and workers to have examination regularly so that this problem can be detected and corrective action taken. But we will go one step further and help any company which wishes to have this hearing conservation programme and we will give appropriate advice, when possible, and monitor closely the performance of this company in implementing such a programme.”
“So management and workers must constantly keep at it and we at the Ministry will do our best to encourage them and to keep the pace going. Safety is our major concern.”
“Reminders were sent to 140 factories, performance of which was found to be wanting. We also take enforcement action when necessary. Last year, a total of 21 composition fines were issued for contravention of one kind or another relating to the requirements of Safety Committees. So we do take the trouble to check and we take a carrot and stick approach. For those companies that do well, in terms of safety, we have a yearly safety award ceremony, where they are given gold, silver or bronze safety awards, to encourage them to do even better and to set an example for the rest of the industries. 2.30 pm On safety audits, I agree with both Mr Zulkifli and Mr Othman that even if a management safety system is in place, there must be regular auditing to ensure that there is compliance, and that everybody knows what they are supposed to do. At present, I am glad to report that large refineries and chemical plants carry out safety audits on their own, for example, Shell, BP and Petrochemical Corporation of Singapore. And we do encourage as many factories as possible to have this auditing system and, especially if they can, we will encourage them to have an independent audit, particularly for major industries and shipyards. My Ministry also helps by conducting seminars of one kind or another, in terms of safety and helping them to understand the significance of Safety Committees as well as safety audits. And we believe that everybody has a part to play in this - management, Government and workers. And if all play their part, particularly through self-regulation, many accidents and tragedies could be avoided with this proactive self-regulatory approach.”
“Sir, my Ministry shares the concern of Mr Zulkifli and Mr Othman on the safety of our workers. It was very unfortunate that last year there were a number of major accidents and mishaps in Singapore. This gives the impression that the industrial safety situation has deteriorated. But let us take a look at the statistics. Last year, the total number of industrial accidents reported was 4,698, of which 65 were fatal cases as compared to the total of 5,154 in 1991, of which 66 were fatal. Hence, the total number of accidents had dropped by about 9% compared to the previous year. In terms of accident frequency rate, there were 3.6 accidents per million man-hours work in 1992 as against 4 in 1991, a drop of 10%. I would, therefore, like to assure Members that overall, there is no slackening of industrial safety standards at the workplace but we will not be complacent. We will take every possible action to make sure that safety is in place and the situation improves further. I agree with Mr Zulkifli and Mr Othman that we should give special emphasis on strengthening safety management at the workplace. And one important mechanism, of course, is the safety committee. From statistics of the Department of Industrial Safety, there are about 1,500 factories that are required to have safety committees, of which 1,322 or 88% have done so. The rest are mainly new factories which are in the process of forming the safety committees. The Ministry of Labour will ensure that this is done. Officers of the Ministry do regular checks on these safety committees during their factory visits and also monitor through reading and checking the minutes of their meetings. Through the review last month, for example, we concluded and assessed that 1,180 committees were effective.”
“This will then relieve the emergency ambulance service of non-essential and non-emergency cases so that it can carry on and focus on the major emergency cases. By the end of this year, all emergency ambulances will be equipped with defibrillator which is a very essential equipment, particularly helpful to cardiac patients. It will help to revive them and stabilise their conditions before they reach the hospital. So all in all, I would say that the emergency ambulance service will be updated and upgraded to meet the needs of our population.”
“The feasibility of this scheme is still under study and, if viable, it would be implemented after all the procedures, the ground work and safeguards are in place. I assure Mr Chen that we will consult all the professionals and all the parties concerned and brief them before implementation. Sir, with regard to Mr Zulkifli's question on the FRMS, I am glad to report that the results have been encouraging. The average response time of the FRMS is 4.7 minutes during the peak hour as compared with 11 minutes on ambulances. In view of the successful result and the very good rate of response, we have decided to expand the service to cover other areas. Starting from July this year, six more teams of FRMS will be deployed, doubling their numbers. This will bring the FRMS to most parts of Singapore, including all expressways. As for Mr Zulkifli's suggestion that we extend it to other areas, I am glad to say that we are considering this scheme and we hope to extend into other kinds of accidents and emergency, but we wish to take it step by step. With regard to the question of ambulance service, my Ministry is considering various ways to improve this emergency ambulance service. We are considering the starting of a paramedic service with the assistance of the Ministry of Health. A core of officers will be specially trained to man the emergency ambulance service as paramedics. This, I believe, will be a major improvement in the service, especially in emergency ambulance services. We are also considering the setting up of a special or private service undertaken by private medical transport companies to carry non-emergency cases.”
“Sir, the volume of work for the Fire Safety Bureau (FSB) has been growing steadily over the years and FSB officers have tried their very best to keep up with the increasing work load, bearing in mind its very limited manpower. The FSB has made several adjustments or improvements to its working procedures in order to simplify and expedite the processing of cases. Some of such measures are, first, the setting up of an inquiry counter to grant on-the-spot approvals for minor renovation works. Second, encouraging the professionals to make preliminary consultation of major projects. Third, allowing engineers in charge of the project to certify that the minor fire requirements have been complied with. However, despite these measures, the manpower shortage remains a problem. Therefore, we have to have a re-think and a new approach. FSB is currently looking into the possibility of selecting and appointing accredited private professional companies to undertake some of the inspection work on behalf of FSB so that FSB can concentrate on the major aspect of fire safety and fire prevention. Under this concept, plans for all building projects would continue to be first vetted and approved by FSB so that basic safety requirements are met and the plans are scrutinised. Upon completion of these plans and buildings, FSB will appoint an approved professional company to conduct on-the-spot inspection to check that all plans and designs are complied with and safety measures are in place. I would like to assure Mr Kenneth Chen that there would not be any double checking. It would expedite, it would not hold back, and the procedures would be simplified.”
“In this particular case, the parties concerned came to a settlement among themselves. But if you go by precedents, the Commissioner is likely to rule in favour of the worker. I would like to thank Dr John Chen for bringing up this very important case of the anomaly. I would not disagree with him. I think he has got it correct. The Ministry has reviewed its practice of making a fine distinction between hospitalisation and outpatient medical leave. Where there is no evidence of malingering or abuse, the Workmen's Compensation Department, I assure Dr Chen, will advise employers to treat such outpatient leave as full-pay leave, up to a maximum of 14 days. I would like to thank him again for bringing this up on behalf of all the workers.”
“Sir, first, I will take up the point raised by Encik Zulkifli. The Workmen's Compensation Act now covers 73% of the total workforce, based on the Labour Force Survey of 1991. It was last revised, as far as workmen's compensation was concerned, in 1981. It is now about 10 years, and definitely it is time to review. I would like to thank the Member for bringing this point up. The Ministry is actively reviewing the quantum, but we have to bear a number of factors in mind, for example, the impact in terms of cost on employers as they have to buy a larger coverage in terms of insurance. But with inflation and rising costs for our workers, we have to also take care of the interests of our workers. Therefore, we must revise the ceiling upwards. The question is: how much? And we are working on it. We will consult the NTUC, and we thank the NTUC members for bringing this up. 3.30 pm With reference to the case brought up by Mr Zulkifli about the SBS case, I would like to say that under the Workmen's Compensation Act, compensation of permanent incapacity takes into account the loss of earning capacity for every type of employment which an injured worker was able to undertake at the time of the accident. Therefore, although the injured worker continued to be employed in this case by SBS, the compensation awarded for permanent incapacity was meant to take into account the likely loss of earnings which the worker would face if he were to take up any other employment. It was on this basis that the injured worker in the SBS case was awarded compensation of $24,600. The Ministry's view is that there is no ambiguity in terms of law and we will ensure that workers are given full protection under the Workmen's Compensation Act.”
“We have identified certain sites for construction, and we expect that the clubhouses will be ready in four to five years' time. In the meantime, we are examining the possibility of housing these clubhouses in temporary premises on leases. Overall, these reservists' associations and their clubhouses will be the focal point, the rallying point, for all our reservists. They will help to foster a sense of camaraderie, a sense of identity and mission and this, in the end, is a very small token of our nation's appreciation of their role in total defence.”
“Police reservists henceforth will be re-organised, re-deployed according to their skills and according to their background, so that they can contribute most in their appointments. We do not, Sir, wish to put square pegs into round holes. For example, reservists who possess technical skills will be posted to units such as the Force Transport Base, Police Academy and the Computer Services Department. I am sure they will enjoy their work. And those who are posted to the NPP will be those who enjoy field work. What all these mean is that there will be opportunities for reservists to specialise and deployment will be more purposeful and skills-orientated. And those who demonstrate leadership capability will be identified and will be upgraded in terms of training and posting. All round, Sir, we will have a greater sense of identiy and job satisfaction. 4.15 pm Now, Sir, turning to the point brought up by Mr Zulkifli about recognising the roles of these reservists, I am happy to announce that the Ministry will be going ahead with the scheme to promote reservist recognition through the Civil Defence Reservists' Association and the Police Reservists' Association, both of which have been registered with the Registrar of Societies. Two pro-tem committees have been set up and they are finalising the plan. The official launching of these Associations will be in May or June this year. Reservists who join in as members will enjoy a package of benefits, including discount schemes, insurance schemes, sports, and clubhouse facilities, and membership, I assure Members, will be kept at very affordable levels. My Ministry is planning the construction of two clubhouses, one for each of these Associations. They will be on par with the SAFRA Clubhouses.”
“Being a member of the grassroots or being a person in the neighbourhood, they will be ready to calm any person in distress, to give them first-aid, to report and to render every possible assistance before the arrival of the other CD forces. So during peacetime, they help in emergency blood exercises, emergency water exercises, shelter exercises, and even in power failures they come in handy as the first to show the way. So we cannot replace them at all, and we appreciate their role. In terms of Mr Zulkifli's point, I agree that the police reservists are indeed the unsung heroes in our society today. They are deployed for patrol and other duties round the clock, throughout the island, throughout the year. During major events they supplement the regular police officers in crowd control and traffic control. I must say that these police reservists have discharged their duties with a very high level of commitment and professionalism. For example, in May last year, four police reservists, while on patrol duty at the very popular Newton Food Centre, which many Members frequent, spotted a motorcycle which had been reported lost. They laid an ambush successfully and arrested the culprit. It was later found that this person was responsible for other motor thefts throughout the island. In January this year, this time at Henderson Road, three police reservists heard the cries of a lady whose handbag was snatched away. They gave chase and eventually arrested the thief. There are many other examples. To enhance and maximise the contribution of our police reservists, the Police have with expert assistance completed a major study and review of training and deployment of these reservists.”
“Sir, I would like to thank Dr Arthur Beng and Mr Zulkifli for their interest and concern for the civil defence (CD) and police reservists. I agree with Dr Beng that reservists are indeed the pillars of our Civil Defence Force. They play very vital roles in all aspects of civil defence. And I must mention that in an emergency, we have no distinction whether they are regular, full-time or reservists. All are indeed needed together. And therefore in terms of responsibility, our reservists are deployed in all areas of work, for example, managing civil defence shelters, operating public system of warning, evacuating civilian casualties, rendering first-aid and fire fighting. And to equip these reservists for their respective roles, regular training exercises are carried out to increase and maintain the operational readiness of our CD officers and men. We also sought continually to upgrade all our CD reservists, particularly those with the capability and the interest or the qualification. For this purpose, as Dr Beng mentioned, Civil Defence Force has conducted six Officer Upgrading Courses since 1989 for a total of 165 reservists. Upon completion of the course, they are posted either as Second Lieutenants in command or as Staff Officers of their units. In terms of the volunteer scheme which has been introduced since 1982, I am glad to report that we have now 36,000 volunteers throughout the island in all the constituencies. I would like to take this opportunity to thank our constituency advisors for their support and for giving all possible facilities to these volunteers. We appreciate them very much. Volunteers are important. We can never replace them because they are always on the spot within their estates, ever ready and always present to help anyone in distress.”
“If you were caught in a traffic jam in Bangkok, you wish you were not there. Here, the traffic is moving and we can move from point to point quickly and economically by MRT. What more, may I ask, can we ask of our own Government? In terms of health care, we are second to none in this region. No effort is spared to give the very best to the patients, whatever their station in life. No one is denied medical treatment, whatever his financial standing. And despite what is claimed by some Members about elitism, there is in fact, to the contrary, tremendous social mobility through education. The child from the most humble home could, on his own merits, excel and win state scholarships for studies at the top universities in the world - Oxford, Cambridge, Harvard, wherever it is possible, they will be sent. And such scholars from these humble homes have risen to become our Chief Executives, Permanent Secretaries, Generals and, of course, not forgetting, hon. Members and Ministers. My point is simple - that we must view all things in perspective, and not be too quick to criticise and denounce the Government. Some criticism is, of course, necessary, I think, in order to keep the Government on its toes. But if we go all out without consideration, without thinking, we might open the Pandora's box, and Singapore might become ungovernable, whether by the PAP Government or by any other government. Sir, my point is, a house divided, cannot stand. Sir, on that note, I support the motion and the vision of a better tomorrow for all Singaporeans.”
“Are we then going to make a pastime of pillorying our own Government, griping and grumbling, whether it is right or wrong? I am not saying that there should not be criticism of the Government, but it should be done in perspective. It should be done in a constructive manner, with the interests of Singapore at heart. This, of course, does not absolve the Government from the responsibility of listening to the people, of caring for the people and defending the interests of the people. The Government must not only be taking care of the people's interests, but must be seen to be doing so. In this respect, the Government must not lose the common touch. This brings to mind what Sun Tzu, the great strategist, said 2,000 years ago, and I quote: 'If the commander or leader treats his men as his own sons, they will march with him to the darkest valley and die for him or his country." I think we should have this sort of bonding between the people and the Government. I think the Government is sometimes too shy to broadcast its own work, good work, in particular. Or, the people forget easily. Just look around at the marvellous HDB apartments. Where else in the world can you buy such modern apartments at affordable prices, and without long delays? In Tokyo, you really have to pay and pay to get a small cubicle, and that is if you are lucky to do so. On top of constructing the HDB apartments, I can tell you, as a Town Council Chairman, that the Government gives substantial grants every year to the Town Councils to help maintain the buildings and keep the estates clean. Can we ask for a better government? Look at our MRT. The Government spent billions of dollars to build the MRT and a superb road system for the convenience of the man in the street.”
“Sir, the last 26 years of our nationhood have been an era of unprecedented progress: a time of peace, a time of construction and a time of upgrading. Singaporeans now enjoy a much higher standard of living than ever before. But, how long will this last? How long will we remain as a nation of Singaporeans? This question, Sir, flashed across my mind as I listened to the constant and repeated refrain of criticisms and even downright condemnation of the Government by some very unhappy quarters. It is nowadays unfashionable to sing praises of the Government. I am not trying to do that today, and be unfashionable. But I am trying to point out what should be obvious. I also hasten to add that the Government is not perfect, like everyone else. But, we seem to forget the good that the Government does. We seem to forget that Singapore is a small country. It is, in truth, a small city-state without a hinterland and without natural resources. Yet, we have to be a nation; we have to double up in defence and diplomacy. We forget that Singapore is vulnerable, and progress is not pre-ordained. Sir, we forget that Singapore, as a nation, is an accident of history. We rose from the ashes of Malaysian Malaysia. We were evicted. We survived. We prospered. But, we can be undone easily by another turn of events. Remember Cambodia. Remember Kuwait. Remember Yugoslavia. Sir, just look at the events happening throughout the world. They are very unpredictable. No one predicted the Tienanmen incident. No one predicted the invasion of Kuwait. No one predicted the fall of the Berlin Wall. And no one predicted the fall of Gorbachev and the collapse of the Soviet Union. It is a volatile world.”
“Thank you, Sir. There was a reference to the point that there is a contract between the Government and an elected person. I am not a lawyer. I am a lay person. But I think any first-year law student will tell you that there is no such contract. And if there is this belief that there is such a contract, why not take it to court and prove it? It is not a joke.”
“I would like to say that we are equally affected by the ruling on the void decks. We suffer like everybody else, but we abide by the decision, whatever it is. But I am most upset when Mr Ling referred to Medifund. He referred our community leaders as "neighbourhood busybodies". I think this is a great injustice to these people who serve the country, who make sacrifices in terms of time, money and even family life. And there are many of them older than a lot of us. We must give them due respect as leaders of the community.”
“No. I would like to continue with my speech, Sir.”
“I would say clearly that we were considered and appointed by the relevant authorities. Mr Speaker: Order. Mr Chiam, before you ask for clarification, could you please ask for permission?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of the motion standing in the name of Dr John Chen, the Member for Hong Kah GRC. Sir, first, I would like to refer to the earlier point made by Mr Ling How Doong regarding PAP MPs' access to the Community Centres (CCs) and the Residents' Committees (RCs). I would like to state categorically that our access to them is not as PAP MPs but as advisors to these grassroots organisations. And there are some advisors who are not MPs. So, any qualified, experienced and trustworthy person can apply and be considered and appointed as advisors. Also, we do not use the CCs and RCs for our MPS.”
“For example, the arts or social studies. The second category is laboratory-based, for example, science or engineering. The third category consists of medical and dental courses. I would like to know whether the universities have carefully analyzed the allocation of recurrent expenses. For example, arts students who are studying history and geography may not have frequent use of the computer services. On the other hand, those who are studying economics and statistics may have to use the computer very frequently. Are they charged any additional fees for the use of these computer services? The research work in the university may involve the use of expensive equipment. Will these expenses be charged separately? If we are going to strictly adopt the policy of "user-pays", then the expenses of each department or faculty should be carefully categorised in detail in order to decide whether they should be subsidized by the Government, or charged in part to the students. For example, are the depreciation and maintenance cost of the expensive equipment included in the cost? As for the NUH, how much of the expenses is incurred for research and how much is used for teaching? Singapore is a society which provides equal opportunity for education. As long as the children have the ability to study, they should not be deprived of the opportunity because of financial hardship. The increase in university fees does not mean the end of the road for the aspiring students. We should continue to find all the ways and means to support every student so that he or she will have a complete education.”
“Those who object to the increase in fees feel that our university graduates are the cream of our society and education is a long-term investment. We should therefore give them full support so that every one of those students who are capable of completing their university studies could do so, and not just those who do exceptionally well or are brilliant enough to qualify for scholarship. We must ensure that no student who is capable of completing his university studies will be deprived of the opportunity because of financial reason. The second reason is that if the fees are too expensive then some students from the poor family may give up the idea of going to the university. Thirdly, the increase in fees may result in increasing the psychological pressure and burden of the parents. Another point is that we keep hearing from the people that fee increases are too frequent and too steep. I feel that the idea of having the students bear part of the university's operational cost is accepted, but the question is how much? Should the Government's subsidy in the long term be targeted at 60%, 70%, or 80%? We should have a more thorough study. Let the people have more opportunities to air their views so that we could pre-empt some misunderstanding and doubts. If the subsidy is too high, like the Dutch Universities, the students will take their education for granted and they will enjoy life and waste time. If the subsidy is too low, then the burdens of the parents will be too heavy. Although there is a tution fee loan scheme, some students and parents are reluctant to borrow money from the authorities because they adopt the prudent attitude of "not borrowing money before earning it". There are three types of fees. The first is non-laboratory based.”
“In Asian societies, parents attach great importance to education and most of them hope that their children would be able to complete university education. Many sociologists hold the view that one of the main reasons for the "Four Little Dragons" in East Asia to have such remarkable achievements and economic prosperity is that our parents are very concerned with their children's education. We can see that in the United States, the children of many Asian immigrants achieve outstanding results in their studies. This is attributable to the parents' emphasis on good education. We have heard the Minister for Education describe the high cost of providing university education. For the undergraduates who made up only 5% of the total student population, 20% of the total recurrent educational expenses is incurred. On the question of increasing university fees, different views prevail. Those who agree with the increase have the following reasons to think so: First, because of technological progress, more sophisticated and advanced equipment is being produced each year. In order to keep up with current developments, we have to keep on buying new equipment. The students should bear some of the costs of maintenance. Secondly, I believe the principle of "user-pays" is acceptable to most. Thirdly, we can look at the experience of other countries. For example, in some universities in the European countries, almost all the fees are subsidized by the government. In Holland, the students have six years to complete their university education. They have a good time doing little work and thus waste their country's precious resources. With the fee increase in Singapore, our students will realise how valuable university education is.”
“I believe this will be of help in the provision of university education to the next generation of Singaporeans, because I do not believe in the Government having to continue perpetually and unlimitedly providing large subsidies to our university education. It cannot be denied that our university students are getting great benefits after their graduation from the university. Of course, if you take today's standard you may say that the university fees are expensive. But if they think of the returns that they are going to get in future, the price they are paying is indeed negligible. So, in my view, this increase in university fees is beneficial to the future development of Singapore. What I want to emphasise is that there should be adequate loans available to the students who need them. At the same time, I would suggest that the repayment of loans should be minimal initially and it could be increased annually according to the increase in their income. With regard to the setting up of an endowment fund, as mentioned by the Minister for Education just now, Dr Ong suggested that the large enterprises in the private sector in Singapore should come forward to support this endowment fund. I feel that the Government should be the first to help. I hope that the Government will quickly come forward to take the lead in setting up this fund. Mr Lau Ping Sum (Yio Chu Kang)( In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, in any vibrant society, there must be a group of people forming the backbone of the Government departments and the private sector to take the lead so that they could show the way forward. In the cultivation of talent, the university plays an indispensable role.”
“On this occasion, it is true that the margin of increase in university fees is rather high. Many people said that they were not expecting such a huge increase. I hope that the present and future university students in Singapore should think carefully and calmly about their responsibility to society. The responsibility that they should take is to pick up the burden of paying their fees for the education that they are provided with. Now, the Government is not asking them to pick up the full cost of their university education immediately. Government loans will be available to them. However, surprisingly, there are not many students applying for such study loans, according to Mr Cham Tao Soon. As such, the Government should conduct a survey to find out why the students did not apply for these loans. The Minister for Education announced just now that loans could be applied for up to 65% of the fees. To a certain extent, this may not be adequate. The Government and the Ministry of Education should know that some families which are not so well-to-do may require more loan. I hope that the Minister for Education would give his sympathetic consideration in this matter. If we want to increase the university fees and, at the same time, do not want to increase the burden of our taxpayers, then what should we do? I think the most practical and equitable measure is to make the university graduates who were given the benefit of receiving university education to bear this responsibility of repaying the loan they took from the Government, after they have graduated and have started working.”
“Mr Choo Wee Khiang (Marine Parade GRC)( In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, the recent announcement by the Minister for Education to increase the university fees has caused unhappiness to many people and everybody seems to be talking about it because the margin of increase is very high. However, everyone seems to be concentrating on the margin of increase and has neglected the actual reason for such an increase. In principle, I support the Government's policy to gradually reduce its subsidy on university education so that the fees may be able to more accurately reflect the cost of providing university education. However, there should be a very important condition attached to the said policy, ie, the Government should ensure that our Singaporean students should not be deprived of the opportunity to complete their university education simply because they could not afford the fees. Just now, a number of my Parliamentary colleagues mentioned that the increase in fees should be made more gradually, perhaps spread over a period of two or three years. To me, I would rather suffer a sharp pain than a protracted suffering. Why prolong the agony? Our undergraduates and candidates for university enrolment should realize that education does not come cheap. It is an extremely expensive long-term project. Particularly for Singapore, if we want to be competitive in the international market, to have more professionals and management experts, and to attract more well-known scholars to come over to Singapore so that our students would have better opportunity to learn the most advanced technology in the world, then our local students and Singaporeans should realize that they should take up their own responsibility in certain areas.”
“This is one question which deserves our careful study. In the present circumstances, our local students are gravely affected by this large increase in fees, but the ASEAN students are not affected. Under such circumstances, it is no wonder that many local students and their parents have misunderstood the Government's policy, and feel that this round of fee increase seems to favour these foreign students. In fact, a friend of mine told me very bluntly that it seems to be better to be a foreigner than to be a Singaporean. In the letter written by the students to our Members of Parliament, they have introduced some 10 recommendations and I am very glad to hear from the Minister that some of the recommendations have been accepted. I am very grateful to him for this. I believe some students will be happy to benefit from the increase in the quantum of the loan available to them, thus alleviating some of the effects of the present fee increase. Among the recommendations, there is one which I feel warrants our support, ie, if the students' parents do not have sufficient CPF savings to pay for the fees, whether the CPF savings of the brothers and sisters could be used for this purpose. I feel this recommendation will be of great help to those students who come from poorer families. In fact, there is already precedence in this arrangement in our Medisave scheme. More importantly, when the student graduates from the university, he would still have to repay the amount borrowed back to the CPF account. I feel that this recommendation can be acceptable to the Minister for Labour and I hope that he would seriously consider the suggestion.”
“The Ministry of Education was very quick in announcing that 50% to 100% subsidies in school fees would be given to students who came from poor families, depending on their income. I would like to ask the Minister: If the students, despite the loans either from the university or from CPF, are unable to pay for the remaining portion of their fees, then will they be subsidized in the way that it was done in the independent schools? In announcing the increase in fees, Professor Lim Pin also mentioned that there are some 10-14% of our university students who come from ASEAN countries. Based on my estimation, about 2,000-3,000 of them are occupying places in our university. This figure is much more than what I had imagined it to be. Under the present circumstances, there are many of our local students who qualify for admission to the university, but cannot find a place there. Those who can afford will go to other countries to further their studies. I feel that the Ministry of Education should consider reducing the number of places given to foreign students so that our local students, particularly those who cannot afford to go overseas, can have a chance to complete their university studies in Singapore. At a time when our Singaporeans are unhappy with the increase in university fees, we find that thousands of these ASEAN students are almost unaffected by this present fee increase. By this, I mean those who are doing courses other than medicine and dentistry. This is quite contrary to what an ordinary citizen thinks it should be, because it is one of the State's duties to provide subsidy to a certain extent for its citizens to pursue their education. Is the State obliged to give these foreign students such heavy subsidies?”
“00 pm Dr Low Seow Chay (Chua Chu Kang)( In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, first of all, I would like to declare my personal interest. I am a lecturer in the Nanyang Technological Institute. The views I am presenting today do not represent the interest of the University. The fees announced for next year's university courses are increased by some 30-50% as compared to the previous year's fees. From the angle of the students and their parents, such a large increase is somewhat over-done. I feel that this may be difficult for our students and their parents to accept. I sympathize with these students, particularly the Singaporean students, and the parents who are affected by this increase in fees. According to a report in Lianhe Zaobao on 30th April, Mr Er Kwong Wah said that Dr Tony Tan had indicated that he would consider making future increase in university fees more gradual rather than a one-time large increase. This report implies that the Minister for Education has, in principle, agreed that the increase should be done gradually in reaching its target. I feel that if the Minister for Education is serious about what he was saying, it is still not too late. If we can reduce the margin of increase by half, and spread it over two years to attain its target, then I believe the students and their parents would support and accept it. When announcing the increase in fees, the Minister for Education as well as the Vice Chancellor of NUS and the President of the Nanyang Technological Institute gave the assurance that no student would be deprived of a place in the university because of his parents' inability to afford the university fees. This same assurance was given when the concept of independent schools was introduced.”
“The GPC on Education, therefore, welcomes the Minister's pledge that fee increases in the future years will be smaller, and not as large as in the last four years. This is quite reassuring to all of us. We also welcome the Minister's concessions in raising the student loans to 65% of the tuition fees, in extending the repayment period from 15 to 20 years, and delaying the commencement of repayment from one to two years after graduation. All this, I am sure, will help the students. Most encouraging of all is the launching of the universities' endowment fund. This is a positive step in diversifying the sources of funding for the two universities, a step which I hope would make it less necessary to raise fees sharply ever again. I would, therefore, urge foundations, companies and graduates to come forward, to support the endowment fund and rally behind these two universities. Big corporations and, particularly, Government-owned companies should take the lead. The Turf Club could kick off the donation drive with a lump-sum donation of, say, $50 million to $100 million. Graduates, who have benefitted from university education, like ourselves here in this House, should give generously to their own universities. I have a suggestion that NTU, with the consent of NUS, should transfer the names of the Nanyang University graduates to its own alumni rolls and tap on the tremendous goodwill that I think still exists for the former Nanyang University and build upon this goodwill. I will say this: donations to this endowment fund will be money well spent. It will be an investment in Singapore's future and in the well-being of the next generation of Singaporeans. I personally would pledge support for this endowment fund. 2.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I wish to thank the Minister for his reassuring statement and for this opportunity to speak on the issue. Sir, no one in his right mind would quarrel with the necessity for a fee increase. With rising costs and inflation, you cannot just freeze the fees. Neither would one dispute the need to reduce the universities' dependence on the Government for grants. No self-respecting universities should be completely tied to the apron strings of the government. They must flourish on their own. But the fee hike is simply too steep and too drastic. We have three big hikes in the last four years. If you use the 1986-1987 fees as the base-line, the fees have risen by 192% for non-laboratory based faculties, 263% for laboratory-based faculties, and 731% for Medical and Dental Faculties. This is too much; too soon. University education may become less and less affordable. Sir, one must also bear in mind that university undergraduates need to pay for personal expenses, like transport, photocopying in the university, meals at the campus, not to mention hostel fees for those who have to stay, for example, at NTU. We must also consider that they need to have some allowances for dating, or pak tor, to lighten the burden on the Social Development Unit (SDU). We want them to socialise, so I am sure they need expenses. It is true that many students work as private tutors to pay for these fees. But there is a limit to what they can do, lest they become full-time tutors and part-time students and, in the end, end up at being good at neither of them. My plea to the Minister is to spread out the fee increase, do it more gradually over a period of years. Slow, or gradual, and steady win the race.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to ask the Minister how long it will take before water from either Pahang or Riau will be running in our taps and whether this will increase the price for local consumers. BG Lee Hsien Loong: Mr Speaker, Sir, it depends on how quickly our negotiations with the Pahang State Government and with Indonesia can be concluded and then schemes will have to be designed and the engineering works will have to be done. Once that is done, we are ready to buy water from both Indonesia and Pahang. It is a matter of a few years. Will it cost more? When we provide for water supply, we always need to provide not only for the amount which we are consuming now but also for our long-term plans, the infrastructure, so that as our economy expands and as our water needs go up, there will be enough water for all our requirements - for industry, commerce, homes, recreation. That inevitably is an expensive matter and the expenditures have to be made whether they are invested in the Johor River or Pahang River or in the rivers of Pulau Bintan. BUONA VISTA MRT STATION (Provision of covered bicycle park) 2. Encik Abbas Abu Amin asked the Minister for National Development if he will consider providing a covered bicycle park at the Buona Vista MRT Station.”
“Sir, as we develop and prosper, we must dispel any notion that we are self-centred and ugly Singaporeans. That I am sure we are not. I therefore welcome the despatch of our medical teams to the Philippines and the Middle East, and the sending of English Language teachers to Indonesia. Sir, we should have a higher profile in international affairs and leave no stone unturned in our efforts to enhance our image overseas. I therefore hope that the Singapore International Foundation will, besides forming Singapore clubs overseas, help to send young Singaporean volunteers to work in our neighbouring countries as teachers, doctors, nurses, and specialists in various fields. We can here draw upon the experience of the American Peace Corps or the British Volunteer Service Overseas. We can also enlist those who have retired from business or the professions to serve overseas as consultants or advisors. Our message to our neighbours is that they have a stake and a share in our prosperity and that we are all partners in progress in this region.”