Penny Low
Singapore
“These amenities will offer recreational choices and also prevent traffic congestion to the new town when it is built. Will MND look into these suggestions favourably and also work with MOT to prevent congestion?”
“Going forward, the quality of our lives will also depend on how well we can integrate knowledge with technology and creativity to find solutions with daily, social and economic concerns. What plans are there to encourage people to act responsibly, dream up new ideas and design for a better world?”
“Let us navigate the sea of change with mastery of seafaring skills, guided by the light of the stars and not by passing fancy ships. Only then can we continue to be that extraordinary little red dot the world envies; only then will we know that the future generations will continue to be world-beaters and make their families proud.”
“These considerations should be part of the MediShield Life design so that it is holistic, it incentivises the desired behaviour and it improves the overall health outcome of our Page: 122 nation.”
“Thank you, Deputy Speaker. Clarification, Sir. The Minister mentioned that MediShield premium payments can be paid for by immediate family members.”
“Mdm Speaker, there have been more reports on the increase in rodents lately and I am wondering whether NEA has done any study to discover the reason for such an increase, or is it that there is just more visibility of rodents in, especially, housing estates.”
The complete record
Every one of 773 lines we hold for Penny Low, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 5 of 16.
“Sir, the revolutionary Indian Aravind non-profit network is famous for its eyecare services and an intralocular lens factory called Aurolab. Since 1976, it has done 3.6 million eye surgeries and laser procedures, treated 29 million patients either for free or a low fee, and yet made $7.9 million on revenues of $20 million in 2009, and all these in US dollars. Through disruptive supply chain innovation, Aurolab manufactures two million lenses in a year sold at between US$2 to US$10, exports to 120 countries, and has a global market share of 7%. Today, it continues to challenge conventional pricing models and supply chain with more products. Sir, Aravind could have set itself up as a profit maximising "hungry hippo", but the founders decided on the higher value of compassionate capitalism, and turned Aravind into a social enterprise that brought sight to the underpriviledged millions, who would otherwise remain blind. However, in the profit maximising world, the idea of compassionate capitalism was considered berserk, so Aravind's founders have to mortgage their homes to raise $55,000 as their seed funding. Fortunately, their persistency paid off and foreign funds in the form of Acumen Fund, Gates Award for Global Health and others came to their rescue as they expanded. Sir, in Singapore, passionate and able social entrepreneurs (SEs) meet with the same challengers as Aravind's founders. We lack the ecosystem and access to financial fuel that can help SEs blossom. There is no incentive for the setting up of social venture fund, SE banks or loans for social good. The 250% tax advantage given to charities with IPC status is attractive, but its mandatory charity status runs contrary to the handup approach taken by SEs.”
“Mr Chairman, Sir, three clarifications. For the Minister of State on Social Enterprise (SE). I think he mentioned that City College was successful in getting the LETA Scheme, and I am very happy about that. But may I ask whether City College is the only SE that qualified because as far as I know, they took at least between one-and-a-half to two years before they managed to get the paperworks through and qualify for the LETA Scheme. And I suspect that part of it is because of the inherent differences in the organisation's core structure of SEs that makes it very difficult to qualify for it. So would the MOS look into the intricacies of the grants and the schemes available to make them more friendly and more suitable to MPOs like SEs? Second clarification: MOS has not really replied to my query on whether we could have a strategy of putting SEs and SMEs together in the cluster hunting overseas because they can add to the competitive edge, as I mentioned in the speech itself. And the third clarification: EDB has a special International Organisation (IO) team that was set up to attract IOs to Singapore quite successfully. As the Minister has mentioned, in the past two years or so, it attracted some 80 IOs to Singapore. Can we set up the same under SPRING to groom and have a priority sector development for the SEs in Singapore? 4.45 pm”
“Imagine if MTI can work with MCYS to formulate a systematic approach to groom local SEs, treat them like any other priority sector SMEs, not only would we have a more robust and inclusive economy, SEs can also become a strategic partner and a competitive edge in the second budget thrust which is growing global companies. Let me explain that briefly. With IE Singapore, I understand Budget 2010 will encourage "cluster hunting" and collaborations between SEs when going overseas. We will then compete with hard-nosed Taiwanese conglomerates, Japanese and Korean chaebols to offer foreign investment, mostly based on price points and competencies, often driving down marginal revenue. My suggestion is: why not strategically include the SEs in the conglomerate, and position ourselves not just as a Singapore Inc, but as Singapore Syinc? In other words, while the pure-for-profit businesses offer their investments and trade, SEs complement it by offering social goods and services which find solutions from within the community to break poverty cycles and help communities to help themselves. In the longer term, these empowered communities will also become our clients to ensure the success of our SMEs. On the other hand, especially in the developing nations, our local counterparts can also look good and gain popularity for partnering investors with a heart. Sir, Singapore will be known as the Singapore brand where every citizen will be proud of and feel welcome wherever we go to. Helping SMEs internationlise”
“Sir, building an inclusive economy is a key thrust in Budget 2010. If so, while widening and deepening the capabilities of SMEs, would MTI also do the same with non-profit organisations (NPOs), especially social enterprises that intend to do good and do well? Sir, a few of the SME schemes under SPRING and IE Singapore claim to be open to social enterprises (SEs). However, upon closer examination, the fundamentally different value propositions, organisational and cost structures of SEs immediately disqualify themselves from those schemes. If indeed we want an inclusive society, can MTI tweak the qualifying criteria and make it more friendly towards the NPOs? Sir, Singapore is an old hand at inter-Ministry priority sector nurturing. For instance, in the ICT sector - with iN2015 plans, IDA works with SPRING to support the Technology Enterprise Commercialisation Scheme (TECS) and provides SMEs with early-stage funding for R&D projects. A Proof-of-Concept grant attracts up to $250,000, while a Proof-of-Value grant 85% co-funding of up to $500,000. In addition, there are also generous opportunities like the Overseas Development Programme and the infocomm Local Industry Upgrading Programme that are created for infocomm local enterprise (ILEs) to collaborate with the infocomm MNCs. Through these initiatives, the local SMEs also get access to the global marketing and distribution networks of their MNC partners, build new capabilities in emerging technologies. My question therefore is: can we do the same for SEs?”
“Sir, the story of Singapore has been that of a hardworking clever strategist, who was able to take advantage of its strategic geographical location to develop itself into a bustling city. Over the years, we have also leveraged on our competitive advantage to develop multiple hubs that continue to add fuel to our economy. Hence, can the Minister first update us on the status of our hub strategies and, in particular, whether we have also strategies to interlink these hubs, so that each hub can leverage on one another to multiply the returns. Two, with the changing trade routes from the Atlantic to Asia, it presents unprecedented opportunity for Singapore to reposition itself. We can be a convenient gateway to the new emerging mega economies of China and India. Given our familiarity with the global business lingua franca, transparency, low tax regime, rule of law and political stability, how are we leveraging on this window of opportunity to develop Singapore as a global business hub as well as a global gateway to Asia? What are the measures and support available to both local and foreign businesses? Finally, given the threats of climate change and pandemics, we spoke about the possibility of setting up Singapore as a disaster and relief co-ordination hub. Could the Minister give an update on this? Also, would the Minister agree that this hub is even more effective if we also invest in building a Humanitarian or International Organisational Hub that can complement the hard products with humanitarian software and services – whether in training or hot housing such organisations?”
“While, we need to return the economy to the service of its people, people too, need to return to the country the dignity of being the best and the spirit of self reliance, and people need to return to each other, the humanity that binds us all. Sir, in the spirit of taking this opportunity to re-value, redesign and rebuild our society, let us strive towards a more inclusive, sustainable and better future, ming tian hui gen hao (明天会更好).”
“But the Commonwealth Games means so much more – it is the once-in-a-generation opportunity to regenerate a derelict part of the city and tackle some of the issues of health and deprivation that have blighted Glasgow." It went on to say that, "Members of Glasgow City Council and the Scottish Government are working on plans to ensure the Games leave a positive legacy on our communities." Amongst others, Glasgow is working on a comprehensive transport system that covers the city and extends to the expressways that connects the country, while the Commonwealth Game Village will be built and converted to 300 low-cost social housing units and a 120-bed care home. This is relevant and real connection with the people and responsible use of taxpayers' money. This is also why while Glasgow is cheering while the Games are four years away, our streets are still quiet while the clock is ticking away. If people welcome the Games, they will embrace the athletes with open arms and genuine smiles. People need to understand what the Games mean to them, we need to involve everyone in this historical event. We still have five months so it is still not too late. I urge the organisers to make this event the Singapore moment where everyone counts. I also urge that everyone, individuals or enterprise rally around the YOG and stand up for Singapore. In conclusion, Sir, during the downturn, many global MNCs suddenly discovered that they have a nationality. Similarly, many people discovered they have a welfare pass via their passport. Only in our own homeland, are we first class citizens.”
“My final wish is that for the Youth Olympics Games (YOG). This is an inaugural event in the world, and one that Singapore will possibly host once for a long time to come. August is only five months away, and yet, there does not seem to be very much buzz in the air. In contrast, Glasgow won the bid to host the Commonwealth Games 2014. Yet, when I visited it last November, people were excited about it. Why? The answer is found in the search results page. When you google the YOG page, that is the YOG site, the search results turned up words like "volunteer", "sports", "YOG", "events". But the Glasgow Commonwealth Games, abbreviated GCG, turned up words like "getting involved", "our people", "what Games mean to Glasgow", and so on. Sir, a language reflects the dominant thought of the organiser. While both Glasgow and Singapore rallied the people to support the Games, Glasgow made the game relevant to the people. First, I understand from the Mayor he had to go to the Chambers to ask for taxpayers' money to bid for the Games. When he won the bid, he set up multiple feedback and suggestion portals, to understand how the Scotts would like to spend that money. As it turns out, seemingly unrelated wishes like improving public transport, more low-cost housing and so on topped the list. The GCG website states that, "One of the benefits of hosting the Commonwealth Games is to leave the host city with a lasting legacy of improved infrastructure that is both positive and sustainable. Glasgow will be rolling up its sleeves to ensure that everyone involved with the Games has a fantastic time.”
“The right lessons must be learnt. We need to re-value our goals, which cannot be just a pure GDP race. We need to redesign the policy incentive framework to be truly inclusive, and rebuild the KPIs and institutions to support them. What gets measured, gets done. It is not an issue for the economists to worry about. It concerns all of us. So I have three wishes for this Budget, in building an inclusive growth. Wish number one – I hope that the National Productivity and Continuing Education Council will involve not only the union, the public and the business sector, but also the people or the non-profit-organisation sector, who also needs a leg up. Wish number two – making of what I call, a WikiMe. I understand that the Government promotes mass collaboration between multiple Government agencies and businesses. The impending One Map is one example, where Government agencies and businesses can make their facilities and services available through a map interface. I propose the we create another map, which I call 'WikiMe', meaning Wikipedia and me where the Government creates the infrastructure like how we created Wireless@SG, and templates, while people upload their own content, offering information about themselves, exchange triumphs and tribulations, and even offering a hand for free or for a fee. If done properly, this could be the largest and single most effective way of self-help and neighbourhood bonding mechanism that could inform the neighbours of who are around them, who is available to be a babysitter, run an errand or be a handy man. Productivity will rise, as latent resources like homemakers and elderly who may not want to work long hours and only want to work on jobs to home, can now be meaningfully employed.”
“Another example, Mr Dennis Kweh, an National Library Board (NLB) staff, suffered from a rare genetic disorder called Morquio-Brailsford Disease, Spinal Sclerosis and blinded on one eye due to glaucoma. He started Adventure 200, a 200-kilometre wheelchair marathon over three days, to raise $200,000 for the Spastic Children's Association of Singapore. I wheelchaired alongside Dennis at the start and end of the marathon and saw how he toiled every distance, stopping only for a doctor to check that he is fit to carry on. Yet, the event was not very well supported because Dennis is not an Olympian nor a super star, and there is certainly no big prize money at the end of it for him when he completes the trip. However, his effort is no less than that of an Olympian. How can we support his effort? How can ordinary Singaporeans support his effort to be a net contributor to society, despite his own very difficult conditions? For too long, while in a rat race, the world has accepted a widening bell curve approach to development, rising Gini coefficient was acceptable, and economic growth does not have to account for externalities. Perhaps that was necessary to get majority up to speed in the shortest possible time. But history is a mirror, and externalities, be it social or environment, will boomerang in our face, if we refuse to heed the lessons of the global recession. Sir, we are not all responsible for the past, but we are all responsible for the future, and for the world we leave for our children. I repeat my Budget call last year, when Iceland and the Artic Ice melted together that the right question to ask is not "when the downturn will be over", but "how would we want to emerge from this storm – as a person, as a corporation, and as a nation"?”
“For example, without MND's recent effort in ensuring barrier-free access for all roads and buildings, the physically handicapped, the old, the weak and the heavily pregnant will find navigating roads difficult, and in another 20 years when the ageing population explodes, we will have a good proportion of the population sitting at home. But with the barrier-free access and low step buses, they can continue to be mobile and continue with gainful employment, contributing to growth with dignity. Once, I was at the launch of a universal access website by a disabled people's association. At the welcome speech, the president said, "Imagine a world where the visually impaired can file their tax returns online". Just then, it hit me that I have been e-filing my taxes for years, but they had no access, even though universal web access is inexpensive and has been around for sometime. Then it occurred to me that they did not need it any way, because to start with, they have no income to file. Yet, like savants who have been found to have super-human abilities because their brains block out some other functions, the blind has a profound sense of hearing and touch beyond that of a normal being. The same can be said of many other marginalised groups, be it the autistic, hearing impaired, depressed, elderly or lowly educated. Can policy makers design incentive frameworks that encourage the deepening and employment of such super skill sets? It will up productivity if a square peg is fitted in a square hole. Now, by giving wage subsidy to companies to employ any disabled is not only a handout approach, but one that does not incentivise people nor company to operate at their best.”
“Every person deserves to be facilitated to become the best that they can be in whichever field that they choose. Sir, Google recently won the accolade of having the highest value-add per worker at $450,000 at the second quarter of 2009. Not only that, it is said that they receive one million job applicants a year and denies some 99.5% of them. How did they do that? There is no time to elaborate here, but a complete redesign of the workplace and workflow, making Google Town the place to work, play and live in, while offering space and flexibility for workers to work on their dream technology seems to be the trick. In short, they kept morale and aspirations high, and drives employees to be the best they can be. The question is: can we do the same for Singapore and Singaporeans? Can the Government act as a facilitator and create an incentive framework that encourages everyone, every enterprise to be the best that we can be. Yes, we can, and I think, in fact, we might have done so for the top half of the population, but I cannot say the same for the bottom half. I was heartened to read that an inclusive growth was the third thrust of this Budget. But upon closer examination, I was dismayed to see that it refers very narrowly, to increasing productivity and income of the low-wage workers. What about the no wage workers? What about the marginalised latent resources that could have been further disadvantaged because we had unknowingly built an environment that further isolates them?”
“In Japan, all 7-Elevens have additional pictorial keys on their Point of Sales (POS) system. Once, a 65-year-old smiled as I self-scanned my purchase, while she pressed some pictorial buttons which indicated my age, gender and build. She was collecting shoppers' data so she can have an accurate picture of her clients' purchase habits, frequency and time of purchase so that she can better plan her cashflow and manpower needs. She also makes more money from selling the data to manufacturers, who will use it for better product launches specific to that locality. In Singapore, the National Library is way ahead of the curve. With its bold and innovative use of technology, some regional libraries now have only one frontline staff. One of my grassroots leader, Mr Jeffrey Low, from Meng Soon Paints and Hardware Trading Company, recently invested in a computerised pre-programme paint tinting machine. He said that it has increased efficiency of his business operations significantly because before that, when there were special paint colour orders, he would have to take it down to the paint supplier personally and wait for about three days before he got his order confirmed. And sometimes, because the quantity is too little, the order is turned down and he loses the business. But now, with this machine, he said that he can cut down on the supply chain for customised requests immediately thereby increasing efficiency, sales and of course, giving him a lot more free time to do and focus on growing his business. So indeed, improved productivity can spur economic growth, but we must remember that they are only a means to an end, and not the end in itself. So what is the end? Workers are not just a statistic on a business or Government chart.”
“Sir, in the past 40 years, simply put, our growth strategy was one of "more input, more output". First, we mobilised our own land and labour resources and attracted foreign capital and entrepreneurs. Then, when we expanded land by building upwards and labour by importing more cheap workforce. Over the decades, labour force participation rate reached a high 80%, for ages 20-59 years old, quality of life improved and the cost of living escalated. But meanwhile, this same old method of increasing input to increase output seems to have reached a diminishing marginal return. So this year's Budget focused on increasing productivity, spearing global SMEs from Singapore and an inclusive growth. But yet, feedback from the GPC Resource Panel, trade associations and businessmen pointed to the fact that change means uncertainties and uncertainties is not good for business. Many businessmen also said that they know how to maximise every factor of production so there is no need for the Government to interfere. Some in the hospitality and construction industries even criticised the Government for not being truly understanding to their operational limitations, and that the new levy rules would severely impact their business. But, Sir, global tides are changing at real time, and we must avoid the frog-in-boiling water syndrome, waking up one day, only to ask "who moved my cheese?", when it is too little, too late. European supermarkets offer us some lessons. Many have digital price display panels alongside barcode scanners that provides information about the goods on the well-stocked shelves. Since all products do come with barcodes, there is no longer a need to physically tag every item and change tags when there is a price change, greatly reducing the need for manual manpower.”
“May I ask the Parliamentary Secretary whether there is going to be any step-up measure against unsolicited mailers?”
“Sir, two supplementary questions. One, I am aware from my block visits yesterday that Town Council, in working with the HDB, has started to issue a lot of letters of warning to residents for placing objects or undesired parcels precariously. This has caused a lot of unhappiness, mainly because residents are not aware of the dangers associated with such behaviour. So may I ask the Parliamentary Secretary, in his reply earlier on, where he noted that there has to be a higher level of education, when will this be rolled out and can this be rolled out quickly so that the communication with the residents can be a lot smoother? Second, on an associated litter issue, there has been a rise in unsolicited mails – mailers, pamphlets, leaflets distributed door-to-door by housing agents, locksmiths, and so on. This has caused two concerns. One is, of course the cost of cleaning up itself is tremendous and the residents are paying for that. Two, it has also become a signal of which unit is not occupied or that the occupants are temporarily away, and this has also caused quite a number of cases of burglary, even in my own area itself.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, may I call on this House and our nation to journey on, as Minister Mentor says "step-by-step" with vigilance, hard work, compassion and cohesion – so as to achieve happiness, prosperity and progress for our nation. Sir, I support the amended motion.”
“I have not received a letter like that from a BG before but I think it is a very good reminder that even the BG – someone perceived as operational-minded and civil servant – is mindful of our Pledge and does his part in his call of duty to align himself, his policies, and his implementations to the Pledge. So I am glad that we have enlightened civil servants like BG Tan. We have to understand that it is not just building a united and inclusive society regardless of race, language and religion, but also regardless of background, abilities or age. Home is, after all, made up of two words, "hope" and "shared memories". Singapore is ours to build. In conclusion, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, Singapore has come a long way in both economic and social terms. We should be proud of it, but not rest on our laurels. We are not perfect, much needs to be done, and we will always be work-in-progress. The competition is not just within Singapore. It is global and the fittest survive. Lest we throw the baby out with the bath water, we better anchor ourselves on what we did right in the past 44 years, while adapting furiously to changing circumstances. The nation building tenets as enshrined in the National Pledge are applicable, of course, to all policies – social, political, and not just economics. Our secret weapon – one united people; and the other secret weapon, the ability to walk the talk – requires not just the public sector and the legislators in this House, but also the private sector and the people sector to step up. It is not just a "many hands" approach but a "many hearts", "many heads", and "many hands and legs" approach.”
“There is also an important social outreach effort where we bring in voluntary welfare organisations, Institute of Mental Health and the Yellow Ribbon project to help in the packing of our fun packs, with each pack being tagged by the person who packed it. We hope that Singaporeans can appreciate how the marginalised and less privileged also play a part in our national efforts." And for the first time, new media is used extensively to engage Singaporeans and the response has been encouraging. He said: "We have over six million views on our official website and over a million on our various interactive platforms like Facebook, YouTube and the like. Singaporeans have also shared more than 60,000 thoughts and reflections online and at least 40,000 wishes on cards. We have also worked with the grassroots, schools, self-help groups, and many other agencies to pool our various national efforts. Our National Day is a natural rallying point and it makes sense to coordinate our many activities." And then he said: "The highlight of the evening will be our 8.22 pm Pledge moment. As we take the Pledge at the float at Marina, Singaporeans at over 640 locations in Singapore and up to 10 overseas points will also join in as we pledge ourselves in unison. This will be our equivalent of Earth Hour and promises to be a memorable experience as we bring new meaning to the line "Pledge ourselves as one united people". Sir, I have taken time to read what he has written to us. It is unusual.”
“In fact, most of us – we jokingly say – are married to our constituency and we call it our second home. We grow old with the elderly qigong group while the toddler in the pram is now taller than me. Can we not hear them? Can we not share their joy and challenges? Can we not represent their woes, their needs, their wants in this House and not translate it into apt policies? It is in fact this very close relationship between policy-makers, PAP MPs and the people, and the faith that we have in each other, that helps us move non-populist policies in the last 44 years. It is the faith, and of course this social contract, this unwritten duty and code of honour, that prevents us from scoring short-term political brownie points but instead, go for long-term gains in national interest. Unity in diversity and solidarity together is what moves us ahead and gives us this unique Singapore edge. To reiterate: This unity did not happen by chance, and will always be work-in-progress. The moment at 8.22 pm on 9th August 2009 was a carefully thought out, meticulously well-planned event that leverages on modern ICT (InfoCom Technology), resource mobilisation and goodwill on the ground to unite Singaporeans near and far into one united chorus. Just days before the parade, I received a letter from the Chairman of the NDP '09 Executive Committee (Exco), BG Tan Chuan-Jin. In it, he tried to explain what NDP is this year, and I quote what he said: "Given that most Singaporeans will not be at the NDP itself, we want to reach out and engage as many people as possible. We have a wide range of activities aimed at the heartlands.”
“We run as a team, and whatever price won by any team-mates will be shared by the nation. In other words, we are better off with this social contract. It is a win-win solution. Yesterday, Nominated Member Viswa also mentioned that Singapore scored the second lowest in terms of trust amongst the people. Indeed this finding somewhat contradicts the finding of Transparency International – which is a global organisation that measures corruption around the world. And corruption is often used as a proxy for measuring trust, as corruption lowers confidence and reliability. In the 2009 Global Corruption Barometer which polled 69 countries and 73,132 individuals, Singapore emerged as the least corrupt country in the world. What is even remarkable is that the scores related to our political parties, parliament legislature, judiciary, public service and civil servants, also top the chart of being the least corrupt in the world. This trust, confidence and reliability of our institutions have contributed greatly to the premium Singapore brand, giving Singaporeans and Singapore brands a headstart when we go overseas. This high trust even has an unwanted side effect – that the Singapore passport sells at a premium price tag in the black market. Sir, selective data without a holistic approach and understanding can at best be persuasive, but perhaps unrealistic. This House comprises of Elected Members with full accountability to its constituents. We listen to our constituents, we celebrate the weddings and festivities with our residents, we grief with our residents when ill fate bestow, not on a yearly basis, not on a monthly basis, but on a weekly and even daily basis.”
“Yesterday, Nominated Member Viswa and earlier on, Nominated Member Calvin Cheng lamented about our high Gini co-efficient. I think they were not in this House, when a few years ago, Prime Minister Lee painstakingly explained the need to attract top talents that can continue to create wealth and bring jobs to Singaporeans. Top wages attract top talents, and the inadvertent outcome is that of a higher Gini co-efficient. This House then debated at length on how we can, through policy implementations, self-help and mutual help, mitigate the income gap via rebates, upgrading community amenities (for example, instead of country clubs build community clubs), ComCare schemes, revamps in the 3Ms in healthcare, lifelong learning and massive upgrading of an entire nation through the SPUR programme, and the list goes on. These measures are not taken into consideration in the calculation of Gini co-efficient, are they? This re-distribution of wealth to reduce the gaps and improve outcomes is the result of the understanding that the people – residents, in fact, of Singapore – have a shared destiny. Nominated Member Calvin Cheng also shared the story about the runners. He said that if the fast runners stop to help the foreign runners, the team will be slowed down; but if the fast runners ignore the foreign runners, it implies that they may neglect their foreign team mates. Both appear to be lose-lose options. I think we can think out-of-the-box for a win-win outcome. First, the team can understand that no matter what happens, the fast, the slow or foreign runners are all part of the team with shared destiny. Give space to the best to be the best, while continuously build the physique and technique of the slower runners.”
“Whereas at one time before the Asian financial crisis, economies were booming, cities were thriving and people, I think, were happier. But, today, there are much uncertainties in the Philippines, Indonesia, Thailand and even Malaysia. People are divided along political, racial and religious cracklines, economies stalled and with fewer jobs, many have no choice but to leave their families to become manual labour in foreign land. They remit the money home. Many of them, quite possibly, could have been amongst the many who have chanted for democracy, freedom, fairness, without fully understanding the context and responsibilities of these words; and they could be asking for change without insight into what change really means to the man-in-the-street. Streets have become unsafe and families are broken down. Are they happy? Hardly. Every country I go to these days, I try to spend at least half a day visiting some of the non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and the locals. It is a humbling experience to know that many of them ask if they can come to Singapore for a better life. So, what is our secret weapon? One united people – this is difficult to replicate. Change that, and we will change for the worse, and there will be no easy turning back. Given the anecdotal evidence around the world, this unity is not a natural state. It takes very enlightened and determined leadership, one that is closely connected to the heartbeat of the heartlanders as much as it is connected to the global trends and one that is non-corrupt, to be able to forge a united people. The secret weapon – sharpen the secret weapon. So our other secret weapon is that we act, we do not just talk. And we walk our talk.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, thank you for your patience and to Members of the House too. Given that I am the last speaker, I will try to keep it as short as I can. But this is an important subject. Like Mr Viswa, I google quite a bit and know that not all net sources are reliable. But, recently, I was surprised to read from a 'aneki.com' that Singapore surfaced as the most googled nation in the world. I paused and asked, "Is 'aneki.com' reliable?", or "What do people google Singapore for?" But I soon realised that these are not the right questions to ask. The right question is: how did a tiny island state in a developing region, deprived of any resources, be of interest to anyone? How did we, against all odds, evolve a model of growth that is now adopted and adapted by countries as near as Vietnam and as far as Kenya? Putting things in perspective, just a mere 0.5% of the people with the highest intelligence quotient (IQ) in China or India would be more than the total population in Singapore. What the US consumes in a month is probably more than the total consumption of Singaporeans in a year. So with no natural resources, no market size and insufficient people, what did this little red dot do right in the last 44 years to defy gravity, contradict the law of large numbers and become amongst one of the most admired nations in the world? Then, during this year’s National Day Parade (NDP), as I said our Pledge at 8.22 pm on 9th August 2009, the answer became clear. Indeed, the answer is found in the first sentence of our Pledge: "We, the citizens of Singapore, pledge ourselves as one united people." One united people – this is what makes us stand out from the rest, and indeed from the world. Look no further than ASEAN.”
“I remember vividly the tear-jerker video of a young Minister Mentor Lee shedding tears when Singapore was booted out of Malaysia or Malaya then. I also remember a video with the Minister Mentor, fist clenched, determined voice addressing an audience, promising a metropolitan in 10 years while looking at deteriorated kampongs. We built this nation on great leadership. Generations after generations, the PAP has made the search for committed leadership its top priority, for it understands that only with leaders who are agile and clean, leaders who are compassionate yet clear headed, can Singapore continue to thrive. With changing times and the impending parliamentary constitutional changes, I hope that whoever enters this Parliament, enters to build on the sacrifices of our forefathers, and endeavour to make Singapore the land of opportunity and the best home for our residents – based on the principles in our Pledge, which is: regardless of race, language or religion, to build peace, prosperity and progress for our nation. Sir, I think this time round, Prime Minister Lee has shown the mark of great leaders, by not stopping at just reflection. He does not want to waste a good crisis. He wants this to be the point of inflection. I urge all citizens and organisations to give him your utmost support, in making the next chapter; the best chapter for Singapore. Sir, if it is to be, it is up to me. Mr Speaker Sir, I thank you and I support the motion. 3.12 pm”
“The proposed changes will add more diverse views. However, if the Parliament debates becomes reduced to a contest of words, without real responsibilities, then we may discover, to our cost, the problem of barking dogs. As witnessed in many countries, parliamentarians play to the gallery, bills get laggard, investors lose confidence, citizens lose jobs and hopes in a once-upon-a-time prosperous land, culminating in a complete breakdown in the social contract. So, I say let us get real. We are a small country. If we do not get our acts together, then we are no good for anyone, local or overseas. We will lose our relevance to our citizens, we will lose our relevance to the world. Singaporeans travelling overseas will need visas and be queried for hours at checkpoints. As hon. Member Assoc. Prof. Koo Tsai Kee said, we will have no voice even if we shout. Then, survival becomes a big question. Yesterday, NCMP Ms Sylvia Lim said she is against the changes, yet she advocates letting the people judge what makes a better system. So I wonder if she would agree to let the people judge if these changes are good. But, of course, I hope that Ms Lim would agree that judging is always retrospective. The stakes in this case are the livelihood of Singaporeans and survivability of Singapore. There are enough examples right in our neighbourhood to show what political instability can do to social progress in bigger nations; so let alone a small nation like Singapore. A reminder here: there is no easy 'reset' button. So, let us not belittle the achievements of our past and current leaders, or the contributions that the PAP party has made in structuring Singapore’s prosperity.”
“Because human beings are survivors of the evolving eco-systems over hundreds of years, and, in fact, we are the result of winning sperms and eggs. Our survival instincts can be sharply enhanced by investing heavily in the health, education and opportunities of our people. Hence, the investments under Minister for Health, Minister Khaw Boon Wan, in promoting the 3Ms and healthy lifestyle are crucial. In the area of education and lifelong learning, the SPUR program may appear to be like a recession tool. But I actually see it as a very clever strategy to up-skill and entire nation when the opportunity cost is at its lowest so that we can stay ahead of the game. Health and education has to be complemented by access to opportunities to fulfil potentials and passion. This is perhaps one reason for convening the Economic Strategies Committee, but it alone is insufficient. In a networked world where individuals have amplified voices and abilities, we need to earnestly empower our citizens in building people-to-people bridges across the globe. The more friends we have, the further and deeper our reach. And the clue here is to leverage on existing organisations and individuals, instead of building from scratch. Empower and collaborate, not just compete. Similarly, on the political scene, we need to stay relevant to our people. The Prime Minister announced a series of constitutional changes to the Parliament. And, indeed, as time changes, needs change. And fortunately, our political system is soft-coded. So, instead of throwing away everything that has been built, new client specifications can be added on, goals redefined, process refined and constraints tweaked so that the system yields better results that is apt for the changing time.”
“For my part, on a pro bono basis, I have formed a team with the World Economic Forum and two Professors from the Harvard Business School to craft what is temporarily called a 'Davos Oath for Business Leaders'. This will be accompanied by a set of measurement tools to set the ethics and ethos of business leaders. In the process, I have also incorporated the thinking of our pioneer leaders from Singapore – which is economic growth for social progress not as an after thought; but as a key motivation for doing business. When launched, investing in communities and upholding integrity will become the new business benchmarks. This may sound like a very long shot but, fortunately, in our beta test with top business leaders, MBAs and media, have been positive. I hope that when it is ready to be launched, Singapore leaders can also embrace it. And this brings me to my second question: what do we need to do to stay relevant to our people, and to the rest of the world? Minister Mentor Lee, Senior Minister Goh, Prime Minister Lee, all our Cabinet Ministers, in fact, have constantly reminded us of the need to stay relevant. This should be edged into our modus operandi. The story of Iceland is a good reminder of small states that could be amongst the richest and most educated population in the world, but once it loses its relevance, then no one comes to its rescue when the hurricanes of change swirl. We need to keep abreast of the winds of change, and constantly ask ourselves, what is our relevance to our neighbours, our relevance to the world? Only then, will our neighbours and global allies have reason to help us in times of difficulties. So, what would be our best bets in staying relevant? The answer, is three – people, people, people. Why?”
“Chances are, we will hope to have our loved ones with us, and know that we mean something to someone, and have led a life without regrets. Meaning something to someone is important, for that is humanity. For what profits a man, if he wins all but loses his soul? Up until the recent economic meltdown caused by the fond embrace of the invisible hands, coupled with short-sighted irrational exuberance and greed, Milton Friedman’s advocacy of business-for-pure-profits-equals-social-prosperity argument reigns. We now know that the short sightedness of the free market approach has caused an abdication of social responsibility and sacrificed collective social progress for individual gains. But is this the result of a system failure? As Bill George, former CEO of Medtronic, philanthropist and a bestselling author, wrote in the Wall Street Journal, "The current crisis was not caused by sub-prime mortgages, not caused by credit default swaps, or failed economic policies. The root cause is failed leadership." From business schools that taught students profit maximisation for shareholders rather than for society, to Wall Street that espouses 'greed is good', to economies that espouses growth at all costs, we are all guilty of accepting or advocating a narrow culture of success, which is measured only in terms of transactional dollar value. Growing income gaps, rapid rise in urban depression cases, short-termisms, are all results of a transactional value system. Hence, we all have a part to play and let us not waste a crisis. Let us leverage on it to fundamentally change this culture of narrow self-interest, to a broad culture of sustainable social progress.”
“Up until the 1970s, my kampong at Mata Ikan had four households with 30 people sharing a jamban. The average Singapore household now has four people sharing at least two bathrooms – that is the progress. Singapore was born out of accident, with no valuables underground, and chaos above ground. We relied on clean hands, competent minds, compassionate hearts and clear heads with determined visionary leadership to transform ourselves into an economic miracle. The question is, can what brought us here continue to bring us to where we want to go to? Furthermore, have we, as individual citizens, as a community, as a nation, thought seriously about our collective future? Perhaps adding onto the Economic Strategies Committee, I propose that we could also convene a Aspirations Strategies Committee to canvass the views, hopes and aspirations of our people – both old and young, abled and disabled, across gender and ethnic groups, in a many-brains, diverse souls approach. After all, Singapore must strive to be our collective dream home. Sir, the Prime Minister outlined questions for us to ponder as we move forward. I would like to add two more : First, going forward, what are the global principles by which we govern ourselves or measure our success by? The world was on a rat race – individuals compare pay packages and net worth, companies compare PE ratios and market value, while countries compare GDP and size of reserves, and the list goes on. I am not saying that these are not important. In fact, they are. But these cannot be the only benchmarks by which we measure ourselves. When ashes to ashes and dust to dust, we will unlikely be comparing pay cheques.”
“Sir, thank you for allowing me to join in this debate and "bao buey". It is my honour to do so, even though all that could have been said, would have been said, are probably said. But that gave me time for reflection. And, indeed, Sir, every country goes through phases of reflection. Often, a real crisis gives the golden opportunity to do so. While intense efforts are focused on tackling the current crisis, I am heartened to hear Prime Minister Lee's speech on Wednesday, where he made it clear that he will use this period of imported economic tsunami to reflect, ask hard questions and re-strategise. Singapore has come a long way. Back in the 1990s, when I was hitch-hiking across the European continents, conversations on the road inevitably entail an education on Singapore. Some thought we are a part of China or even Thailand, some asked if I am a disciple of Bruce Lee. The only period in my year long travel, where people talked about Singapore as if they knew us, was in Paris, during the period of the Michael Fay incident. So, in fact, I heard about Michael Fay from the French, and you can imagine how difficult the conversations were. Fast forward to May 2009, in preparation for this speech, I surveyed a group of 30 young global leaders from all over the world, aged 25-42. My question to them was, what comes to mind first, when you hear the word 'Singapore'. This time, everyone had an answer. Amongst the most interesting answers were 'Lee Kuan Yew' and 'structured prosperity'. In retrospect, Singapore owes its being to leaders like Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew and his team of capable and committed comrades operating under the banner of the People's Action Party, to structure the prosperity of Singapore from Third World to First World.”
“Hence, while the amendment is a step forward, it should be accompanied by steps to further encourage the political debate , so that society's critical faculty can become its best defence against any ill influences. And with that, we could further liberalise any political films/acts in the future. With that, Sir, I support the Bill.”
“And on the process itself, for any government to be credible, it must be seen to be fair to all – regardless of language, religion, culture or political orientation. In this regard, the appointment of the Political Film Consultative Committee should be an open process, and the members of this Committee should be seen as neutral individuals who are reputed for their fairness in their dealings. I am heartened that Mr Richard Magnus would be chairing the Committee. He is known to be a very experienced and independent district judge. And I hope that the rest of the members would also take on that air of neutrality and fairness. And on the deliberations of the film itself, I think some have also asked should rejected films be given any reason so that they can work out what is acceptable and re-edit the film and re-submit for admission. And how will this process itself be different or would it be exactly the same as other films that are currently submitted to the censorship board for deliberation? Finally, Sir, I think Singaporeans are highly educated and Singapore is one of the most connected nations in the world, especially the fact that we have very high penetration rates of broadband and the mobile. It is, therefore, important to encourage good political debate and public discourse, so that good views are not driven underground or only pushed to the cyberspace. And, of course, good political discourse and space would encourage iron to sharpen iron. Open public discourse can also help to mature a society, help citizens to feel a sense of belonging and responsibility to Singapore.”
“To argue that film censorship is more an art than a science, and the Government will use a "light touch", it is little comfort to serious producers on any side of the fence. So, Sir, while I do support not over-dramatising or distorting films into a fanciful circus of acts, I am also saying that having vague terms and constructs will not do serious documentaries with a bit of animation to illustrate certain points any good. Next, does the amendment also make the filming of illegal activities, illegal? If so, this is even more problematic when licensed broadcasters, including foreign ones, are allowed to film them but ordinary citizens are not. If foreigners are allowed to film and disseminate, while citizens are not, then what is the Government actually trying to prevent? If the argument is that licensed broadcasters are easier to manage under the law whereas individuals/mavericks/rogue filmmakers are not, then reality is not as clear-cut. So long as they are residents in Singapore and are known entities, I think there are some existing laws that can take its course. If, on the other hand, they are unknown and un-catchable, then it may also have the unintended effect of promoting anonymity and further lack of accountability. And by this, I mean that people who want to, will still upload their videos, but they will do it anonymously, via foreign media and, of course, websites, and perhaps would dramatise it even further just to make their point. Would this, therefore, be worse off for Singapore as a whole? So I think, at the very minimum, some of these questions need to be answered rationally as much as judgmentally. Hence, I urge the Minister to clearly articulate its intent, and clarify the content of the Bill as much as possible.”
“Sir, please allow me to clarify that I do not mean to say that full liberalisation or the current proposed form will result in one or the other. Rather, I take the view that versus doing nothing and absolutely nothing from our current position, and hence disallowing all political films, this amendment is a step towards liberalisation and, at the same time, safeguarding against money and showbiz politics – which can be a waste of resources and self-indulgent. But I do have some issues with some of the content of the amendment itself which includes certain problematic areas and words like, I quote, "wholly accurate account" where the word "wholly accurate" is debatable; "no animation" because I do not know of any persuasive films or documentaries today that could be completely animation-free; or "the recording of actual and legal event only". Please let me elaborate. It is questionable if good documentaries could and should be produced "without any animation and composed wholly of an accurate account depicting actual events, persons and situations" and without presenting them in any "dramatic way". Any serious documentary producer’s major concern would be its dramatic effect in telling the story so as to capture the audience. This is one of the ways in which the best documentaries in the world win awards. Even Al Gore’s documentary, "An Inconvenient Truth", uses animation. Secondly, what is meant by "wholly accurate account"? If it was intended as an injunction against mixing fiction with facts, in other words, distortion of facts, then are there currently known remedies that could better address this situation? I think the proposed Bill should spell out exactly what it means instead of using vague language and broad constructs.”
“And it is suffice to say that each jurisdiction will have to find its own set of principles that will work for its citizens in a fair and transparent manner, because this is the only way which it can be sustainable in the long term. I spoke with residents, grassroots leaders and opinion leaders to get a sense of whether there is a common view around this issue in Singapore. And the result? The views are as mixed as a kaleidoscope, and the colours are just as vibrant! While netizens tend to weigh heavily on the side of full liberalisation on political films, and allowing people to judge for themselves, others quoted the bak-chor mee stall story where a rumour can be misconstrued as reality, especially if it is allowed its full song and dance in pictures. Some also felt that politics should be kept clean, and not go down the way of the US or Korea and Taiwan where film stars, celebrities and clever producers were able to juice up serious political contests into a contest of bloopers and laughs, fancy dress competition or, worse, to escalate it into a competition of who can get the best talent or pay the best producers for the most fanciful or persuasive film for infotainment. Closer to home, as Senior Minister of State has alluded to, in one of our neighbouring countries, illegally filmed footage of the private affairs of political leaders have also made their rounds, with disastrous consequences not just on the candidates, but also their family and community. So I guess one key consideration in this Bill is how and what do we want our political scene to look like in the long term. Would it be a serious contest where all views and citizens should be able to participate fully, fairly and in a cost effective manner, or one which becomes a costly circus of the fanciful?”
“Sir, thank you for allowing me to kick off the debate on this much watched Films (Amendment) Bill. I will speak about the intent, content and also the process relating to the amendment itself. Following the widely reported AIMS Committee recommendation, the Government has accepted most of the recommendations, amongst which is a gradual liberalisation of the films, including political films. This Amendment, therefore, is seen as a step in that direction. Yet, the Internet is riled with different opinions, questioning the intent of the amendment. Common questions asked are: Is this really a step towards liberation? Or is this a step backwards to contain certain political parties? Even worse, is this to introduce a catch-all clause to contain even the film producer, videographer and free speech? First, let us be upfront here. Every country has worries about the ill effects of unfettered free speech. However, the responses vary dramatically between countries. Even amongst Western liberal democracies, it would be hard to find uniformity. US is often seen to be at one end of the spectrum with its First Amendment which has been used to thwart most kinds of restrictions on free speech, including, very recently, even the attempt to rate pornographic websites! It is preposterous but it happened. Some European countries, on the other hand, have enacted laws against hate speech with relative ease and speed. At the other end, there are countries that purport to protect its citizens from the ill effects of Internet by banning it almost entirely! Again, impossible but it happened. And there is of course all the positions in between. There is, in other words, no international norm.”
“SROI, by the way, is 'a way to express social value in a way the bankers understand', and it would usually measure not just the financial bottom line, but also the social dividends. Also, instead of a top-down approach, the UK government understands that giving a fish will only be good for a day, and enterprises really need cashflow and demand for its products and services. Hence, instead of just giving one-off grants and setting KPIs, it embarks on what it calls, public social partnerships (PSP) to proactively search for ways to partner and procure goods and services from the social sector, as a full paying customer. In government service procurement documents, efforts are also made to incorporate social and environmental clauses into tenders, and disseminate the opportunities to both social enterprises and social firms. 4.30 pm Sir, I hope MCYS would seriously study these developments at lightning speed, as we can better tackle the challenges of changing demographics and changing socio-economic landscapes. I would also like to echo the voices that we have heard in this House that more needs to be done to help the social economy itself. In fact, we are not looking for just a many-hands approach where most of the hands are really coming from the Government sector, but really many-hands approach where most of the hands are bottom-up efforts rather than top-down initiatives.”
“Sir, I declare my interest in the social economy. Sir, I applaud the setting up of the Inter-Agency Committee on Social Economy Implementation Committee, which I regard as a significant milestone and testimony to MCYS' enlightened whole-of-Government approach. The social economy plays key roles in providing meaningful jobs, stimulating the economy and providing solutions where the market fails. Innovative social entrepreneurs bring solution from within the community to meet the needs of the community. This means involving citizens more fully in problem-solving, and channeling active citizenry into constructive socio-economic goods and services. Socially-driven businesses could help one another bear the pressures of the downturn. Therefore, in that light, would the Minister commission a study to better understand, firstly, the size of Singapore's social economy; secondly, the demand and supply of jobs in the social economy; and, finally, its impact on our social compact? In the United Kingdom, the office of the Third Sector at the Cabinet Office has pledged to work with government agencies to look for ways to grow social enterprise, and in fact, just injected another 42.5 million pounds. And as an example of what they do, the Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform (BERR) department would explore ways to make community development finance institutions more sustainable, while the National Offender Management Service would research ways in which social enterprise can help reduce re-offending. The UK Department of Health, too, looks at social return on investment (SROI) of social enterprises operating in mainstream healthcare.”
“Sir, I would like to clarify that social enterprises are called social enterprises because they are double bottomline. In other words, their profitability is measured on social and financial bottomline. So, in that light, they exist between a whole continuum from for-profits to not-for-profits. Is the Senior Minister of State aware that, currently, the problem with social enterprises is that if they are registered as not-for-profit, under the CLG, they are not availed to the schemes that are operated under SPRING. Therefore, in this time of demand and credit crunch, many of them would, in fact, face the same problem as SMEs, but without the help-lines that are currently offered to even SMEs.”
“A different legal structure in the form of UK's CIC and US' LCCC, both of which I mentioned last year, should also be explored. Can the Minister please give this suggestion some serious thought?”
“I declare my interest. Sir, which is a better way to build resilience in our people? By giving handouts or giving handups? The answer is obvious. For too long, we have hard-coded businesses into for-profits and charity categories. Thereby, force fitting people into jobs and welfare. This is outdated. The hybrid models of double bottomline social enterprises (SEs) can enable marginalised communities to help themselves and find sustainable solutions from within their communities. SEs build compassion and resilience, and lower social burdens in the long term. To do so, a serious push requires fundamental incentives and paradigm shifts. For a start, why not incentivise investments in the social economy? Currently, an investor in for-profit enterprises can obtain enterprise related grants, loans, investment schemes and tax breaks. Investors or philanthropists in charities are eligible for up to 250% tax relief in charities with an Institute of Public Character (IPC) status. So it baffles me as to why investors in social enterprises, which are enterprises that help build social capital, do not receive any tax breaks, loans or grants extensions, especially in these tumultuous times. In fact, offering the same tax incentives to investors in social enterprise is not asking for any special favours, it is just asking for a level playing field that will let social enterprises prove that they can deliver financial and social returns. An example is UK's Community Investment Tax Relief scheme which is designed to stimulate private investments in marginalised communities by providing tax relief to individuals and companies that invest in not-for-profit and for-profit seeking enterprises in or serving those communities.”
“Can the Minister clarify the question that I asked earlier on – whether the Government has a specific policy regarding our GDP versus trade ratio? And also his comments on the growing social economy which, obviously, has the capacity to soak up any excess capacity from the private sector.”
“Last year, EDB amended its Act to include NPOs and NGOs in its ambit, while SPRING Singapore has also become part of the inter-agency Social Economy Implementation Committee. That is laudable. However, due to its constitution, schemes under EDB has been mainly foreign-enterprise focused while SPRING’s schemes are largely targeted at for-profit enterprises. Therefore, its spirit is willing but its flesh is weak. While time is needed for our Government-led agency to study the landscape, the changing academic and demographics wait for no man. Like any businesses, social economy enterprises may face overnight demand and credit crunches. Therefore, urgent measures need to be rolled out to help social economy save jobs and create community-based solutions. In such a tumultuous time, a clear signal needs to be sent and I urge MTI not to miss a good opportunity to help build this sector that do good and do well. Consumer Protection and Education”
“These mavericks' job creation and game changing innovations may provide solutions to the present crisis. Hence, can the Minister update the house on its entrepreneurship push and what it intends to do in helping SMEs increase their demand, increase their risk capital pool and raise the bar for societal capital, which is the capacity for failures as norms? And, ultimately, it should not be the one-hit wonders but the pay-offs from persistent ongoing businesses. On to my second cut, Sir, on social economy. Sir, the combined global social economy forms the fifth largest economy in the world. I am wondering how is MTI taking advantage of it. In recognition of the innovative value of those involved in the social economy, several OECD countries have launched a series of strategies to promote social enterprises and social economies and the results have been encouraging. In 2002, UK launched a strategy in their Department of Trade and Industry and even has a Minister for the Third Sector. In 2004, the Canadian government allocated CAN$132 million to support social and community academic development and they do it via three levels. One, financing at $100 million over five years; two, capacity building, CAN$17 million over two years; and, three, research, CAN$15 million over five years. The budget is also committed to improving the access of social enterprises to programmes and services for SMEs. And the result? Today, just Quebec alone has 6,200 social economy enterprises that employ 65,000 people and generate annual sales in excess of $4 billion. In contrast, our effort is dwarfed and, hence, the results are wanting. Can the Minister enlighten us on what and how much resources are set aside by MTI to take advantage of this global growth in social economy?”
“Sir, according to the Global Enabling Trade Report by the World Economic Forum, Singapore has been increasingly dependent on trade, especially since 2002. While this has boosted our GDP, it also makes us more vulnerable to the global economic climate. In recent years, our SMEs have also been encouraged to venture abroad, adding to our exposure. Can the Minister explain whether there is a particular Government policy in terms of our GDP versus trade ratio, the impact of this increasing dependency on our SMEs, and what measures might be in place, or not, to help SMEs with large trade exposure, cushion any global downturn? 12.30 pm Sir, SMEs employ some 60% of the workforce and, therefore, keeping them afloat by smoothening their cash flow and credit lines are keys to job preservation. So in that light, I applaud the Government’s move in this Budget. However, the devil is always in the details of the implementation. Can the Minister explain how will the well-intended policies be operationalised and translated into actual benefits on the ground? For example, is the form-filling process too onerous or is there still a lot of red-tape that could be cut? In cases where credit applications are rejected, how will SPRING reassess such cases? In fact, who has the authority to make these decisions? Will it be based on the number of employees that they have to save jobs or whether the business is in our economic thrust sector? Also, if the credit assessor is a civil servant with no business experience, would he have the wisdom to judge the viability of a business that is hit by the downturn? Some businesses may have a good track record during the boom time but is now hit by a demand drought. Entrepreneurs are the engines of growth and innovation.”
“Mdm Deputy Speaker, I thank the Minister and SMS for their comprehensive answer and assurance of MICA's continued commitment in the arts, culture, media and ICT sector to develop Singapore into a creative, intelligent nation. Madam, I beg leave to withdraw my amendments and thank you for your patience, Madam. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The sum of $492,036,100 for Head Q ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. The sum of $277,433,400 for Head Q ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. Head V - Ministry of Trade and Industry”
“Madam, just two quick questions. One is for the clarification on arts scholarship. Do you also fund the arts scholarship for Masters or PhDs? Because I understand that a few applicants have been turned down. And, second, there seems to be a lot of questions around getting performance venue or funding and opportunities for arts group. Would the Ministry also consider setting up a match.com portal for such services? And, very quickly, third on assistive technology – would the Ministry consider developing R&D in that sector, and also making Singapore a Silicon Valley for assistive technology? 6.45 pm”
“Madam, on ICT (Information Communication Technology), mobile versus broadband internet, there has been a lot migration of the content from blogs to twitters, from food application to widgets. I am wondering how much of MICA's content investments are put into mobile content versus broadband internet content creation. And given the prevalence and multi-fold surge in mobile take-up rates – I think, Minister has said is 130% for mobile and less than 100% for broadband – how is MICA encouraging the creation of mobile content and incentivising the adoption and diffusion of mobile application amongst businesses and end-users? It also has great impact on the health and education sectors as well as for the emergency preparedness and terrorist alert. So, I am wondering if MICA would be putting extra effort or extra investment into mobile content creation. Second clarification on the marginalised sector: The Minister mentioned that we have almost 100% broadband penetration rate and about 38,000 marginalised households that are still not wired up. And it will take a few years to do so. My question is, why does it take so long? Is it a cost issue or is it a suitability issue? If it is a cost issue, then perhaps MICA can adopt a new type of laptop which is a sophisticated version of the $100 laptop which leverage on the power and advantage of clout computing that gives the user almost unlimited computing power, and all at the cost of less than $500. But if it is the suitability issue, perhaps you can look at investing and developing assistive technology to help the marginalised sector to better utilise the ICT.”
“Four, how can MICA assist the arts, heritage and cultural sector in encouraging and incentivising cultural philanthropy, which is crucial to the sustainability of a vibrant arts and cultural scene? Madam, it is very difficult time for the arts and we know that philanthropic money have dried up. I hope the Ministry can indeed allocate more funds and help the artists overcome this difficult period. Library Services”