Peter Sung
Singapore
“After all, we are on the same side as the Frontbench. We say these things out of concern. We say these things because we are concerned for the children, for the future of our children. There are residual concerns and the Minister shall hear more about them in the course of this debate. The Opposition, Where Are They?”
“Sir, I have already made remarks about creating a business library and I shall not repeat them. The Ministry of Information and the Arts has published the Library 2000 Report. I agree with the proposals and the plans set out by the Ministry.”
“In terms of both geographic and economic development, Singapore is well endowed to become an international centre for the arts. It can serve as a centre for the exchange of South-East Asian cultures as well as between the western and eastern cultures. I would like to know more details about this project.”
“In fact, as an MP, I have received many pictures sent to me which have very explicit scenes. We should not copy this liberal lifestyle of the other countries.”
“That film was brought into Singapore with the full blessings of the Government. How this helps, I do not know. I notice that the Police and the Ministry of Home Affairs are concerned. I also notice that MITA and SBC are reviewing the position. This is comforting and encouraging because it is not too late to mend.”
“We must systematically organise and cultivate our people's interest in the arts and improve their standard of appreciation. On the other hand, the Government should also assist and help our artists to venture into the international market. Mr Speaker, Sir, in order to do that, we need a lot of money.”
The complete record
Every one of 129 lines we hold for Peter Sung, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 3.
“Sir, the Minister in his reply has acknowledged MPs' contributions and also said that he would look into further improvements. This is heartening. On that note, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.”
“Sir, I have read with interest the reports of the Advisory Committee on TCS' Chinese drama and variety shows and also the assessment of the Censorship Feedback Panel 1994. Both these Committees are appointed by MITA. They have surveyed and got opinions of other people. They have also put in their own views. The reports are now with MITA and now MITA must decide, as it should be. In matters of government, the Government takes the lead. This has always been the case, Sir. For example, in the case of shared values, yes, there was dialogue, there was consultation. But the process was certainly government-led. In the case also of Confucian values for Chinese Singaporeans, the Government took the lead to distil from the past, from all the studies, the values that are relevant for modern Singapore. My point is that the Government sets the tone and must continue to lead. Sir, this year's debate has been lively. I would thank all Members who spoke, for their contributions, and also thank the Minister for his replies. I like this year's debate better than last year's. Since we last spoke, many improvements have been made. Backbenchers now realise that their pleas have not fallen on deaf ears. And before he came to this House, the Minister in fact made many arrangements to improve programmes, controls and censorship to the point that the remarks made by Members this year were much better.”
“Proposed Arts Centre. Sir, I am pleased to note that the local art scene is becoming more and more vibrant. MITA is to be congratulated for the tremendous efforts over the last few years to promote the arts. The proposed arts centre, when it is ready, will be a monument. But most arts centres in the world are money losing and often they cater to the interest of a very small group of people. I have repeatedly said in this House, Sir, that arrangements should be made for programmes to be shown or conducted in the proposed arts centre that cater to the interests of the masses. Otherwise, two things can happen: (1) The proposed arts centre can be a white elephant; or (2) The proposed arts centre will be a structure through which the poor will subsidise the rich. As it now stands, we have a number of arts facilities. I propose that MITA make arrangements for some of these existing facilities to carry programmes that cater to the interests of the wider community, so that more people can participate in such arts programmes in the existing facilities. From here we can then expand and have bigger activities for the people when the proposed arts centre is finally constructed.”
“After all, we are on the same side as the Frontbench. We say these things out of concern. We say these things because we are concerned for the children, for the future of our children. There are residual concerns and the Minister shall hear more about them in the course of this debate. The Opposition, Where Are They? Let us look at the debate on this issue over the last two years. In 1993, there were 10 speakers, 1994, 21 speakers. This year, 13 speeches are on the book. In 1993, not one Opposition Member made any statement on this issue, not Mr Ling, not Mr Cheo, not Mr Low Thia Khiang. In 1994, again none of them spoke. The only person who spoke on SBC was, in fact, Mr Chiam. And what did he want? A bit more time for party political broadcast. Are they concerned with the future of our children? This year, out of the 13 cuts, Sir, I do not see any on the list by any MP from the Opposition.”
“When Singaporeans see these programmes, they will say, "Those do not refer to Singaporeans. They are a foreign lifestyle. They may be representative of decadent communities. We are Singaporeans. We are different. We are not like that. Our lifestyle is not like that. Our culture is not like that." Drama must be real Sir, that was what the Minister said last year when Members pointed out the excessive violence and sex scenes in programmes produced by SBC itself. Last year, the Minister defended SBC by arguing that it needed to portray the real world. He said and I quote: [Hansard, Vol. 62, No. 13, col. 1096] `But you cannot blinker your eyes and pretend that these things do not happen in society. And good dramas, if they are to drive moral points home, have to reflect some of these goings-on. Otherwise they are too plastic, too polished for people to be able to enjoy ...' Even if the Minister is right, do these scenes have to be erotic, explicit and crude? The challenge for Singapore producers is to portray these things in a tasteful manner using the power of imagination rather than to give details of the obvious. Improvements have been made Sir, I am glad to say that after two years of nagging, if you like, SBC, now TCS, has improved. I have been told by my family members, my friends, my community leaders, my grassroots leaders that they have actually found significant improvements in the programmes produced by SBC. SBC is to be commended on this and I congratulate them on the progress they have made. Indeed, TCS has not just done bad things. They have done many good things. This is not the place to sing their praises. Members in this House must, of course, speak on areas where TCS can improve further. Backbenchers speak out, not just to be critical of the media.”
“But are we helpless? Are we not able to do something about it? I think that we are, and that too should not be in doubt. MITA has thought of using Cable TV as a counter measure, a means to exercise some form of control. This was brought before this House and this House supported MITA in the introduction of Cable TV. If MITA has other counter measures, I am sure this House will listen to them carefully because we are on the side of MITA on this issue. Sir, please let me make three points about international TV received in Singapore. Firstly, we should give credit to our law enforcement officers. They are able to do many things here in Singapore which their counterparts elsewhere cannot achieve. And however small and elusive these satellite dishes are, our law enforcement officers will be able to find them, maybe not immediately, but at some stage, they will be found. Secondly, there is technology to block out international TV if you want to. Here is an article in the Straits Times. The heading "Technology to block out TV violence available." Let me read one small paragraph. It says here: `Over the air broadcasters and television producers are hostile to the idea fearing that it would cost them viewers and frighten away advertisers.' Singapore is not short of creativity. Singaporeans will come up, when they are encouraged to do so, with devices that can sieve and filter out undesirable programmes. I think when these devices are developed, not only Singaporeans, but I am sure many other countries, will be pleased to use some of these devices because they too are concerned with the adverse influence of international broadcasting. Thirdly, even if excessive sex and violence are portrayed on international TV programmes, they depict foreigners.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the total sum to be allocated for Head R of the Main Estimates be reduced by $100. Last Year's Debate When I opened the debate on MITA last year, I said that Members will tell the Minister of their views on censorship. And tell the Minister they did, in full measure. The Minister then gave a spirited and passionate response. He painted the picture in the long term where the flood waters are supposed to overwhelm us. But Members were not convinced. And in withdrawing my amendment last year, I said that the problem of control will not go away. And it has not gone away as the Minister will see in the course of today's debate. Why are Backbenchers concerned? For two years now, this House has heard pleas, passionate pleas by Backbenchers, for MITA to exercise control and regulation over SBC, now TCS, and the media. We do so for a number of reasons. (a) We ourselves have heard our grassroots leaders, our community leaders, our friends make comments about the quality and type of programmes we see on SBC and in other media. (b) Many of us felt that these comments were justified and fair. (c) We felt that timely action must be taken in order not to erode the moral standing, moral behaviour of our children. (d) And we made these comments not because we want to criticize the media for the sake of criticism. We do not want SBC, now TCS, or other parts of the media to sell the morality of the future generations down the tube. International Channels It is true that advancement in technology would make c control and censorship of international TV more complex and more difficult. Satellite dishes become smaller and more elusive. That technological developments will make information more difficult to manage, more difficult to control, that is not in doubt.”
“The benchmark really depends on whether the level of salary we arrived at for both the private and public sectors is one that the economy can sustain. In the end, the question is whether it affects our competitiveness. One final point, Mr Speaker, Sir. Mr Low says that the Government collects a lot of money at the expense of the people. Yes, money is collected. But money is now collected only from those who use the facilities. It is a user charge and those who do not use those facilities or do not need to use those facilities do not pay. In the process, the Government has accumulated very healthy surpluses. This is not something to be condemned. It is something that many governments would dearly like to have. And I think the Government has, time and time again, said that it is prepared to find ways and means to redistribute some of this back to the people, like the sale of Telecom shares and others that will come along, the upgrading of HDB flats for incumbent residents. These redistributions are meant to transfer some of the Government's surpluses back to the people. I think if any Member of the Opposition has any ideas of how to distribute surpluses back to the people in a way that does not lead to dependency and reliance on hand-outs, I am sure the Government will be delighted to hear them. Sir, I cannot support the amendment put forward by Mr Low.”
“The question really is: What is that level? I do not think Mr Low is arguing against the need for a link between public and private sector salaries. He is saying that the salary for Ministers is too high. Is it too high? High salaries in the public sector will lead and follow high salaries in the private sector. The Government will say private sector salaries have gone up, therefore, public sector salaries will follow. The private sector will say that if you increase the salaries now, next year or some time soon, the private sector will have to increase their salaries to catch up. It has gone into a spiral. We do not know which one really leads which; and it is difficult to prove. But if you were an employee, after the public sector salaries have gone up, I think you can look forward to an adjustment in the salaries also. This will lead to higher salaries, both in the public and private sectors. Is high salary good or bad for Singaporeans? Well, with high salaries and a habit of saving which Singaporeans tend to have, it must be a good thing because, firstly, high salaries attract people to come here to work. And we have the opportunity to choose the best brains, the most effective people. And when they do come here, they must add to the economy. High salaries for Singaporeans also mean that when we go abroad for holidays, and many of us do, the Singapore dollar goes a long way. Thirdly, a strong Singapore dollar enables Singaporeans to invest abroad. Many Singaporeans I know have acquired properties overseas as part of their investment portfolio. So a high salary for Singapore is not necessarily a bad thing. The question really is: how high should it be?”
“They affect the efficiency of the operations of the company but they do not impact heavily on the long-term growth, long-term strategy, long-term survival and profitability of my company. So you cannot compare physical numbers. What matters is the quality of the decisions and the impact of those decisions. In the private sector, it is the impact on the future of the company. In the management of a country, it is the impact of those decisions on the future of not only our children and grandchildren but for many generations to come. Mr Low says that people's livelihood has not improved over the last few years. That cannot be the truth. That must be a statement made with tongue in cheek. Every statistic that you can produce will attest to the fact that Singaporeans are much better off today than they were five years ago, 10 years ago, or 20 years ago. Maybe Mr Low has a poor memory. He has forgotten the hard days when we got out from the Japanese Occupation, the communal strife of the 1960s and the progress through the recession of the early 1970s, right through to the prosperity of today. Mr Low says that by giving high salary, we get more money. More money leads to greed and that leads to requests for more money and, therefore, high salary indirectly leads to corruption. He is taking a position which is diametrically opposite of what the Government takes. The Government believes that if you pay people well, there is no need for this temptation to get into a corrupt situation. Mr Speaker, Sir, private sector employees get salaries which are higher than what the public service pays. The link must be there whether you quantify it or not. Even if Ministers only get paid 10% of the average salary of a manager, even if it is that low, there is a link.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I hear with some delight the remarks made by Mr Low. One or two points that he made are quite good. For example, he says that Ministers should not be motivated by money alone and that to take public office requires sacrifice on the part of the people coming forward. I think that is the very basis for people in Singapore to take part in politics. Everyone in the PAP, and several in the Opposition, come forward not because there is money but because they think they have a contribution to make to the governance of Singapore. Mr Low also said that if this White Paper is passed as it is now, there will be no opportunity to debate Ministerial salaries. I think that is not the truth. Any Member of this House can, at any time, raise any question for discussion and if Mr Low does not know how, maybe the Speaker can guide him. Mr Low asked how many hours a Minister works. That answer perhaps will vary from Minister to Minister. It is difficult to give a generalisation and, of course, I am not here to answer that question. But the comparison would be how many decisions does a Minister make. Perhaps I can use an example in the private sector which I know a little bit about. I believe I make more decisions in a day than most Ministers do. I believe that my junior managers in my company make even more decisions in a day than I do. The question, of course, is what is the import of those decisions? The decisions that I make for my company affect the future of the company and I do not make too many of them in a particular working day. But my managers who run individual operations make many, many decisions.”
“SMOKING (PROHIBITION IN CERTAIN PLACES) (AMENDMENT) BILL Order for Second Reading read.”
“So on the one hand, we must not give up the idea of censorship, of holding up standards, of saying these are the 10 Commandments, we adhere by them and, on the other, a realistic assessment that there are limits to what we can do. And some things we do for symbolical reasons, some things we do because we think they can be very effectively done. Mr Low Thia Khiang made a big song and dance about the powers of the Minister to tell broadcasters not to do certain things and require broadcasters not to divulge these things publicly. Why do we introduce this clause? Sir, we are Singaporeans. We are a small country. We live by our wits. Many foreign friends ask us: how is it we are able to maintain good relations with both China and Taiwan, with Indonesia and Malaysia? How is it India considers us such a special friend? It is because we have a keen and deep sense of what is in our national interest. And the profoundest of our national interest cannot be publicly discussed, at least not in an openly explicit way, for they border on matters of race, they border on matters of national security. But this is not to mean that there is no parliamentary oversight. This is not to say that there is anything to stop Mr Low Thia Khiang or Members of the Opposition from standing up here and asking me questions which they think are very difficult and very incriminating. And I will answer them here, but it may not be always possible for me to give full details. Question put, and agreed to. Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House. The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. - [BG George Yong-Boon Yeo]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed.”
“It is one thing to have an advertisement of an American kid talking like an American kid, but quite another to have Singaporeans behaving as if they were Westerners. In the minds of Singaporeans, that distinction is made and that distinction is made both directly and indirectly through the way our national broadcasters carry out their tasks. Therefore, censorship, a sense of what is important for Singapore, must be at the core of the establishment broadcasting media in Singapore, and that is why we insist on tight regulations. It is very important. It cannot be that just because men sin every day that we then say, "All right, the 10 Commandments are no longer necessary." It is because we are constantly not able to meet those standards that we insist on the 10 Commandments, and this is what maintains the tone of society. But, mind you, there are problems and it will be increasingly difficult to censor on a water-tight basis. Take Internet, for example. As you know, we are introducing Internet in a big way in Singapore to our schools. I asked for a briefing from NCB the other day on Internet. And I said, "How easy is it to access pornography?" So they tried for a few days. They came back to me and they said, "Well, we know the existing sources in Europe and in America which any Internet user can easily gain access to." Of course, if you go through Singnet, it acts as a gate-keeper. But how does Singnet censor? Singnet censors on the basis that someone is there looking at the screen and picking up the obvious titles. It is like trying to censor magazines and books on the basis of titles and the cover page. In reality, censorship is very difficult and it is an endless game.”
“So I would answer him by making the point that the fact that we have gone through all these changes, some of which were traumatic, affecting people in the broadcasting industry, causing members of the public to be unsettled, we do this not out of a whim, and certainly not in order to reserve more powers for ourselves, but because these are changes which we have to make to anticipate new problems on the horizon. Indeed, the points Mr Low Thia Khiang made remind me of the standard questions which Western editors and journalists raise with me when they see me. Their standard argument is this. It is becoming more and more difficult to control the flow of information. So what you are trying to do, in fact, a point Cherian George made in his article in the Straits Times yesterday, is a waste of time. Eventually, you are trying to regulate the unregulatable. But is that true? Is it true that just because when information is digitised, when images are digitised, when sound texts are digitised, therefore we should raise our hands and say, "No, we should give up completely." Worse, even to say that the standards we hold up should therefore be brought down. I do not think so, not at all. Because, while Singapore requires complete access to information, the challenge of education will always be with us. And it is not for other people, not for Westerners, not for our neighbours, to tell us how we should educate the next generation. In the public media, there is tremendous symbolism. It makes a big difference whether we see a Hollywood programme espousing a certain lifestyle or a locally-produced programme espousing the same lifestyle. At the National Day Rally, the Prime Minister made the point about the Sustagen advertisement, the little boy speaking like an American kid.”
“If it is supposed to be in the interest of the public, then it should be made known to the public, for public discussion to determine whether it complies with an objective standard that the Minister's decision is correct and unbiased. However, the Bill provides that what constitutes "public interest" shall be decided and defined subjectively by the Minister alone, without any committee, Parliament or public discussion. Now, I understand that, in Singapore, the so-called "public interest" is just a certificate issued by the Minister. The certificate should be known as a "Certificate of Public Interest"! BG George Yong-Boon Yeo: Mr Speaker, Sir, I thank Mr Peter Sung for his support of the Bill and I assure him and Members of the GPC and all Members here that the comments made during the Committee of Supply will be taken into account in the implementation of the new SBA Act. Mr Low Thia Khiang made an interesting speech about how the new Act will give to the Minister powers to censor and control television. But I would like to remind him that I already have all these powers. If my intention is to keep these powers for the Government, then why privatise SBC in the first place? Why separate the SBC successor companies from the regulatory authority in the first place? If our intentions are what he claimed them to be, then it is clearly not in our interest to move on to a different way of developing the broadcasting industry in Singapore.”
“Apart from having to carry out the Minister's instructions immediately, it is also provided in the Bill that all information connected with the entire operation shall not be divulged to others. In the event there is any doubt on the Minister's decision on the so-called emergency situation and on the "public interest", so long as the Minister issues a certificate, everything will be settled without any discussion. Clause 27 of the Bill also stipulates that the Government can censor all the scripts for broadcasting beforehand, or order the Singapore Broadcasting Corporation to send the programme they have made to the Government for inspection before broadcasting. The reason, of course, is to ensure that public interest or national harmony is not compromised. The two abovementioned provisions in this Bill give the Government the supreme power to have control over the broadcasting licensee and the contents of the broadcast, so that the Government can suppress any argument or views which are not favourable to it. For example, during the General Elections, will all coverage on the election campaign be required to be censored and approved by the Government before they are allowed to go on air? Will the coverage on the Opposition parties be required to be pre-recorded and censored to what the Government would consider to be appropriate before it can go on air? The Government feels that it is necessary to control the broadcasting licensee and its programme, purportedly to be in the public interest. But then, what is the definition of "public interest"? That again is to be determined by the Minister, and there is no need for the Government to announce it. The licensee is prohibited from announcing it.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I had a discussion with Members of the GPC on Information and the Arts on this subject and I now speak on their behalf in support of the Bill. Tremendous developments have taken place in IT technology and in broadcasting. Not to keep up with these developments is to be left behind and this will also affect the economic competitiveness of Singapore; something that we should avoid. The question really is whether there is a way to keep the technology separate from the contents of the programmes that reach the living rooms of every household in Singapore. Sir, this is not a new subject. We have discussed this at length during the Budget debate and in the Committee of Supply, not only this year but also last year. With your permission, Sir, I shall not repeat the points but would ask officials of MITA to read the Hansard again so that Members of this House and the Singaporeans they represent have their views noted and taken care of. MITA should continuously bear these points in mind in the administration of the SBA Act. Sir, I believe the Bill provides adequate powers for MITA to regulate and develop the broadcasting industry. I hope that MITA will not hesitate to use these powers judiciously in order to protect and safeguard the way of life that we Singaporeans want for ourselves. Mr Low Thia Khiang( In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, clause 8 of the Singapore Broadcasting Authority Bill stipulates that whenever the Minister declares an emergency, for national defence purpose or in the public interest, he can have complete control of the broadcasting service of the broadcasting licensee and all its equipment. This will involve both the personnel and the physical property of the licensee.”
“In anticipation of SBC doing these, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.”
“Sir, I thank Members who have spoken on this amendment for their invaluable contributions. I also thank the Minister for his reply, eloquent as he always is. The question of control has not gone away and I would like to draw a parallel with the CPF. In the case of the CPF, the Government was cautious, conservative, and was not going to move until the balances were high. Members of this House will remember that they strenuously persuaded the Government to relax the rules on CPF withdrawal, and the Government did move very slowly, but always when it was sure that the balances were high and enough. In the case of MITA, practitioners find their own OB limits. So they push, and when they push to the brink, or when they get beyond the limits, they will be pulled back, as has happened in the case of some cheap drama or cheap melodrama. I do not know why the Government has two ways: one for our financial resources; a different one for our morality. But they are different subjects, maybe a different approach is useful. SBC has many challenges. I think SBC has to be as good as those in Hong Kong, but without their value system. SBC has to be as competitive as international broadcasters, but without down-marketing. SBC has to promote the value system and preserve traditional virtues, but without losing the attention of the young. And SBC has to do all these with a limited budget. This is a tall order. But we cannot look just at the long distance, as the Minister has enunciated. Members of this House, members of the public are concerned with here and now. And I think they still feel that SBC has some way to go. Much has to be done, it must be done.”
“Sir, I have already made remarks about creating a business library and I shall not repeat them. The Ministry of Information and the Arts has published the Library 2000 Report. I agree with the proposals and the plans set out by the Ministry. I would only suggest that the Minister consider using community centres and the PCF kindergartens as additional points for the collection and return of books. This will be convenient for users of the library and may encourage greater utilisation of the library facilities.”
“In terms of both geographic and economic development, Singapore is well endowed to become an international centre for the arts. It can serve as a centre for the exchange of South-East Asian cultures as well as between the western and eastern cultures. I would like to know more details about this project. Can the Minister give us an update on it?”
“Singapore Arts Centre. As a society becomes more affluent, its people will naturally have more time and resources to devote to culture and the arts. A more vibrant cultural scene will certainly be useful as Singapore moves towards developed nation status. It would add colour and variety to our lives. I am, therefore, pleased to note that the Government has programmes to enhance and enrich the enjoyment of the arts. The plans include the development of the Civic District as well as programmes for our cultural enrichment. One such facility is the proposed Arts Centre. It should be a welcome addition to our facilities for the art. One point to note is that if the proposed Arts Centre is to be a good facility, it would not be cheap. And by its own nature, investment in this type of facility will not score easily in terms of financial analysis. With a large capital expenditure, it is necessary to ensure that the Arts Centre would cater not just to the needs of a small group of art lovers but also to the people at large. One challenge facing MITA is, therefore, to design and develop various types of programmes so that there is something for everyone. This will enable the masses to feel that the Arts Centre is also theirs. I hope therefore MITA would make provisions for this from the very beginning. Mr Peh Chin Hua( In Mandarin): Sir, at the International Art and Antique Exhibition held recently, the Minister for Information and the Arts disclosed that Singapore is aiming to become an international centre for art. To realise such a goal, apart from making massive investment, the Government is also providing assistance and facilities for the artists, for example, tax incentives and permanent residence status for the artists.”
“Many SBC viewers, community leaders and Members of Parliament are concerned not just with censorship but also with the trend towards down marketing in the content of SBC programmes. So I do not think the Minister has yet heard the last statement on this issue. As other Members of this House intend to speak on this subject, I shall not cover the same ground. SBC - some good work Sir, SBC has done well in many areas. News: Its quality and quantity, has shown significant improvements. Chinese drama: During my travels overseas, I have heard very good commentaries. These are to be encouraged. Symphony 92.4: They put up good programmes. Some friends of mine tell me that they do not need to install CDs in their cars any more, because 92.4, in fact, puts up very good music. SBC has been upgrading. They have overhauled their internal organisation. They brought in new people. They are experimenting with new styles, new programmes. In fact, I commend them for their efforts, although I cannot commend them for all the results and certainly not for the occasional lapses. Budget allocation for SBC SBC is required to produce local productions because through these local productions, we can put in our own mores, our own standards of behaviour, our own moral values, and also the values the country wants to promote for the citizens. SBC also has to put up public service broadcasts. Some of these cost money, and they are not reimbursed by Revenue. Perhaps the Minister will use his eloquence to ask the Minister for Finance for more subsidies in order to help SBC in this regard because SBC is facing international competition from stations which sometimes make use of really crass commercialisation, base instincts and real down-market commercialisation in order to sell their programmes.”
“In some cases, they have been crude. In many instances, they negate the very values that we are trying to promote. Cinemas, what about them? Are they taking the cue from SBC? If we were to turn to advertisements of films showing in the various cinemas in Singapore, we will find that about 90%, perhaps more, advertised films that are either "R" rated or require "Parental Guidance". Good, wholesome entertainment for the entire family in public cinemas is now hard to come by. Sir, in some ways, I sympathise with the officials in MITA. Firstly, SBC has a difficult balancing act. It has to balance its role to inform and its role to entertain. It also has to balance its professional role with its role to make ends meet and this is no mean task. The public is ever watchful and sometimes critical whenever licence fees are raised. At the same time, SBC has to compete for viewership against international broadcasters, some of whom have very different censorship standards. 3.30 pm Secondly, officers involved in censorship also have a difficult task. Members of the public are not likely to know the sheer volume of videotapes and films that they have to go through. Producers of these videotapes and films would like to sell their wares. They tend to sensationalize because these are the things that may sell easier. So, day in day out, censorship officials have to decide whether or not to apply the scissors. Sir, my view is this. A video viewed in the privacy of one's home has limited impact on the public. MITA has a censorship role to play, but the responsibility is much reduced in this area when compared to films and videos for public viewing. For the homes, I believe the parents have a greater role to play. It is public screening which is the continuing source of concern.”
“The need to make a profit would mean that corporatised SBC will have to consider measures which all of us know are sometimes undesirable. We should be careful not to sell the soul of our future generation for the sake of advertisement revenue which down market programmes can attract. The question again is one of control. I shall say a few words on this matter. Censorship This time last year, several Members of this House fervently told the Minister that censorship standards have fallen and argued that MITA should enforce stricter guidelines for films screened on SBC and in public areas. Members wanted MITA to cut out scenes with excessive violence and sex. At that time, the Minister eloquently defended the position of the Ministry. Let me quote: `Let me now turn to the issue of censorship. I spent some time explaining the challenges confronting television in Singapore because that provides the context, the background, behind SBC's drive to experiment and to try new things. Sometimes they make mistakes which I expect them to. If they do not make mistakes, that means they have stopped trying and that is no good. Yes, I know some people say, "Look, there is no clear nexus between TV violence and crime." But if there is no clear nexus, we must always err on the side of safety.' Sir, my rejoinder at that time was "I am glad he said we would err on the side of safety. But please do not make too many mistakes." At the end of last year's debate, I did not think that Members were convinced. One year has since passed and I think they are still not convinced. To be fair, some improvements have been made as far as sex and violence are concerned. This time, I think MPs, members of the public and community leaders are concerned with the quality of SBC programmes. This has gone down.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the total sum to be allocated for Head R of the Main Estimates be reduced by $100. Cable TV Sir, technological revolution affecting international broadcasting is going on at a very fast pace. As a result, more programmes are in the air and it is easy to bring them down to the ground. Satellite dishes are getting smaller and it is much more difficult to control their installation. All this means that SBC is facing greater competition. I know SBC is doing a few things to meet this competition. Among these is the installation of cable television. This is a good idea. With a few channels of cable TV, more programmes will be available to viewers in Singapore. Viewers will get a wider choice of programmes that suit their personal tastes and their personal interests. And with many channels available, people may avoid the hassle of putting up satellite dishes by themselves and hiding them from the law. Programmes can be down-linked from international broadcasters. However, these programmes do not come in an empty train. Inevitably, they will impart foreign culture and some of these may be detrimental to our efforts at nation building. Therefore, I urge the Minister to ensure that mechanisms exist, or are created, for effective control. More importantly, these controls must be exercised and must be seen to be exercised. Corporatisation of SBC SBC was first converted from a Government department to become a statutory board on 1st February 1980. Plans are now at hand to corporatise SBC. This is a major step and it has my support in that efficiency will improve. However, corporatisation would mean further commercialisation, and this has its attendant problems.”
“The Government should not, on the slightest excuse, privatise all its hospitals. Once the hospitals are privatised, the fees charged by these hospitals will be raised. Now that we have strong financial reserves, we should not privatise all the hospitals even if the hospitals suffer a deficit. The Government should continue to subsidise these hospitals. The Government should make use of its budget surpluses to subsidise the hospitals. Although the Government says that those who cannot afford to pay for their medical expenses can apply for waiver of medical fees, this will result in delay in getting treatment. The Government should think of a more efficient way to make it easier for these people to apply for waiver of medical fees. The White Paper emphasises on the effective ways to cut down health care cost and that people should be responsible for their own health. This is a correct policy. However, I am of the opinion that, apart from the suggestions in the White Paper, the Government should listen to feedback from the people on health care, to understand better the plight of the elderly people and to give more subsidies on their medical fees. 5.13 pm”
“Let me talk on these three points. First, the health care cost to the senior citizens. Because of the changes in society and because of the Government's land acquisition policy, some elderly people, who do not have children or whose children do not have the means to support them, will have problem once they fall sick. If they do not have savings, they will not be able to afford the medical expenses. Many elderly people are jobless and do not have CPF nor Medisave. These people need the help from the Government. Secondly, the patients who are suffering from serious and complicated diseases. They may be small in number, but these are people who require treatment with high-tech medical skills and equipment. They will have great problems in paying for such high medical cost. The Government should find some ways to help these patients to lessen their burden. Thirdly, how to reduce medical costs? How are we going to avoid excessive expenditure on health care? For example, we should not readily resort to expensive, high-tech facilities. The Health Ministry should also consider holding more exhibitions in the HDB housing estates so as to educate people on the importance of keeping a healthy body. Indirectly, this will go a long way to reduce health care cost. On the other hand, we should also restrict the medical fees charged by the private hospitals. Industrial diseases should be looked into also. The Government should raise the salaries of nursing staff to attract more people to join this noble profession. Minor cases can be managed by the nurses instead of the doctors. In this way, we can save on medical fees, or health care costs. But more importantly, the Government should not privatise all its hospitals. Health care is a public service to be provided by the Government.”
“With a lot of money frozen in Medisave, will it not run against the Government's principle of cost-effectiveness? Overall, the White Paper expounds the Government's motive in providing medical care. In other words, the people must be held responsible for falling sick. Free market forces must be used to determine medical expenses. Is this the so-called responsibility of the Government, the PAP Government, to the people? Mr Cheo Chai Chen (Nee Soon Central)( In Mandarin): The Government has the responsibility to provide affordable health care to the people. This is undeniable because people have been paying taxes. Even those who do not pay taxes, or are paying little taxes, have also laboured for the good of the nation. Therefore, the State has the responsibility to look after their health. Even those handicapped people are also our compatriots. The Government has the responsibility to look after them. Our Government has enough reserves, it should spend more on housing, education and health care, especially for those poorer people. Of course, we do not want people to depend too much on the Government, but nobody wants to fall sick and be admitted to the hospital just to enjoy the Government's subsidy. This point has just been made by Mr Low Thia Khiang, the MP for Hougang. When a person falls sick, he and members of his family will have to worry about the medical expenses. Although the Government says that it has subsidized health care, most people are still very concerned about the high medical and health care costs. I hope the Government will pay attention to the three following points: (1) Health care for the senior citizens; (2) The high cost incurred by patients suffering from serious and complicated diseases; and (3) Ways to reduce health care costs.”
“They have to upgrade to B2 class in order to avail themselves of these operations, and hence pay 35% of the cost. Sir, 35% of a major surgical cost is certainly very substantial. If hospital charges keep on going up, then they will become a great burden to the people. The Government's solution is the use of the formula CPI plus X to control the rise in the cost of medical expenditure. How much is X? What will be the actual fees to be collected - $10, $100 or $1,000? Thirdly, the Government plans to increase the contributions to Medisave. The question here is: Will the percentage increase affect the ability of the people to buy properties, to own shares, etc? Will this not be contrary to the Government's philosophy sharing national wealth? Fourthly, the Government is encouraging employers to offer more contribution to the Medisave account in lieu of the traditional medical benefits. The question here is: Will this not lead to the employees losing their existing medical benefits? Does it not mean that, with this increased contribution, employers will no longer be responsible for the medical benefits of the employees? The White Paper mentioned that we too should explore ways to make greater use of medical insurance. I am of the opinion that health insurance is a matter that the government must further explore and look into. In order to ensure that the people have the money to pay for their medical expenses, the government encourages more money to be paid into Medisave account. This is not a long term solution especially when the medical expenses are supposed to be fixed byu market forces and the government refuses to spend more to offset rising medical cost; how much Medisave is enough is an uncertain X factor.”
“The White Paper recommends the overall control of medical service, including the number of doctors and charges of private hospitals, etc. But on the rise of medical cost, it talks about free market forces and cost-effectiveness. The role played by the Ministry of Health is to regulate the rise in medical cost. Government hospitals are privatized to conform to the principle of free economy. On the one hand, the Government wants to have overall control on the medical service market but, on the other hand, when medical cost escalates, it puts the blame on market operation in a free economy. Now, it has come a stage when everyone has to be held responsible for his own sickness. What really is the Government up to? Mr Speaker, Sir, let me now deal with the contents of the White Paper. First, the basic medical care package. The Government says that it will be unrealistic to make the basic medical care package rigid and inflexible, and the items in the basic package will be reviewed from time to time. I presume that when the Government reviews the package, it is done with the view of increasing the items of medical services in the basic package, and not to reduce them. In my view, if the Government is unable to allow Medisave to cover all the items, then you might as well list out all the items that are to be excluded. Apart from pages 23 to 24, all the basic items should be included in the package. I feel that the general principle of the package must be that wherever lives can be saved by the provision of any service, then it must be included. To save life is very noble. Secondly, the payment of medical expenses. The Government's basic pay package applicable only to Class B2 and C patients. However, certain major surgical operations are not available to Class C patients.”
“Although the Government has, after the last General Election in 1991, introduced the Medifund scheme to assist the lower-income people who are unable to pay for their medical expenses, most of the people in the lower and middle-income groups are unable to avail themselves of the benefit of the Medifund. The ever-increasing medical cost has remained a serious problem. This White Paper brings forth some recommendations on how to control the continuous rise in medical cost. This is indeed very appropriate and relevant. First of all, I would like to deal with the Government's philosophy on the provision of health care to our people. The Government feels that everybody must be responsible for his own health, and should not rely on the Government's welfare service or medical insurance. Of course, I agree with the Government's emphasis on a healthy lifestyle to encourage more people to exercise regularly to keep themselves fit and healthy. A mentally and physically healthy person is a valuable asset of the country. However, this does not mean that when somebody falls sick and needs medical care, he must be held responsible for having fallen sick. Nobody wants to fall sick in order to enjoy the Government subsidy. Falling sick is something which cannot be helped. Because of his sickness, he has to worry about how to raise the money to pay for his medical expenses. This is really something which breaks his heart. The provision of medical care is the responsibility of the Government, in the same way that it is the responsibility of the people to pay tax, or to serve in national service. So the Government cannot push the responsibility on to the people. Secondly, the Government is relying on market forces and free competition to improve service and efficiency.”
“In other words, we may have to differentiate between the charges by the doctor for different types of visits. A 10-minute routine visit at nine o'clock in the morning for a routine round cannot be equated with an one-hour stay in an intensive care unit for an extremely ill patient. Thus, there may be a need to have different scales for different types of visits. At the end of the day, what does it mean for the man-in-the-street? I think the message to them is that there will be an affordable basic health care package. But we must educate the public that if they want to continue to have good quality health care, health care cost will increase. Ensuring that the increases remain affordable will require efforts by the Government, hospitals, health care providers, and most importantly, the man-in-the-street himself. At the end of the day, the man-in-the-street must understand that although, at most times, health care is good and cheap, occasionally it will be good but expensive. I support the motion. Mr Low Thia Khiang (Hougang)( In Mandarin): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, over the past few years, medical cost has been going up all the time. Although the Government has increased its expenditure on health care, the rates of subsidy have been reduced, eg, from 85% to 84% for Class C beds, and this will be further reduced to 80%, and from 73% to 71% for Class B2 beds in 1992. This will be further reduced to 65%. The concern of Singaporeans is that after the privatisation of Government hospitals, hospital fees will be further increased. With this trend going on, Singaporeans, especially those in the lower-income group, will one day be unable to afford these medical expenses.”
“If both outpatient and hospitalisation benefits are converted to increased Medisave contribution, the Government may perhaps want to consider allowing the use of Medisave for outpatient care with some caveats. To prevent unnecessary administrative burden and abuse, the use of Medisave for outpatient services should be linked with some conditions: (1) It must be a co-payment scheme; (2) There must be a ceiling for the amount withdrawn over a certain period, perhaps, monthly; (3) It should only be allowed for outpatient treatments which are relatively more costly; and (4) There should be a cap on the amount to be charged for the services provided. In other words, you should limit the balance billing. I also support the establishment of MediShield II, and the development of the private health insurance. However, health insurance in Singapore must not evolve in the direction of the US where doctors, instead of being trusted for their expertise, are expected to call an 800 number and get approval for even basic medical procedures from a total stranger sitting in an air-conditioned office miles away. The US system promotes over-consumption and over-supply of services. Any private insurance scheme should involve some form of co-payment. I also support the concept of balance billing. However, this is something that needs to be looked at carefully. The bill often contains not only the doctor's fee, but there usually is a two-component fee: one, the hospital facility fee; and two, doctor's fee. And in planning to limit balance billing, all sectors should be considered separately so that all sectors will contribute to this effort to limit balance billing. Also, each inpatient visit by each doctor may be different.”
“So if we take away high-technology medicine, who is to lose out? I think that the rich can always go overseas and seek treatment, but the average Singaporeans will face problems. So sometimes it is very difficult to have good quality medicine and cheap medicine. Secondly, I would like to say a few words about basic health care. I am glad that the White Paper has tried to give some form to this nebulous term of basic health care. In principle, I agree with the broad definition given in the White Paper. However, some of the principles are completely sound and logical but do not give health care givers clear directions at the ground level. For example, no one will dispute that basic medical care excludes extravagant efforts to keep gravely ill patients alive using high-technology equipment, regardless of their quality of life and prospects of recovery. However, in practical aspects, what does it mean? Does it mean that a young man with a disease affecting his muscles, resulting in his inability to breathe properly, we should put a tube in him? Because if you put a tube in him and put him on a ventilator, he will otherwise be well. But if we do not put a tube in him, he will die. If we do not put a tube in him, is that passive euthanasia? So these are very difficult questions for practitioners on the ground. Perhaps at the national level, or at hospital level, ethical committees should provide clearer direction. If a patient's family insists on high-technology measures against doctor's advice, will he be automatically converted to non-subsidised status, because such measures are not part of the basic medical package? These questions need to be answered. I support the recommendation that employers contribute more to Medisave in lieu of traditional benefits.”
“The system perhaps should be revised so that patients should pay a percentage of the true cost of the service or tests provided rather than a flat rate. Those who consume more should pay more and those who consume less should pay less. Hence, those in subsidised wards who use more services should not receive more subsidies than those who use less. If the true cost of health care is distorted, it will be detrimental to our health care system. An elderly gentleman I met along a corridor of an HDB block expressed great unhappiness about his hospital bill. He was admitted to a subvented hospital for a surgical procedure and his gross hospital bill was more than $1,000. However, after all the Government subsidies were accounted for, he had to pay about $200. He was unhappy not because he had to pay about $200, but he was indignant that the gross bill was more than $1,000. He felt that it was ridiculous that the bill should be such, even though he stayed in hospital for about a week and had undergone a surgical procedure. He was unable to appreciate the true cost of health care. We must not have a generation of Singaporeans growing up not appreciating the real cost of health care or they will not appreciate the health care subsidies given by the Government. Hence, in whatever way health care subsidies are given, the real cost of health care should not be distorted by over-subsidy. There must be not too big a gap between the real cost and the cost paid by the consumer. Singaporeans must understand that if they want a high quality of health care, health care cost will increase. For example, in the past when dialysis was not available, if you had renal failure, the ultimate cost was death. However, now dialysis is widely available, but it is also costly.”
“We should not be too liberal in subsidising health care services, but we must be liberal in ensuring that those who are unable to afford basic health care services will not be denied of basic health care services. By over-subsidising health care, not only will consumption of health care be increased but it will also distort the true cost of health care. Our present system of health care subsidy in the subvented hospitals at the macro level is not reflected at the micro level. For example, a B2 patient may in effect be subsidised substantially more than 65% of his cost if he requires more investigations. Hence, a patient who, because of his medical condition, requires extensive x-ray investigation, including a CT scan costing a few hundred dollars, may only have to pay a maximum of $50 for all these tests throughout his entire stay in hospital. Likewise, a B2 patient with cardiac disease who requires multiple electrocardiograms, cardiac ultrasound scan, treadmill tests, ECG monitoring costing, say, more than $500, may not have to pay more than $20 for all his tests. In fact, a subsidised B2 patient once remarked that it was ridiculous that a cardiac ultrasound scan is charged only $20 when an electrocardiogram is also charged $20. It seems ironical that a cardiac ultrasound scan which takes a highly trained technologist half an hour to an hour to do on a machine, which costs a few hundred thousand dollars, is charged the same cost as an ECG which can be done by an unskilled technician in 10 minutes on a machine that costs a few thousand dollars. In line with the objectives spelt out in the White Paper, the Government should take steps to address this issue of over-subsidy.”
“With just three million people, there is a demographic limit to the number of people who can realistically become specialists and we simply do not have enough men to man so many specialities. Many of this talent ought to be channelled to other areas in Singapore because these other sectors also need a fair share of talent. Summary To summarise, Mr Speaker, Sir, the development of Singapore into a medical centre has inadvertently increased the cost of medical treatment. I urge the Government to control this by restricting the number of specialities that it would promote and subsidise, leaving the private sector to promote other specialities if the market demand is there. On this note, I support the motion. Dr Michael Lim Chun Leng (Cheng San GRC): Mr Speaker, Sir, reading the White Paper on Affordable Health Care was like de javu. My views on health care are in many ways similar to that advocated in the White Paper. [Mr Deputy Speaker in the Chair] 4.46 pm The Ministerial Committee has produced an excellent report on the macro aspects of creating an efficient health care system, keeping basic health care accessible to all and containing long-term health care cost and Government subsidies. I believe that it is a step in the right direction. However, I would like to make comments on certain areas. Firstly, health care philosophy. The five fundamental objectives spelt out in the Government's approach to health care philosophy are sound. However, I think that there is one other important objective that should be added to the Government's health care philosophy, that is, to avoid over-subsidy of health care services and to educate the public on the true cost of health care.”
“Some of these medical equipment are very expensive and their capital cost would have to be recovered by means of usage fees and so the cost of medical tests and procedures will also increase the cost of medical attention. Many family members would also want specialist treatment GPs are not the only people who would like their patients to be subject to specialist treatment. From time to time, a patient is sent for specialist treatment when the family members think that it is a matter of duty, perhaps their love for the patient, to send the patient for specialist treatment and to get the best possible attention available. Often this is out of a sense of filial piety, even though in some cases the condition of the patient may not be all that hopeful and the cost of specialist treatment may be beyond the means of the family. But many of them would feel that their conscience will not be clear if a specialist is available and his help is not sought for their sick or dying parent. Choosing the Specialities In the process of becoming a medical centre, let us choose the specialities carefully. It is clear that in trying to become a medical centre, we have inadvertently and perhaps indirectly raised the cost of medical treatment in Singapore. I am not saying that Singapore should not be a medical centre. May I suggest to the Health Ministry that we restrict the number of specialities that the Government would like to subsidise and encourage in the hospitals funded by the Government. There are many reasons for these. For example, there is a finite number of people in Singapore who can become doctors. And among them, there is even a smaller number who can become specialists.”
“Singapore as a Medical Centre Singapore would like to be a medical centre and to succeed in this task, we need a number of specialists in a number of specialised areas. For each specialty, we need to have many specialists in order to provide breadth and depth of knowledge in the field. Over the last few years, we have, by and large, succeeded in this task. This is shown by the number of patients from the region coming to Singapore to seek medical treatment. This is much to the credit of the doctors in Singapore as well as the people who plan the scheme. More specialists means more referrals by general practitioners When a general practitioner suspects that the patient suffers from a serious illness, it is very likely that he will refer the patient to a specialist. This is to enable him to get a second opinion. It is also to ensure that he has the benefit of the advice of properly trained specialists in order to help him with the diagnosis. If no specialists were available, then his conscience is clear. But if a specialist is available, the GP may find it unconscionable not to seek that advice. This is good for the practice of medicine, it would also contribute to the rise in medical expenses. Specialist Equipment Sir, specialist equipment is another area. When specialists are available, they would install specialist equipment. When the specialist equipment is available, specialist tests would be prescribed. A doctor would find it difficult not to prescribe tests that are available in order to get all the information that he can get hold of for the purpose of a complete diagnosis before treatment. When more tests are being prescribed, the cost of medical treatment would therefore rise.”
“Sir, would the Minister agree that since Singaporeans are mature, they should be given all sides of the story, including our right of reply, so that they can judge for themselves?”
“Some of my friends who have been doing business in China told me that, in China, if you are able to converse with the people there in their native dialects, the relationship would immediately become more cordial and half the battle would be already won. Then your conversation with them will not only be a mere exchange of views, but will also convey a message of empathy and emotional rapport. Therefore, it is much more easier to reach a consensus on matters of mutual interest and eventually to close your deals with them. In view of that, it occurs to me that, perhaps, we should conduct courses in some of the Chinese dialects to cater for the needs of our businessmen who intend to invest in China. As a matter of fact, these businessmen have actually experienced the necessity to acquire a working knowledge of the relevant dialect or dialects so that they can do business more effectively. In this respect, I think the Singapore Federation of Clans Association or the Chinese Chamber of Commerce and Industry can play a useful role. As these courses are meant for people who are intending to invest or to work overseas, I believe they will not run contrary to the Speak Mandarin Campaign which Singapore has been promoting all these years. I would like to know what is the view of the Ministry of Information and the Arts on this suggestion of mine.”
“I want to clarify what I have said. When I said that The Lover was brought into Singapore legally, I meant it was brought in to be shown under the R(A) category. Somehow when the film got into Singapore legally, it went on show illegally. On behalf of the MPs who spoke on this amendment, I would like to thank the Minister for his reply. I am glad he said that we would err on the side of safety, but please do not make too many mistakes. Sir, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. 1.15 pm Mr Chin Harn Tong (Aljunied GRC)( In Mandarin): Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head R of the Main Estimates be reduced by $10 in respect of Code RB 1500. Sir, "More Mandarin, Less Dialect" is a policy we have been actively promoting in recent years. This policy helps to unite the different dialect groups in the Chinese community in Singapore and to enhance the cohesiveness of our society. Undoubtedly, it is a policy which we should fully support. However, with the development and changes in the international economic environment, our Government is quick to realise that in order to develop and progress in this rapidly changing world, we must broaden our vision. We must treat the various territories in the world as a market-place for our business ventures. Only then can we compete with the other highly developed economies in the world. At the same time, this will help to overcome the problem of our space constraint. To develop overseas, having a large capital alone is not enough. We need the right opportunities, a favourable climate and also the support of the local people.”
“Perhaps the library will consider getting the services of these people to help.”
“So how to collect the information and, more importantly, how to disseminate it is a challenge which the Business Library would have to overcome. Thirdly, information on the economic environment. This should include macro-economic analysis of the economies, the trends and the developments there. It should also include macro-economic studies of individual industries or sectors which Singaporean businessmen may be interested in. Fourthly, information on selected industries. For selected industries, the library may also collect information about individual firms. I am aware that the information required about individual firms may be very detailed, very complex, and may be difficult to collect. But these are precisely the kind of information businessmen want and need. Perhaps the Business Library can do something about finding a way to satisfy some of these needs. Collection of information may not be all that difficult. Much of the information is already available here and there. And it is really a question of assembling them and collecting them together. More importantly, we should also establish, maybe computerise, links with other libraries with similar types of information so that Singaporean businessmen can go to our library and have access to information in other people's libraries. Even Government departments have information which may be useful to businessmen and to the extent that these are not sensitive or confidential in nature. I hope the Government will make some of these available to the public. Finally, some kind of research may be necessary when we go overseas. Perhaps the library can engage the services of people from the target countries because they would know the environment there and know information sources which we ourselves may not know.”
“Sir, last year, I suggested that MITA look into the setting up of a Business Library. May I now make some suggestions as to the types of information that might be included. Firstly, information on the political environment. I am thinking of information on the political trends and developments in the countries that our businessmen will be visiting to do business. I hasten to add that I am not asking MITA or the Business Library to take a position on any particular issue, but really to collect information for the convenience of businessmen. This information may be those available in newspapers, academic papers, seminars, and so on. Secondly, information about the operating environment. The operating environment is different from one country to another. So, when Singaporeans move overseas to do business, they really need to know how to do business there. The information I am thinking about would include laws and regulations as well as the legal systems in the countries concerned. It also includes information on the living environment. For example, the American Association of Singapore published a book called "Living in Singapore". It describes Singapore from the American perspective and it is meant for Americans who intend to visit Singapore, live here, and do business here. A similar publication or a series of information on this subject will be most helpful to Singaporean businessmen if we were to encourage them to go overseas. Information may also include guidelines on business practices. To be sure, this varies from town to town, even within a country. The challenge here is that information is very varied, very diverse, and sometimes sensitive.”
“In fact, as an MP, I have received many pictures sent to me which have very explicit scenes. We should not copy this liberal lifestyle of the other countries. As a Government, we have a duty to explain to the more conservative Singaporeans the objective of relaxing the censorship standards: How does it benefit our nation and the people of Singapore as a whole? How could it contribute to the future development of our nation? Will it corrupt our people or will it encourage them to be more rugged? These are some of the things which our older Singaporeans would like to know.”
“On the surface, this appears to be making provision to control PG films by classifying them under NC-16 category which is accessible only to youngsters above the age of 16. But, in actual fact, it is to further relax the standards of censorship by allowing the inappropriate parts of PG films, which ought to be banned or censored to be relaxed as NC-16 films. I am worried that this relaxation would bring about unhealthy consequences on our teenagers. The news of relaxed censorship has already led to some bold presentation in the Act Magazine, which is published by the volunteer Aids Awareness Group, known as "Action for Aids". Its contents are crude and explicit causing the principal of a school to lodge a formal complaint against it. There is a caption which says: "Either you use the plastic, or I use a cucumber." That is very crude. On the other hand, the family planning authority has also produced an advertisement showing a pair of innocent young children acting as a young courting couple to convey the message of starting a family early and to discourage late motherhood. This has also brought about a lot of public dissent. The advertisement would give people the wrong impression that we are promoting early maturity of children and for children to criticise the elders, which is contradictory to our traditional values. We can say that the relaxation of standards by the Censorship Review Committee has caused the family planning authority and the above voluntary group to be confused. For example, the Minister has shown concern over the violent scenes in the SBC drama Angel of Vengeance and also the ban on the Marie Claire magazine which carries articles on casual sex. We need not blindly copy the liberal lifestyles of other countries.”
“The sheep has left the arena. You mend the fence. It is still not too late. Mr Peh Chin Hua (Jalan Besar GRC)( In Mandarin): Sir, the Censorship Review Committee commissioned by the Minister for Information and the Arts has already presented its report to the Minister. Although I agree with part of the recommendations by the Committee, I beg to differ in some of its recommendations which may be an erosion of our traditional values. We all know that it is an extremely difficult task to set up a strict policy without limiting freedom for creative pursuit, yet maintaining our traditional values. This is especially so when Singapore is such an open society and Singaporeans can travel freely to every part of the world. Also, we have about six million tourists visiting Singapore every year. This makes the job even more difficult. However, we cannot deliberately relax the standards of censorship in Singapore because of this practice. I must stress that our standard of censorship must be set in such a way as to ensure that we do not move away from our traditional values which must not be destroyed or eroded. At the same time, it should be in line with the Government's emphasis on shared values. Sir, I therefore request that the Ministry of Information and the Arts review some of the recommendations made by the Censorship Review Committee. Since the R(A) classification was introduced, many older and more conservative Singaporeans are very worried. Now the Committee recommends an intermediate category of NC-16 to be introduced between the R(A) category and the PG category for the benefit of those who are below 21 but above 16 years of age.”