Philip Tan Tee Yong
Singapore
“But from the point of view of the nation as a whole, it is better for the defence industries to do this and channel the private sector into other areas of business, rather than for the defence industries to keep their surplus capacity idle in order to give the business to the private sector.”
“Sir, I would like the Minister to consider whether this is in line with maximising the productivity of our limited manpower. BG Lee Hsien Loong: Mr Speaker, Sir, the line between what the Government should do, what the Government-owned companies should do, and what privately-owned companies should do, is a matter of degree, judgment and c…”
“Sir, is the Minister aware that ST companies are also agents for personal computers? BG Lee Hsien Loong: Mr Speaker, Sir, yes, indeed. The SAF Enterprises (SAFE) retails many brands of PCs as well as other consumer goods as part of its business.”
“Sir, but how can we say that they are on a fair footing? The Minister should consider that there are certain factors that the Government-owned companies will have to take into account, for instance, land cost, rentals and even the attractiveness of employing people from the industry.”
“I am referring to the ST company which is the agent for the AST personal computers. BG Lee Hsien Loong: Mr Speaker, Sir, rather than argue what advertisements have been published or not, I take the position that even if they were published entirely as the Member has maintained, I see nothing wrong with it.”
“I rest my case. TELECOMMUNICATION AUTHORITY OF SINGAPORE (Sourcing of personal computers) 2. Mr Philip Tan Tee Yong asked the Minister for Communications and Information, in line with the Government's intention that the private sector be the engine of growth, why is the Telecommunication Authority of Singapore sourcing personal computers…”
The complete record
Every one of 160 lines we hold for Philip Tan Tee Yong, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 4.
“The danger is that money-making can become our only pre-occupation if we do not balance up with cultural and recreational enjoyment. Such activities for relaxation are few. I suspect that the Singaporean's alternative to hanging around or watching the television is work. The Government has started to address this problem. To make our society more vibrant, I suggest that we create a culture among companies to be part of it. These companies should also include shopkeepers, market stallholders, hawkers in the hawker centres; in short, a social obligation culture. Over the years, most companies have benefitted from an honest and efficient Government and, not less importantly, a disciplined society. As an appreciation to the society, companies should be encouraged to contribute to arts and performances, sponsoring of sporting events and giving to the less fortunate. We should encourage the spirit of participation and the amount of contribution should be free-will. Some companies are already doing this. But with a social obligation culture, more can be encouraged to join in. I think the employees of participating companies will be more motivated when they identify themselves with certain charities, sports or performances. This is a human touch to money-making. Sir, Singapore need not be a cultural and recreational desert. We can become a more balanced Singaporean materially and culturally. ADJOURNMENT OF DEBATE With the consent of Mr Deputy Speaker and the general assent of Members present, Question put, and agreed to. Resolved, That the debate be now adjourned. - [Mr Wong Kan Seng].”
“EDB must continue its good work in getting multi-nationals to assist local companies upgrade their production facilities and management. Many local companies are now more productive. I am of the opinion that encouraging them to join forces for economy of scale should be the main goal. By companies coming together, wastage in manpower is minimised, some jobs can be done more productively, and with stronger financial resources, more qualified and experienced managers can be recruited. As a result, bigger contracts can be targeted, growth will be achievable, expansion overseas can be a reality. But our best bet is to concentrate on the few bigger local companies. A study should be made of their strength, identify overseas business opportunities and then to match them, provide the necessary incentives and assist them to organise a structure suitable for regional and international management and control; finally, to lead a mission to the respective countries concerned. But how can we achieve this? I think a master plan should be drawn up. Who should undertake this task? I suggest the Enterprise Development Division of the EDB which is already doing some of it. The Government should give this Division the necessary budget and manpower. In this way, our investments overseas can be more prudent, calculated and systematic. In this way, we will be ready when the overseas business opportunities come our way. When our investments overseas materialise in substantial numbers, we would have attained a good balance to foreign investments here. Singapore will then be more stable economically. Sir, I would like to turn to another issue. We strive hard to maintain and improve our economy. It is not uncommon for Singaporeans to work more than eight hours a day, seven days a week.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, economically Singapore is very vulnerable. This is because we are small and we are dependent on other economies. Singapore needs to respond to the vast changes taking place in today's world. The situation in the Middle-East is uncertain; the United States is working towards trading arrangements with South America; United Europe in 1992; China is yet to firm up its national and international policies; Hong Kong faces 1997. Closer home, Burma, Cambodia, Laos and Vietnam are opening up. All these swift and uncertain changes can also present business opportunities. Singapore, being small and disciplined, has the advantage of reacting and responding swiftly. But forward planning is the key to our survival. In this respect, the Minister for Finance has announced a two-pronged strategy. Our network of linkages to other economies is well spread and profitable. Many of our local businessmen have benefitted over the past 10 years. From the multi-nationals, we have gained in technology, acquired the art of modern management and organisation, international marketing skills, and the knowledge in creating new products. We have matured and some have graduated to become investors overseas, particularly in the ASEAN region. Our long term economic stability will be more secure if we can achieve a good balance between foreign investments in Singapore and our investments in other economies. The next five years will see many business opportunities for investment. To invest overseas, companies must be of a certain size, have adequate management and financial resources. Very few local companies fall into this category; most are small. For these smaller ones, we must take a longer term perspective.”
“My question is whether Telecom has actually gone round to see the local companies and found that the expertise was not there and that was why Telecom had to resort to CEI?”
“Sir, is the Minister saying that Telecom has actually scouted around Singapore and found that the expertise in CEI is not found in any local company?”
“Sir, is the Minister saying that a Government-owned company is no different from privately-owned companies and that a privately-owned company stands on the same equal footing as a Government-owned company? Secondly, I agree with the Minister that I have no quarrels with Marconi, because we do not have the technology. But here the question is: can Marconi not work with a locally-owned company which manufactures PCs instead of the Government?”
“Sir, is it not then that what Telecom is doing is not in line with the Government's intention that the private sector be the engine of growth?”
“Sir, when the development has completed, will Telecom consider tendering out the PCs rather than following up with CEI in the manufacture of PCs?”
“Sir, is a tender called for choosing of partners in the research? Does the partnership in development also include the manufacturing of PCs? Are local companies being approached for such a venture?”
“I rest my case. TELECOMMUNICATION AUTHORITY OF SINGAPORE (Sourcing of personal computers) 2. Mr Philip Tan Tee Yong asked the Minister for Communications and Information, in line with the Government's intention that the private sector be the engine of growth, why is the Telecommunication Authority of Singapore sourcing personal computers from Chartered Electronics Industries Pte Ltd, a Government-owned company, instead of from local private manufacturers.”
“Sir, but how can we say that they are on a fair footing? The Minister should consider that there are certain factors that the Government-owned companies will have to take into account, for instance, land cost, rentals and even the attractiveness of employing people from the industry. BG Lee Hsien Loong: Mr Speaker, Sir, Government companies pay for their land cost, they pay for their office rentals and, if there is any preference, I can tell you that people prefer to work in private companies rather than Government ones.”
“Is the Minister assuming that the productivity of the Government-owned companies in the area of personal computers is higher than the privately-owned companies? BG Lee Hsien Loong: I make no assumption, Mr Speaker, Sir. But these are Government-owned companies competing on fair basis, receiving no subsidies, hiring workers and yielding returns, and they are not losing money. So why should they not continue?”
“Sir, I am wondering whether the Minister will comment on the statistics provided in the directory of the Singapore Federation of Computer Industry that there were five Government-owned companies employing 1,135 computer professionals as against 50 private companies with 4,802 employees. This works out to an average of 227 computer professionals per Government-owned company and 96 computer professionals per privately-owned company. Is it not true that the manpower has been drained away into the Government-owned companies? BG Lee Hsien Loong: Mr Speaker, Sir, if tomorrow the Government decides to sell off one of its companies with 220 people to a private sector entrepreneur for $10 million or what ever it is worth, the averages are even out overnight. Does it make one jot of difference to the economy? Which is better for us? That whoever owns the company and whoever has the enterprise gets the individuals and puts them to productive use, or that the Government and its companies, when these have talent and ideas, stand by idle and do nothing in order that others who are less competitive can come in and monopolise the market at the expense of consumers? Surely it is better for resources to be used optimally and consumers to be better served. They are not forced to go to Government companies. They can, if they wish. Telecom - the next question - is not compelled to buy computers from the Government. In fact, we encourage them to tender or to explore R&D contracts with whoever is available. If the Government company is the best one, so be it. If the Government company were not there, are we so confident that there would automatically be a private company in its mould and image in its place magically? I doubt it. Mr Philip Tan Tee Yong: Sir, I beg to differ.”
“Sir, I would like the Minister to consider whether this is in line with maximising the productivity of our limited manpower. BG Lee Hsien Loong: Mr Speaker, Sir, the line between what the Government should do, what the Government-owned companies should do, and what privately-owned companies should do, is a matter of degree, judgment and choice. From MTI's point of view, it makes absolutely no difference when a company sells a computer, whether the shareholder happens to be the Minister for Finance on behalf of the Government, or happens to be a private entrepreneur on his own behalf; provided he is operating on a level playing field, provided that there is no hidden subsidy from the Government, provided that the Government is not favouring its own company and, therefore, enabling it to compete unfairly with the private sector. If the Government company can give the private sector a run for its money, so be it.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the point is actually we want to maximise the limited manpower pool that we have. The PC area is not a very high-tech area.”
“I am referring to the ST company which is the agent for the AST personal computers. BG Lee Hsien Loong: Mr Speaker, Sir, rather than argue what advertisements have been published or not, I take the position that even if they were published entirely as the Member has maintained, I see nothing wrong with it. Why should a commercial company, making a commercial decision, seeing a business opportunity, not go in to offer a service which their customers value and find useful?”
“Sir, is the Minister aware that the advertisements by the ST companies were on selling PCs as stand-alone hardware only? BG Lee Hsien Loong: Mr Speaker, Sir, I do not know what advertisement the Member is referring to. I presume it was the advertisement for the Lynk computer which was designed, manufactured and sold by Chartered Electronics Industries (CEI).”
“Sir, is the Minister aware that ST companies are also agents for personal computers? BG Lee Hsien Loong: Mr Speaker, Sir, yes, indeed. The SAF Enterprises (SAFE) retails many brands of PCs as well as other consumer goods as part of its business. In addition, SCS, which is an information technology systems house, provides PCs and other work stations as part of its total system solutions. That means, when it sells a consumer a package, it is selling a solution - hardware, software, integration, training support. Therefore, SCS has a standing business relationship with PC vendors, which reduces the cost of such total systems offered to the clients. It is better for the clients. It gives them a more attractive package. Once SCS is a value-added supplier of PCs, there is no reason for SCS to turn down, customers who walk in and want to buy PCs off the shelf.”
“But from the point of view of the nation as a whole, it is better for the defence industries to do this and channel the private sector into other areas of business, rather than for the defence industries to keep their surplus capacity idle in order to give the business to the private sector. ST companies are required to maintain a clear business focus. They only undertake those non-military activities which make sense for the core mission of their companies, where there is synergy with the defence business. They are not allowed to practise predatory pricing, or take advantage of their Government-owned status to hide costs and win contracts. They must compete for business on equal terms with private sector companies. Electronics and computer systems are pervasive and important components of modern weapon systems. While we cannot become totally self-sufficient in these areas, the ST companies can develop a comprehensive capability in these systems, to give the SAF the extra technological edge. This is why ST companies manufacture and sell personal computers.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, before asking the Question, I would like to declare that I am in the computer software business though I am not in the business of manufacturing personal computers for sale. Secondly, I also want to declare that I am a council member of the Enterprise Development Council. This Council was formed by the Economic Development Board to promote and develop local enterprises to play a bigger role in Singapore's economic growth in the 1990s. The Second Minister for Defence (Services) (BG Lee Hsien Loong) (for the First Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Defence): Mr Speaker, Sir, I am answering on behalf of my Minister. The principal purpose of setting up the Singapore Technology (ST) companies is to provide technical and industrial support to the Singapore Armed Forces (SAF), to enhance its operational effectiveness and strengthen our economic defence. However, ST cannot do this solely by undertaking work for the SAF. No defence group in the world does this unless self-sufficiency is to be achieved at all costs. Strengths and capabilities which the SAF will need only in a contingency will almost by definition be surplus to requirements in peacetime. The same technology used by the SAF can often also be employed for civilian purposes. For example, both military data terminals and civilian personal computers require similar integrated circuits and printed circuit boards. To develop a capability for one and not to use it for the other would be wasteful. MINDEF's policy is therefore that ST companies should, besides SAF work, also undertake industrial and commercial activities which have synergies with, support or extend the core defence-related activities. This may mean "crowding out" the private sector from the business.”
“But I would like to suggest maybe one way to mitigate this situation is to create an environment in Singapore so that daily informal social interaction can take place instead of the organised events that we have in Singapore.”
“The achievements of these companies have blurred our vision of a possible disaster that can occur in the future. When these Government-owned companies grow in numbers and size, they will be very formidable. The biggest danger is when you have an inefficient government. Things can go very wrong. I have no doubt that this is unlikely for the next 15-20 years. But it will be prudent for us to anticipate such possibility. Touching on the quality of life in Singapore, our lifestyle is very much influenced by three factors, as I can see it, namely, the non-welfare state, productivity and meritocracy. The non-welfare state has unconsciously generated in us a sense of insecurity. We often hear people saying that they must save for rainy days. But there is a very thin line drawn between prudence and insecurity and, as such, it does not augur well for the psychology of our people. Next, productivity. In the area of productivity, usually the companies view it from their point of view. As such, productivity in Singapore has always been correlated very closely with long hours of work. The long hours that a person spends in work has resulted in very little time left for social interaction and recreation. This has created some problems. Finally, we have meritocracy. Although we must achieve excellence, meritocracy has an ugly side. Meritocracy has the danger of producing a very selfish population, in that if one wants to excel, he or she would try to be the best and very often it means keeping information and not helping others. I admit that it is difficult to strike a balance between what we are doing and what I have said earlier.”
“One observation I have is that many of these students are poor in articulation and in application of their knowledge. Can this be because in our school system students have always been commanded to be quiet, speak only when spoken to, and if a child is outspoken he is labelled as talkative and sometimes penalised? Exposed and disciplined in such an environment for about 10 years in primary and secondary schools, it is possible that our students will graduate as we see them today. Yes, we produce many students, but what about their personal development? In business, we have always been very happy, and rightly so, to see so many big MNCs coming out with their foreign investments in Singapore. And also rightly so, our whole Government machinery is geared to promoting them and hoping that they would establish here to increase the economic pie that we have. But my concern is, in the midst of all this activity for attracting foreign businessmen to Singapore, the increase in foreign investments, what about the local businessmen? The local businessmen have always been advised by Ministers and Government officials to automate and to go for overseas projects. Though the advices were well intended, the realities are that because we are clouded by the high investments of MNCs, we tend to pay relatively small attention to the local businessmen. I think that we should increase our focus to help the local businessmen so that they can be helped to go overseas. Recently, as you can see, there have been many Government-owned companies competing for the local business. These companies can do well because of many reasons. There are two main reasons. Many of these companies have no cash flow problems and their old boys' network is very large, especially among the Ministries.”
“And not forgetting that so many national events have been organised or will be held to celebrate the 25th anniversary. It is like going down the rapids where you have no time to stop to rest, to consolidate, and to review. But the biggest question I have is: granted that the form is impressive, what about the contents? We have been building flats for so many years, and did it not occur to our architects that our void decks are really void - void of activities, unfriendly and, in some blocks, very ghostly in the night? I was wondering to myself what is the purpose of void decks if they are not used daily by the residents. Can we not design a more friendly void deck where residents can interact? Can we not cater for some snacks and refreshment stalls to brighten up the void decks? Yes, I think we have the greatest number of void decks in the world. But is it not better to have void decks which residents can find them useful? Our architects have been designing coffeeshops ever since HDB flats were built. Coffeeshop is our way of life. But I think we should take a look at our coffeeshop. The design of our coffeeshop is such that customers and patrons have got to compete with the heat coming out from the stalls. We all know that we like to sit in the open air to enjoy our food. Can we not design a better and more bearable coffeeshop which can then be our national identity? Just as in Europe, they have the sidewalk cafes as their identity there? I am sure if we stop, consolidate and review the designs, and not just be so caught up with numbers, I think we can come out with better designs. In the field of education, we have been very successful in producing students in great numbers with good results.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, on Monday, 11th June, 1990, the Straits Times carried a front page news headline on the kitchen that caved in at a flat in Bedok. I was saddened by the news because it is a fear that I had long ago and it came true. It was the pace in which we built flats and I was afraid of the lack of supervision involved, and this actually happened. But what attracted my attention most, and I was very concerned, were the comments made by the HDB's Chief Executive officer, Mr Chuang Kwong Yong who said recently that: 'Spalling concrete and other defects such as tiles popping up from floors were due to poor on-site supervision by the Board during the rush to build flats from 1980 to 1986.' The question in my mind is: how safe are the other flats built during the period 1980-86? Will cave-in likely to occur again? What assurances will the Board give to the owners of the flats built during that period? If poor supervision is the root cause, will HDB conduct a survey of all flats built during that period? With the Hotel New World still fresh in our memory, this fear is a very real one. I hope the HDB will advise on these matters to calm their fears. Reading the comments of the HDB's CEO, I cannot help thinking that his comments may be true in many other areas. Is it not true in years past that we were very concerned or sometimes very obsessed with numbers, quantities or achieving of goals in the shortest time possible? We are rightly proud that we build the greatest number of flats in record time. We are elated that our economic figures shot up in such a short period. We are very happy that so many foreign investments have been committed and, of course, not forgetting our MRT was completed in record time and ahead of schedule.”
“We, being relatively younger, may not understand the senior citizens and their needs. Our thinking is very much current affairs orientated. I wish to suggest then that the Government consider enlisting the retired former Members of Parliament to spearhead this planning. Being senior in age, they can understand the needs of the senior citizens better, and because they were once leaders among us, they have the necessary experience and wisdom to plan and to lead. I personally believe that these former Members of Parliament can do a better job. I hope that funds can be set aside for this task.”
“To me, unfortunately, I think it took a little bit too long and, frankly, I was on the verge of giving up pursuing this plight inside and outside the House. Now with this relaxation I am personally very satisfied and I am also very happy for the local businessmen. I hope that local businessmen will take this relaxation only as an interim measure to allow them the time to search for ways and means to mechanise or automate their operations. Ultimately, they should rely less and less on work permit workers. My colleagues have talked quite a fair bit on the high cost of operations in Singapore. I shall not dwell on that subject except to add that maybe the Government should look into incentives of how we can get the smaller companies to work together to increase their revenue. One way is to persuade some big companies or Government-owned companies to work together with the smaller companies to take on projects overseas so that the revenue can be increased. I think that is an important area that we must not overlook, and not just merely to contain cost. Sir, this budget confirms that our economy is doing well. Whilst enjoying the fruits of a well-managed economy, I share the Government's concern for the years ahead. One such concern is the greying population. While we can quickly supplement the lack of manpower by allowing foreign workers to work here, we cannot do the same for the facilities and activities. We should start to plan now the activities and facilities for our senior citizens. Looking at some of the activities planned by our younger community leaders and civil servants, I tend to think that this task can be better planned by senior citizens who have the necessary leadership capability.”
“I am also very happy to note that the Government will introduce material science in the university. This discipline, although it is expensive to have, has very great economic potential and value especially in industries such as aerospace. The Government should be commended for having very good foresight in aiming for future excellence. The working class has also become more acutely aware that further education is the key to promotion or for self-development. The number of working adults studying part-time for professional degrees, computer qualifications, or for the MBA courses is on the increase. My personal experience tells me that working in the day and studying on your own in the evenings is very tough. More so because the pace at work today is getting faster and faster. I wish to appeal to the Government to consider setting up part-time courses, tutorials or appoint resource persons in the universities or colleges to assist this group of working adults prepare for the various professional degrees. I view this additional investment as worthwhile. With proper facilities and relevant guidance from lecturers and professors, the understanding of the subject is enhanced, and the time needed to finish a course can be shortened. This is in line with our productivity drive and we can increase the much needed professional manhours our economy badly requires. Excellence through education can and should continue, irrespective of age or status. I wish now to touch on the labour shortage problem. I believe the businessmen would join me in thanking the Government for relaxing the employment of work permit workers. To me, I see in this move that the Government can be persuaded to see the plight of the local businessmen, especially the small and medium ones.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the Government's drive for excellence has been successful. This budget is a clear evidence. Many reputable international surveys have concluded that we excel in many areas. Many factors contributed to this success and education is one of them. Education has become a vital link. Students strive to do well in primary, secondary, post-secondary, tertiary and post-graduate education. Parents strive to make sure that children get to the right schools, given the best tutors and funds are available to get them to the university. When they do not qualify for NUS because of limited intake, parents strenuously strive, though reluctantly sometimes, to enrol them in a foreign university. Education has become a top priority and it must also be said that the stress level has also increased. The recent move to upgrade schools and teachers confirms the Government's recognition that education is a very important link. In this respect, I feel that funds should be set aside for the employment of full-time administrators in the schools so that teachers can concentrate on teaching rather than administrative duties. The fact that NTI will be upgraded into a university and a substantial increase in student intake is really a good news to students and parents. Chances of tertiary education are better and the dependence on foreign universities becomes less. This may reduce some stress for all. I am sure many parents who have reluctantly sent their children abroad at great financial cost only wish that this policy has come earlier. It will be a great financial relief to this group of parents if the Government will consider granting subject credits to students currently studying abroad for them to continue their studies in the local universities.”
“If this is true, then the nominated MPs will lose their credibility. Sir, I submit that we do not need nominated MPs in this House.”
“I did not say that 1DPM insulted us. But I said, to me, it is an insult. It is my opinion that it is an insult to the intelligence concerning the capability, depth and breadth of knowledge, and courage of the present PAP MPs. Because 1DPM did say that with the presence of the nominated MPs, the quality of debate will be better, more dissenting views can be aired. It is true. That is my understanding and that is why, to me, it is my opinion that it is an insult to us. Because if you look at Hansard, we have also voiced dissenting views. The First Deputy Prime Minister also said that decisions are usually taken after closed-door meetings with PAP MPs. The fact remains that if the Government had decided after these closed-door meetings, how can 6 nominated MPs' views change it? Is it not reasonable to suggest that whatever views the 6 nominated MPs would air would have been aired by the PAP MPs at the closed-door meetings? What then is the value of the views of these 6 nominated MPs? Sir, these nominated MPs will probably be successful professionals or academicians. The question to ask is whether they, especially the successful professionals, will speak out without fear that their careers will not be jeopardized. Will a nominated MP who is a banker dare to speak out against policies of the MAS? Will a nominated MP who is an architect dare to speak out strongly against the BCD? Will a nominated MP who is an accountant dare to speak out strongly against the Income Tax, the SIC and the Stock Exchange? My personal view is that they will not be very forthright because they are wise people. They will pull punches. After all, a two-year term is not a very long time and they have a career to look after after their two-year term.”
“The First Deputy Prime Minister gave the impression that these 6 nominated MPs' views are crucial, without which no matters and issues will be wholly debated and dissenting views aired. To me, this is an insult to the intelligence --- The First Deputy Prime Minister (Mr Goh Chok Tong): Mr Speaker, may I just make a point of clarification? I think the Member for Paya Lebar should have listened to my speech carefully. In fact, he should read my speech in the Straits Times quite carefully. The whole speech is published. I did not in any way imply that. I was listening to the speaker quite merrily. But when he said that I have insulted, I think, members of the public should please read what I have said quite carefully.”
“This makes doing business an uphill battle for local businessmen. To compound their problems, they have to compete with Government-owned companies. Many PAP MPs have spoken strenuously on this unfair competition because Government-owned companies do not have cash flow problems. One Minister arrogantly said, "What's wrong with Government-owned companies competing? It is our philo- sophy. So be it." Is this not another way of saying, if your views do not coincide with ours, shut up. If your views coincide with ours, we listen. Do we need alternative views from nominated MPs? And will these nominated MPs dare to speak otherwise? We go on to some other areas. Many MPs have also told our Ministers that our regulatory bodies are behaving like demi-gods. And such situations only intimidate the commercial well-being of local businessmen. Sir, I can go on and on. But I just want to touch on two areas, and that is on higher medical charges and the higher school fees. Recently, we talked about the independent school fees that have gone up. We have said many times that we should not just raise the fees at such a quantum leap. It is not easy for a person to adjust suddenly. Our Ministers are always quick to adopt the attitude: did the ends justify the means? They always do this with a glee on their faces. I really find this disgusting. I think it is dangerous to adopt such a policy that the ends justify the means. History has shown us that many people adopting such policies oppressed the masses to achieve the ends. They failed in the long run. We had Hitler. We had the Chinese Emperor Chin Shi Huang. We must be careful. The ends do not always justify the means.”
“He is not without honour except in his own country. Allow me to quote the views of many PAP MPs on some matters and issues but are disappointed because they fall on deaf ears. Take for instance, the HDB. Many PAP MPs have told the Minister that many lower income residents are still having financial difficulties to pay conservancy charges, rental and instalments. When these residents finally found the ability to pay because they found jobs or they borrowed some money, they went to pay the current dues, but only to be turned away by HDB who coldly demanded that they must, I repeat, they must first pay the arrears and a hefty administrative charge ranging from $100 to $500. This, to me, is most ridiculous. Even a landlord will have mercy on his poor tenant, but not the HDB. Sir, to the poor, even $10 is a luxury. I have not forgotten my own childhood days when my mother had to borrow a few dollars to buy the daily food or we had to wait for the bread seller to complete his rounds and sell us the balance at a reduced price. Sir, poverty is not a joy and should not be taken lightly by those who can afford it. The PAP MPs have aired their views to the Minister on this predicament but nothing, I emphasize, nothing is conceded by the HDB. The Minister will always say it is a deterrent for abuse. This, I think, is an easy way out for the administrators and a case of the rich taking the poor lightly. The Government has made HDB look like a very cold and heartless animal to the poor. If they have taken heed of our views, HDB can become a heart warming and reasonable landlord. Do we need any more alternative views on these matters from the nominated MPs? Let us go on to business matters. Singapore has a small domestic market.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the First Deputy Prime Minister emphasised that the purpose of this amendment to have nominated MPs is to invite alternative views from qualified professionals who did not want to be involved with the hassle of elections or the long and hard hours of constituency work. I question the value of such views as they will probably be conceived in the ivory towers. Such views will be theoretical and do not reflect the real needs of the people. As for the alternative views that we try to obtain from these qualified professionals, we should ask ourselves a few questions: (1) On what matters and issues? (2) Are there enough existing channels of feedback for these matters and issues? and (3) Are the elected MPs contributing enough to the matters and issues at hand? If the matters and issues are on concepts and ideologies, we have our think tank, the university professors, the various specific institutes covering specific subjects. If the matters and issues are on economic and business matters, we have the Chambers of Commerce, trade associations, Trade Development Board, Economic Development Board and, last but not least, the elected MPs who are in commerce and industry and banking. If these matters and issues are on social aspects, we have our Feedback Unit, our grassroots organisations and, more importantly, the elected MPs who are in constant touch with their respective constituents. On all these issues and matters, if we look back into the Hansards, we will find countless number of views expressed by the elected MPs. Do we then need any more alternative views based purely on theory? The answer is no. We need theory based on experience. Sir, I strongly feel that the Government is not taking the views of the PAP MPs seriously. It is like a case of a prophet.”
“Sir, can I have your permission to clarify something that the Minister has said? I think the Minister has misquoted me by saying that I exaggerated that this amendment will cause an exodus of investors. I never did say that. What I said was that this amendment may engender a psychological fear which may prevent potential investors from coming to Singapore.”
“If you do not mind, I would like to clarify certain things. I did not mention that work permits were given only to the multi-nationals. I did not state that. I mentioned they were given only to those approved industries that the Labour Ministry has designated. I also mentioned that many of my constituents in the Paya Lebar side are actually smaller local businessmen. They often have a lot of problem in getting work permits. These are the people that I am referring to.”
“We are in a full employment situation. There is a need to review the use of levy. I would think the Labour Ministry should review this financial levy and substitute other non-monetary controls so that employers need not resort to employing illegal immigrants. In conclusion, I want to state that I am in favour of rules or regulations which will bring about an orderly business atmosphere but I am not in favour of caning as part of the penalty.”
“But, Mr Deputy Speaker, there are a myriad of industries in Singapore and these industries are crying for workers but no work permits are given. I would like to emphasize this because I have actually applied on behalf of my constituents and the result has always been negative. They happen to be the smaller businessmen in Defu Estate. If you and I are employers in such industries, I wonder what we would have done. I am often saddened by the things that I hear that many responsible administrators often advise employers in such industries to relocate to Malaysia or to any other country. Personally I think that the administrators may not fully understand the business environment. They have forgotten that such industries which are support industries are very much needed in Singapore because they are the ones that attract the multi-nationals. To relocate to other countries would increase the cost for the multi-nationals and in turn would lose our competitiveness. At this moment, I think the administrators are basking in the economic health generated by the multi-nationals that they think that the local industries are no more important or not glamorous enough for them to channel their energies and time. I think this is wrong. In order that the economy of Singapore may thrive, we need our local industries because they are an important factor in attracting multi-nationals. This amendment has also come about because many employers in the approved industries where work permits are freely given try to evade payment of levy on the foreign workers. Initially, the levy was introduced to check the number of foreign workers so as not to deprive our citizens of jobs. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, the environment has changed and, like all other things, rules must also change.”
“I urge the Government to redraft this amendment to exclude caning as a form of punishment. In its place we should consider heavy monetary punishments which are very effective in Singapore. We can see from our own experience how monetary punishments have brought about the desired results. For example, fines for spitting have made Singapore a cleaner city. Traffic fines have also reduced traffic offences and fines for late submission of annual returns by companies have also been very effective. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I could go on and the list can be very long. But I think it is sufficient to drive home the message by mentioning that even the latest fine for those who did not or forget to flush after their business in the toilet has also been very effective. I have said before that the main cause for such an amendment to become necessary lies in the strictly controlled work permits. I am very convinced that if the Government relaxes the issuance of work permits in accordance with demand, this amendment and the previous amendment of caning the illegal immigrants will no more be necessary. At this moment, there is a demand for foreign workers as we are in the full employment situation. It is a fact that Singaporeans choose jobs where the environment is comfortable and the physical demand is relatively less. As a result, there are not enough Singaporean workers for local businessmen who are involved in the labour-intensive businesses and the working conditions are harsh. The Labour Ministry has always claimed that work permits are usually and freely given. I understand that this is only true in the construction industry, shipbuilding industry, domestic maids, manufacturing and the hotel industry.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, caning has always been a punishment meted out for criminals. With the passage of this amendment, employers who commit non-criminal offences will be treated together as though they have committed criminal offences. The Government and administrators have rightly boasted Singapore of many firsts in the world. Singaporeans at large are very thankful for the progress and status that we have attained. We probably will be the first in the world to punish commercial offenders with punishment meant for criminals. I personally do not think that Singaporeans will be proud of this first. We should not draft our laws as though we are a commercial island to ourselves. Singapore is an important commercial and financial centre in the world and, as such, our laws which affect commerce and investors should take into account the foreigners who will invest in Singapore. This particular amendment will engender psychological fear in the potential investors to invest here. It will also create unnecessary psychological fear in our professionals to become entrepreneurs. The Government may contend that as long as the employers operate within the rules there is no cause for fear. But the truth of the matter is sometimes offences can be unknowingly committed on technical grounds. This one such fear will be real when such an amendment is passed. This may hinder the growth of entrepreneurship. Consequent upon to the psychological fear, many of our professionals may decide to start their business outside Singapore. At this juncture, it is already an uphill battle to retain professionals in Singapore. I am afraid this amendment will drive more Singaporeans overseas. I sincerely call for caution.”
“When he says "it is too hastily introduced", he is not against them but that it is not properly explained to the people. This brings me to my next point, the evening ALS. My grassroots leaders and friends are dead against this evening ALS. I am actually very cheered by their concern. This clearly shows that Singaporeans are not selfish. They are concerned even though these measures do not affect them personally. They tell me that these people who are living in the city are actually encouraged by the Government to take up residence in the city in the hope to make the city more lively after office hours. They heeded the call. Lo and behold, they are now penalized because of their cooperation. I think this is undesirable. I would request and plead with the Minister to strongly review this measure to make some concession to those people living in the restricted zone. Sir, I support the amendment moved by Dr Arthur Beng.”
“As I said, Mr Speaker, Sir, when I mentioned just now that my grassroots leaders and friends, being rational people, accepted my reasoning, then I asked myself, "Why is it that people are so charged with emotion and used very strong words to express their dislikes?" I thought through for a while. I came up with my own conclusion. I concluded that the Ministry has not done enough convincing and explanation to the people. It has been too often that policies affecting their livelihood have been introduced in a very abrupt manner. This gives rise to the impression that the Government is unreasonable, arrogant, dictatorial and unsympathetic. In the business jargon, I think what the Ministry lacks is some marketing skill and public relations. I want to respectfully remind the Minister that the PAP MPs are identified with the Government and the people view us as though we are the Government also. So whatever policies that the Government comes up with, it affects us as PAP Members. I think it will be good for us PAP Members to give as much inputs as possible to the Minister before any policies are formulated and announced. Then we can be together and speak as one voice, very unitedly, without doubt to the people and say, "Look, these are the reasons." In my own capacity as an MP I can reason with a few grassroots leaders, few friends. I do not have the financial resources, the manpower and the machinery to explain to all the people "across the board". I strongly feel that the Ministry has the manpower, the resources and the machinery to explain and reach out to more people than what a lone MP can do, and that is why I say that the amendment by Dr Arthur Beng is correct.”
“No, it means we examine the formulation.”
“I will support the increases according to the national policies that the Government announce from time to time, if it is justified. All right? The Minister has not answered my question whether he is prepared to open ---”
“I mentioned that I would only come to that conclusion after I have looked at the formula and provided the Minister is prepared to be reasonable enough to say that some elements are controversial. We must have an open mind. We cannot take a fixed rule and say, "Look, these are the formulae. These are the elements of costs." Of course, mathematically, you can prove.”
“Then I will make my decision after that. Isn't it fair?”
“First of all, before I answer the question, I would like to be satisfied that the costing is fair. Okay? And if he is prepared to allow some Members to sit down with him to look at it, I am prepared to head those Members who are willing to look at the costing? Mr Dhanabalan: And will you openly support the increases?”
“No, I did not suggest that. I am just saying that I am puzzled because, as much as the Minister says that Members use statistics to lie to bring forth the case, I am only suggesting - I am not sure that maybe to free our minds we should have a look at it so that we can be convinced that the costing formula is correct. The Minister cited the interest element. But when you collect the fee, there is also an interest element involved.”
“Will we be fair just to cater for the 40% and ignoring the 60% of the population which do not own cars? Will more car parks promote a better and healthier living environment? Will the safety of the children be taken care of if more car parks are built? I could go on asking a lot of these questions. Ultimately I asked my grassroots leaders and friends whether there were other alternatives? There was silence. We waited for a little while. We all agreed that there were no alternatives and that monetary measures was one, although it was not a perfect measure it could help to curb car ownership. So I am not surprised that both my grassroots leaders and friends, being rational people, accepted the reasoning. But what I am against more is the rate of increase in the season parking fees. I think it was said that only 40% would be affected, 60% would not be affected. But we forgot that the hawkers and shopkeepers would seize this opportunity to increase their prices. In so doing, not only 40% but 100% of the people will be affected, even those who do not own cars. They have to pay more for what they buy. The Minister for National Development has very carefully put forward the recovery cost of the car parks, and he put forward the case that it would take many years to recover if we wanted to recover the cost. I wonder whether the Minister is willing to allow some Members to sit down with his officials to go through the costing of the car parks and see whether it is really true or not that the costing is reasonable. Mr Dhanabalan rose.”