R Ravindran
Singapore
“Sir, on behalf of all Members who raised various cuts under this amendment, I would like to thank the Minister for Defence, the Second Minister for Defence and the Senior Parliamentary Secretary for their detailed explanations. I would like to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.”
“All this training only comes when the critical time for us to play the game and stay there on the field after the critical 30 minutes. I think it is critical that the SAF provides safe training but, at the same time, realistic training. I would like to ask the Minister how the SAF intends to provide for more safety.”
“Sir, ASEAN, as an organisation, looks like it is back on track. The last ASEAN Leaders Summit showed that the leadership shares a common vision and is committed to meeting the goals set henceforth.”
“Sir, I thank the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Mr George Yeo, and the Minister of State, Mr Zainul Abidin, for their very comprehensive answers to the queries raised by Members and I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The sum of $257,379,160 for Head N ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates.”
“If such rivalries continue, there is every risk that the community-building exercise would be fatally compromised. At best, the EAS may just emerge as another talk-shop like APEC or ARF, where leaders meet, declarations are made, but little community-building is achieved.”
“Sir, the big plus over the recent debate on the Melvyn Tan's case was the tremendous understanding of the role of National Service by all Singaporeans and the spirited defence of it by many.”
The complete record
Every one of 385 lines we hold for R Ravindran, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 3 of 8.
“But I would like to remind our union leaders that just as they support the Government on these CPF cuts, they have an equally important job in getting the best for the workers when the economy recovers. I would like to call upon our unions to be equally fervent and demand appropriate wages and bonuses when the economy recovers, and not let employers off lightly when they make good profits. It is important that unionists be seen to be championing workers' rights and fair demands in good times in as much as they call on workers to make sacrifices during bad times. Workers are very discerning, and how unions represent them will determine the future of unionism in Singapore. I sincerely hope that our unions will get the best deal for our workers when the economy turn-around comes about. Fourthly, Singapore companies. Sir, I would like to urge Singapore companies locating overseas or starting businesses overseas to see how they can provide employment for Singaporeans. My message to them is: do not all of you abandon our Singapore workers. Many of our workers have worked many years in Singapore and have valuable experience. I am confident that they can help pass on some of their skills and experience to foreign staff. I would like to appeal to these companies to bring along some of these workers with them and, in the process, help reduce unemployment in Singapore. In doing this National Service, I am confident it will exemplify these companies as good corporate citizens. Fifthly, brain drain. Sir, I would like to ask the Government as to whether making Singapore a low wage cost centre might make Singapore inadvertently a less attractive place to work for expatriates and, hence, drive them elsewhere.”
“With the prospect of the economy recovering in the second half of the year, many have asked whether this is the right time to retune the CPF, particularly the CPF contribution rates. The reality on the ground is that many companies and firms have already cut the salaries of workers over the past few years because of deteriorating economic condition. Some are already working alternate days. The wage market was working its own equilibrium and determining Singapore's competitiveness. The latest CPF cuts are a further cut of workers' salaries. The jobs that have left Singapore left solely not due to wages. Some of the technologies have become obsolete. Some wanted to be close to their MNC customers. Some wanted to be in growing markets. Some are not convinced that the small cut in CPF will help keep some of the jobs from migrating to cheaper labour cost centres. I am of the view that the Government's decision to cap the future CPF employer's contribution at a maximum of 16% is a strong signal that we intend to cap wage and business costs, and that it will certainly help the companies to consider staying here. But as to whether it will help save costs or businesses to stay here, I am not convinced. Perhaps the Government could have provided a better case with more detailed studies rather than tell this House that they rely on gut feel. Sir, the third point is on unions. I am truly impressed by the way our unionists have come out to support the CPF cuts as measures needed to save jobs and create new jobs. My sense is that some workers are questioning the relevance of unions in an era where employers hire and fire at will. These are tough times for our union leaders. I support them for being frank and discussing the problems with their workers openly.”
“Sir, the retuning of the CPF was a landmark decision. Unlike past changes which primarily affected the contribution rates, the present changes touch on withdrawal amounts, the contribution quantum and how much will be channelled into the Special Account. I must commend the Government for its brevity and honesty in addressing our short-term and long-term problems openly and rationally. The people's reaction is mixed. Employers are naturally happy and wish they have more. Employees are worried as they have to reorganise their finances and cut back their consumption. I have received feedback from the public and my grassroots leaders and I do hope that the Government can address the issues raised. The first one is on wage policy. It is clear that we have a rigid wage structure in Singapore which becomes particularly acute during recessions when wages do not adjust downwards fast enough. While the National Wages Council has been pushing for the AVC and MVC for the past few years, there are few takers in the unionised sector and even fewer in the non-unionised sector. In fact, MNCs and other businesses find it cumbersome to implement them. A one-size-fits-all national wage policy may not be suitable for our economy which is facing structural problems. Is it the right time to let go of the NWC and instead leave it to employers, unions and employees to work out wage matters? This may be a better approach to wage matters than the Government using a blunt tool, like the CPF, to macro manage the economy at the workers' expense. Is it the right time to explore whether we could arrive at a laissez-faire model, which is more nimble, responsive and adaptable to our fast changing economic environment? The second issue is on whether it is the right time to make the CPF changes.”
“Sir, I understand that many domestic airlines in Indonesia and also some of the budget airline operators in the region would like to hub in Singapore. But they are complaining that the cost of hubbing in Singapore is too high. Are we reacting fast enough to ensure that we are able to attract them to hub in Singapore? Or are we going to wait until a situation arises like PSA where we lose the customers and then we take measures to attract them back to Singapore? I would like to get the Minister's input on this.”
“Sir, I would like to seek the Minister's clarification as to whether the Ministry's practice is to have a hands-on policy with regard to how teachers and principals encourage multi-racialism in schools, or is it something where they want to be proactive and continue to monitor what really happens in schools. I think the problem in many cases may be the principals and teachers who turn a blind eye to the problem in the schools for various reasons. I do not know the exact reason and many people have gone on to speculate. I am just wondering, if such an instance that I cited is the case, whether the Ministry could be more proactive and also give avenue for parents and even students to highlight cases that such practices are condoned by teachers and principals and thereby lead to a lack of inter-racial mixing. Feedback seems to indicate that principals and teachers do contribute to the problem, because they turn a blind eye to the matter. But, more importantly, I would like to ask the Minister whether the committee, that is headed by the Parliamentary Secretary, could come out with various ways of monitoring not only the measures but the results of some of these things that the schools have implemented, and not instances where a Minister or Member of Parliament visits the school, they put up a show as a model of multi-racialism, but when the Minister, MP or VIP leaves, what is the real situation in the school. We can find out whether this is what the Singapore population wants. Is it the reality, or is it that some policies or the principals and teachers in charge of the schools are the cause of the problem? So I would urge the Ministry to pay greater attention to the problem in school. It is no point that we start talking about nation building ---”
“Madam, in the light of what my colleagues have already asked about ASEAN, I would just come to the crux of the issue. I would just like to ask the Minister for Foreign Affairs as to what really is the state of affairs in ASEAN today.”
“The on-going disarmament issue which is continuing to cause a great impasse in the United Nations Security Council clearly shows that there is a weakness in the UN Security Council's proceedings and the way it makes its decisions. What is clear is that the Iraqi impasse is reaching a climax and that everyone is expecting military action sooner rather than later. What is critical is that, being a small nation but an influential international player in the world, everybody naturally will take notice of what is Singapore's position. It will be much easier for us if the UN Security Council is able to make a decision and everybody follows the decision of the UN Security Council on Iraq. But the problem arises when the UN Security Council is unable to make a decision and the coalition of the willing goes ahead and takes military action in Iraq. The problem that arises is what is Singapore's position in this regard, if the UN Security Council is unable to make a decision. Do we become part of this coalition of the willing and, if so, what will then be our interpretation of UN Security Council Resolution 1441?”
“Sir, when the Defence Science and Technology Agency (DSTA) was set up some three years ago, one of the concerns raised in this House is whether it will collaborate with the private sector to ensure that some R&D is undertaken by the private sector together with the involvement of the academia. As one of the biggest R&D organisations, if not the biggest R&D organisation in Singapore, I would like to ask the Minister for Defence as to what extent DSTA has collaborated with the private sector and the academia to ensure that many of these R&D projects, which have military application, can be tapped by DSTA. And, secondly, in particular, I would like to ask as to what extent DSTA has passed on some of the technology that is developed for military application for usage in the civilian sector, and vice-versa. And as to the extent to which it has tapped on some of the application of R&D results that have been achieved in the private sector, how much of it has been taken over for military application by DSTA?”
“Sir, MINDEF has always maintained parallel diplomatic communication links with all major defence forces all over the world, in particular with our neighbouring countries. And such excellent diplomatic relation has stood the test of time even during crisis, even with countries such as Malaysia and Indonesia. What I would like to ask the Minister for Defence is: what additional steps MINDEF has in place to increase greater defence cooperation and diplomatic communication with the various defence forces, particularly those involving our strategic partners and the neighbouring countries?”
“Sir, I am aware that we have a very strong defence force. In fact, I was pleased that in this year's Budget, we have decided not to cut the budget of the Ministry of Defence but instead to increase it by a marginal figure. It sends a strong message to all Singaporeans that we will continue to have a very strong defence force, one, for the primary purpose of deterrence and, two, for the purpose of defence of all Singaporeans. Sir, I am also aware that defence equipment and a sizeable NS manpower require substantial funds. In addition, R&D and keeping the edge require a lot of investment of funds in cutting-edge technology. I would like to ask the Minister for Defence, in the light of the substantial amount of funds being allocated to the Ministry of Defence, what measures are in place to ensure that our funds are always used prudently and, more importantly, that we always run a tight ship?”
“In the past, I have spoken in this House on the need for opening up state lands which lie idle for use by the public for both recreational and sports facilities. I am glad that whenever some agencies apply, the Singapore Land Authority has been kind enough to allow for the use of such land for recreational purposes. For example, in my constituency, when I applied for about 20,000 square feet piece of land which was lying idle to be used for recreational use, I was very happy that the SLA allowed the use of such land for recreational purpose. But what I would like to see is for the SLA to be more pro-active in putting up such lands which are available for recreational use on its Internet, and to be even more pro-active, maybe sending a list of State land which can be used for recreational or sports purposes, to each constituency and the MPs concerned, so that they can highlight it to the public in their own constituency or even the public in general as to what are the State lands which are lying idle and which can be used by the public for either recreational or sports purposes. Instead of letting public land sitting idle without any alternative use for the time being, it is better that such land be used by the public for such recreational and sports use.”
“Mandatory minimum and rigid sentencing tariffs make it more difficult for the Subordinate Courts to meet the ends of justice in individual cases. 5.30 pm Sir, I must commend the Minister for Transport when he recently moved the amendment to provide the punishment for weekend car offenders from one of jail sentence which was being imposed by the Subordinate Courts to one where they provided fine for the first offender, and only in subsequent cases for fine and jail to be given. Because they realise that the Subordinate Court was imposing jail terms for first-time offenders, which was not the original intention of the Minister for Transport at that point in time when he moved the passing of the law. Sir, there has been no holistic study of the effectiveness of mandatory minimum and sentencing tariffs. This must be done from the point of view of legal jurisprudence and sociological factors. We need a careful weighing of the benefits of putting people into jail against the cost of doing so in terms of expenditure and social costs to them, their families and Singapore. We are dealing with Singaporeans and must not let operational and administrative efficiency become the only factors that are to be considered. Sir, I would also like to commend the NMP Mr Chandra Mohan for alluding to this when he raised this point under the Criminal Justice System in taking a cut on the Judicature. Sir, I would like to ask the Minister to consider whether the sentencing policies in place now have fulfilled their intended purposes. What has been the collateral cost and whether the approach currently in place can be improved? The next cut, Sir, is State Land. Sir, the Singapore Land Authority is the manager of all State lands in Singapore.”
“Sir, the law currently provides for mandatory minimum for some offences. The reason for this is deterrence. However, at the lower end of culpability, this has had the effect of treating cases of differing culpability in the same way. To create a distinction in sentencing between differing cases, the mandatory minimum has become the minimum sentence for cases with the lowest culpability. I have noticed that prosecutorial discretion in reducing charges, etc, has been applied less frequently nowadays. Some charges, with mandatory minimum, such as harbouring immigration offenders, cannot be reduced as there is no available lesser charge. As a corollary to this, the courts use the mandatory minimum as the starting point of sentencing for the least culpable cases. Take the case of employment of illegal workers as an example. The average "plead guilty" case now gets seven months' jail. An accused who claims trial typically gets 11 months' jail, an increase of more than 50% for exercising the legally given and constitutionally protected right to claim trial, which is too high a price to pay to save the court's time. My anecdotal observation is that the combination of legislated minimums and tariff sentencing in the courts has resulted in more people getting jail terms, and the average jail term increasing in length. The four objectives of sentencing are rehabilitation, retribution or punishment, general and specific deterrence and, finally, prevention. Sir, sentencing is a balance of the needs of society and the individual offender to achieve the above four objectives. I appreciate that the different objectives carry different weight, depending on the facts of each case.”
“Sir, my parliamentary colleague, Prof. Chin, has already highlighted the litany of problems being faced by the legal profession in Singapore. I, like him, would like to ask the Minister for Law as to what were the findings of the study that was undertaken in the year 2001 with regard to the legal profession. And, in particular, I would like to find out what are the new directions or steps that the Ministry of Law will be taking to help the legal profession to ensure that many younger lawyers continue to stay in the profession, so that we will continue to have a vibrant legal profession in Singapore, which is in partnership with the judicial system, to ensure that law is both accessible and, at the same time, cost effective for all Singaporeans.”
“Mdm Deputy Speaker, first, could I ask the Minister why does Singapore maintain that Johor has lost the right of review when the Water Agreements provide for the review after 25 years, but does not specify exactly when such a review should take place? Second question, could the Minister explain why Singapore is not insisting that the price review be referred to the ICJ or the Permanent Court of Arbitration?”
“The path of moderation and tolerance is the only way for Singapore to survive as a nation. Terror of any kind, and carried out by any group, will bring great harm. We must engender in our people the spirit that is constructive towards our nation building effort. This is the spirit that was seen in Whampoa recently when a fire broke out near a lift-landing and a couple was trapped inside the lift. A Malay family living closest to the lift-landing rallied other neighbours to assist the couple. It was the same spirit that drove my late father and other villagers, both Chinese and Malays, to form watch groups to protect our kampong during the 1964 riots. It is this spirit that supports the common good that is needed now. Mr Speaker, Sir, I support the motion. [Applause.]”
“Everyone must understand that he or she has a role to play, be it in schools, workplaces, recreational centres, and even in places of worship. But I would also argue that the solution to this problem lies more in the hands of those with the power to effect meaningful change. Those in leadership positions, in whichever organisations or institutions that they belong to, play a key role in this fight against terrorism. If we fail to diagnose and understand this phenomenon correctly, then we risk the well-being of our nation. Simplistic analysis of the global terrorism threat and distorted views of history and of contemporary Muslim societies and countries serve only to confuse and detract from real understanding. Fashionable ideas of the clash of different religious communities as the outcome of modern history are no different from the views of the fundamentalists who divide the world into two opposing ethical communities. Such ideas give fodder to the fundamentalist mind. We should not give space for such ideas here in Singapore. When the Government fought the Communists and the communalists, it was the call to, and support for, of those within the Chinese community who were committed to the idea of a modern and multi-racial Singapore, to stand up against such elements, that helped win the day. Similarly, today we should give notice to those who are prepared to use religious sentiments to provoke resentment towards the State or any other group, that they will suffer the wrath of the people and the State. Such elements are destructive to our nation-building effort and should never be allowed to grow. Space and support should be given to the progressive elements in the Malay/Muslim community. This is a struggle for the hearts and minds of our people.”
“Using old sari material folded four times as a filter for river water, they found that they could cut down the incidence of cholera by half among villagers in Bangladesh. I traced the report and found that one of the researchers is a Muslim from Bangladesh who is currently working in Maryland with other non-Muslim scientists on this project. I communicated with him, and he told me that he and his colleagues have been working for 27 years in a search for a cure for cholera among poor villagers. As a Muslim, Professor Anwar Huq is contributing to the good society. As various Members of the House have pointed out, the current challenges present a window of opportunity for Singaporeans to stand up to defend the society we want to preserve and build upon. Muslims and non-Muslims in Singapore have a role to play in ensuring that the good society prevails. Apart from the need to reach out to one another and to strengthen our social cohesion and community bonding, it is also necessary for us to encourage good behaviour and contributions from each other. By expanding our common space through the encouragement of the adoption of healthy common values, such as the respect for diversity, a commitment to securing peace and harmony for Singapore, a determination to build a strong economy, a desire to provide assistance to the weaker members of society, and to provide a safe and secure environment, all Singaporeans will surely contribute to the good society. It is by ensuring that we all, Muslims and non-Muslims, work together towards the common good that we can ensure a peaceful and harmonious, cohesive and resilient Singapore. Sir, the threat of terrorism is a complex challenge. Our efforts at strengthening our social cohesion must continue with renewed vigour and focus.”
“Elements of the good society include a system to protect weaker members of society, measures to insure a corruption-free environment, the establishment of a safe and secure environment, the provision of opportunities for everyone to grow and develop, a good health care system, and an economic system that promotes development for all in that society. Our contribution to Singapore must be to help build this good society. In fact, I would argue that elements of the good society exist in Singapore, and that it is our duty as good Muslims and good Singaporeans to protect this. Hence, I am encouraged by the achievements of Ms Misnati Dollah and Mr Zainul Sarib who are among the winners of the National Productivity Award for the year 2002 in Singapore. In their own quiet ways, they are helping to promote the productivity movement, which is central to an efficient economic system. They, like many other Malay/Muslim workers in Singapore, are building the good society in Singapore. Our meritocratic system has also allowed us to identify talented Malays for key appointments on the boards of statutory bodies and Government-related agencies. And we have been doing this for a very long time, ever since your days as Minister-in-charge of Muslim Affairs, Sir. So, today, we find Malays on the boards of organisations, such as the Public Service Commission, MPA, CAAS, LTA, Science Centre, MDA, National Heritage Board and the Singapore Management University. There are many other ways in which Muslims can contribute to the building of the good society. The BBC reported last week on the discovery by a group of US researchers in the fight against cholera.”
“Our challenge, as has been suggested by several Muslim and non-Muslim scholars, is for the moderates to speak up. And I know the term "moderate" is loaded with meaning. But it must be so. To those who view the world as incompatible with their version of religion, they would see people who advocate a multitude of voices and interpretations of the religion as being the enemy. Their insistence on a monolithic interpretation of Islam, with no room for disagreement, must necessarily clash with those who advocate diversity. Hence, we see groups issuing edicts of death to those who advocate a different view from them. We must collectively reject these views immediately. The best safeguard we can put in place is to allow a diversity of views and opinions to emerge. Muslims all over the world will never have disputes on the fundamental principles of Islam, such as the oneness of God, the Prophecy of Muhammad, the five daily prayers, the payment of wealth tax, and fasting. But in the way we order our lives, cherish our women, organise our religious life, exist in a multi-religious society, educate our young, and so on, there can be differences. Of course, the diversity cannot be unlimited. Certainly, if some advocate violence as a basis of their struggle, then we must all condemn it. As rightly pointed out by several Muslim scholars, the proper interpretation of Islam is compatible with democracy and human rights. And democracy is about respect for differences of opinions and consensus building by the strength of arguments and not by the size of your arsenal. The Way Forward - Building the Good Society Sir, Islam encourages all Muslims to build the good society.”
“Having taken the oath of allegiance, the JI ideology of violence, hatred and extremism was never challenged by anyone in the group. If we, as a community, allow intolerant and extremist views and ideas to go unchallenged, then we inadvertently allow such views to take root here. If in response to a question on how Muslims should deal with banking interest, a foreign Muslim religious speaker tells a crowd in Singapore that they do not need to live in Singapore, and we allow such a comment to go unchecked, then we unwittingly sow the seeds of conflict and fundamentalism. The response by a foreign religious speaker echoes that of the local JI leader, Ibrahim Maidin, who wrote to the Taliban leader, Mullah Omar, on whether Muslims should all migrate to Afghanistan as he believed then that, under the Taliban, Afghanistan was a true Islamic state. Both Ibrahim Maidin and the foreign speaker reflect the same mind. And this is the nub of the problem: what we are dealing with is a peculiar orientation of the mind. If we allow myopic, extreme and radical views to go unchallenged, even if they do not advocate violence, then we inadvertently provide a conducive environment for the growth of intolerance and a rigid fundamentalist orientation to life. Just like the fundamentalist groups who reject everything Western without a clear understanding, we find today such thinking permeating the Muslim mind in a variety of ways. Articles and journals that present the West as the great evil of modern society and present alternatives, on matters such as politics and economics, couched in religious terms as the absolute truth, reflect the fundamentalist traits. But these articles get published while those with a more rationalist interpretation are blocked.”
“Their vision of a Daulah Islamiyah or Islamic state is anchored in the past, with no scope for change or adaptation, and no tolerance of diversity. While not all fundamentalist groups support terrorism, they indirectly provide the ideological motivation for religiously inspired terrorism. The JI showed us that it is a short step indeed from religious fundamentalism to terror. Sir, this may all appear academic. But the point I am trying to make is that both Muslim and non-Muslim Singaporeans owe it to themselves to understand this phenomenon. This phenomenon is not about Muslims versus non-Muslims. It is about a particular orientation towards life that insists that the modern world offers no salvation; it is about returning to an idealised notion of a religious past and accepting a rigid interpretation of religion as the true path. It is about justifying the use of violence for this purpose. We must oppose this orientation towards life; we must believe there is no inconsistency in being both religious and modern at the same time. Diversity and Tolerance: Best Guard Against Extremism The Muslim community here cannot pretend that nothing has changed in the last 20 years. The White Paper calls for a comprehensive system to regulate religious education within the Muslim community. This, as I have explained earlier, is being done by MUIS in collaboration with other Malay/Muslim organisations. But is this sufficient to safeguard against the emergence of groups like the JI? As shown in the White Paper, Ibrahim Maidin and his JI members attended religious classes, like other Muslim Singaporeans would do. But slowly, over time, and for a select group of members, the JI ideology gets introduced.”
“They manifest this as a struggle between their vision of how society is to be organised against models of societies developed in the West. These groups perceive secular nationalism as a Western construct that has failed to address their concerns. This struggle, which is ideological in nature, has been termed by one author as a conflict of the "ideologies of order". One side maintains that secular nationalism is the glue that can bind groups into a coherent nation, while the other insists that it must be religion. And true to their fundamentalist traits, their vision harks back to a past which they deemed glorious and perfect. In order to achieve their vision, these groups are prepared to use violence. In their minds, they see the world dominated by Western ideals and which holds nothing for them. Hence the need to destroy in order to build something new. People who believed that all symbols of the West should be destroyed, carried out the 9/11 attacks and the Bali bomb blasts. And that in doing so, their own death serves a perceived so-called higher purpose. This form of revolutionary violence has been noted by some writers as being similar to the way in which revolutionary socialism and violent anarchism have seduced young Westerners into terrorism in a previous generation. The JI and Terror If we juxtapose all of the above against what the White Paper has described to us about the JI, we will see a picture emerging reflecting the so-called fundamentalist mindset. The JI is an exclusive group that mistakenly believed that they had found the path to salvation. Those who do not share their belief are considered as "unbelievers", a demarcation that in their mind legitimises the use of violence against everyone, including Muslims.”
“For non-Muslim Singaporeans, Sir, I hope they do not view the White Paper as proof of a fundamental flaw in the Malay/Muslim community. Muslim Singaporeans are equally shocked at the emergence of a terrorist group within our midst. We did not create this group. Most, if not all, of us are saddened that there exist within the community people who are prepared to use violence, even towards fellow Muslims, to further their own goals. Between the need to move on and the need for concrete action to prevent the emergence of terrorist or extremist groups, lies a common ground where all Singaporeans should converge. And that is to understand this global phenomenon correctly and to see that it affects all of us, irrespective of our religious or ethnic backgrounds. Understanding this global phenomenon In any religious group, as pointed out by Mr Ravindran, there can emerge, and have emerged, groups that are prepared to be different and, in some cases, even pursue a path of violence to achieve their vision. Martin E. Marty and R. Scott Appleby are editors of a five-volume work on the study of fundamentalism. These studies have noted that fundamentalists share a tendency to separate from fellow believers, and to establish strict boundaries between insiders and outsiders. Fundamentalists also define the opposition as including both non-believers and believers who do not share their views. While the term "fundamentalist" is frequently associated in the popular press with Muslim extremists, fundamentalist thinking can exist in any religious system. There are fundamentalist groups, like the JI, who see the modern world as offering no future for them.”
“These are concerns that the Government, community and business sectors are addressing. However, the Malays certainly did not view the Singapore system as being stacked against them. Nor did they think that the community is marginalised. Indeed, this view is borne out by objective measures of the community's progress in education, income and social and material well-being. Our own Prime Minister has given us the data of the past 10 years achievement of the Malay/Muslim community. The Malay community has seen successful individuals in diverse fields in line with the overall progress of the community. Over time, we will see more of them. With greater interaction between Muslims and non-Muslims at all levels and more visible examples of Malays in leadership, we will strengthen the mutual respect and understanding between our various communities and build on the cohesion that we have achieved in the last three decades. Finding the Common Ground Sir, the Malay/Muslim community has gone through an entire year of discussions, dialogues, meetings, cross-cultural sessions and many other forms of trust building efforts. The community wants to move on. While the White Paper has been well received by most Singaporeans, I understand why some in the Malay/Muslim community feel uneasy about being in the spotlight again and they want to move on. Perhaps, it is useful for us to reflect exactly on what moving on means in the context of what is happening around us. Moving on does not mean ignoring and not dealing with the JI incident and its implications. Moving on requires understanding what the issues and challenges are all about and what needs to be done in order to avoid a similar incident in the future.”
“But the principle applies to all social environments such as schools, workplaces, and community clubs. While the Government and community can provide platforms and facilitate social bonding, Members of this House have rightly pointed out that individual Singaporeans have to make the effort to interact and understand one another. Sir, as pointed out by the White Paper, there is no quick solution to counter the threat of terrorism. Groups, like the JI, took a long time to form and morph and can exist in our midst without anyone knowing about it. Similarly, building cohesion and trust is a long-term process requiring every one, Muslims and non- Muslims, to stay focused on the real issues. The real challenge for us here, in Singapore, is to build a climate where extreme views will not take root. We must create an environment that is conducive to a healthy development of every one's faith and belief in the context of a multi-racial and multi-religious Singapore. My parliamentary Malay/Muslim colleagues and I are committed to this process. We had started a process of consultation with the Malay/Muslim community and religious leaders long before the attacks on the twin towers and the JI arrests. The process will now continue with a sharper focus on what needs to be done within our community. I recently met a group of such leaders to share with them my views on the White Paper and what I intend to say today. I found the process useful and will continue to consult community and religious leaders in the future. Sir, in my discussions with many Malays from all walks of life in the past year or so, I heard concerns about jobs and livelihood, as well as how the community was being put under the spotlight.”
“The hon. Member, Mr Ravindran, noted the issue of the credibility of MUIS in the eyes of Malay/Muslim Singaporeans. I think it is important for the Malay/Muslim community to give their support and respect to MUIS. As the highest religious body in the Muslim community in Singapore, Muslims have a duty to work together with MUIS to build it into a strong and responsive organisation. I would also urge our religious leaders to work closely with MUIS in our effort to strengthen Islamic religious education in Singapore. Building Social Cohesion Building social cohesion is an issue for all Singaporeans, not just the Muslim community. The JI security challenge has been a test of our cohesiveness and resilience as a people. Although the issue is a difficult one, it is good that the Muslim community has not withdrawn into itself, but actively reached out to others - and built bridges across communities. At the same time, non-Muslims should understand that communal worship is an integral part of Muslims' lives, and should not view this as Muslims `retreating to the mosque' at the expense of social interaction. I am glad that other communities have not stood and looked on as bystanders or commentators, but have made a sincere effort to better understand and reach out to the Muslim community. We need that understanding and trust not just at the level of the community leadership but also at the grassroots level. Community leaders have a critical role in modelling the attitudes and actions that promote community bonding. As leaders, they can also help dispel misperceptions, prejudices and encourage members in their groups to interact socially with people in other ethnic communities. The IRCC is one important platform where these initiatives are taking place.”
“It will also look into enhancing the quality of the network of teachers and institutions providing religious education. Developing asatizah and enhancing their role The Muslim religious teacher, or asatizah, holds a respected place in the Muslim community. Many Muslims can recall fondly a teacher who has made a positive impact on his/her life and values. This respect is something the teacher earns through continuously learning and being able to address the concerns of the students of today. We want to systematically enable our asatizah to enhance their knowledge and exposure. MUIS will work closely with relevant Malay/Muslim organisations to look into their professional development and recognition. Currently, MUIS has platforms to engage religious leaders and teachers to discuss professional issues, as well as generate new ideas for programmes. MUIS also gives scholarships to assist individuals to pursue religious education at reputable institutions of learning. MUIS will build on existing initiatives and develop a structured training and development framework. This can then form the foundation for the consideration and development of other measures, such as the accreditation of our religious teachers. To help point the public to qualified teachers, MUIS will work to maintain an updated and comprehensive database for their reference. Sir, all of the above initiatives are components of the comprehensive regulatory system that the Muslim community is putting together as proposed by the White Paper. With time and greater experience in managing the various aspects of the system, MUIS will be able to provide more precise guidance to Muslim Singaporeans on their religious education needs, either independently or in collaboration with other Malay/Muslim organisations.”
“We will strengthen the safeguards against adverse influences from outside Singapore. There is already a vetting system for foreign speakers. We will also leverage on, and strengthen information sharing among Malay/Muslim organisations and mosques so that we can more easily detect activities that are out of the ordinary. The White Paper has helped in educating the public on how to recognise potentially untoward activities. MUIS will provide guidance to students in selecting the overseas institutions in which to pursue religious education. It will also undertake pre-departure programmes and keep in touch with the students while they are overseas. However, Sir, other than adopting a defensive approach, we want to strengthen our own Muslim community's religious education system, not only as a safeguard against deviant teaching, but also to support the holistic development of the Muslim community. Strengthening of part-time religious education for children and adults There is a strong and vibrant part-time religious education system within the Malay/Muslim community. Almost every mosque in Singapore provides classes in religious instruction for both children and adults. There is also a thriving private sector market in this area. Given the extensive reach of this system, it is important that we pay close attention to it. MUIS will set up a Religious Education Advisory Panel. And this panel will make use of a collaborative approach that will bring together all stakeholders, and seeks out the views of parents, teachers, and students on religious education. The comprehensive review will look into the appropriate content and teaching methods relevant to different age groups, as well as training for our teachers.”
“What will be critical is how Singaporeans pull together to overcome these twin challenges, so that we become more resilient as a people, and come out stronger and more cohesive as a nation. Response of the Malay/Muslim community The Malay/Muslim community and religious leaders are united in their determination to tackle these challenges. The responses of the various Malay/Muslim organisations, such as MUIS, Mendaki, Pergas, Perdaus, and various community leaders to the White Paper again underscore this commitment. We want to play a constructive role in this important effort of building trust and strengthening ties across all groups in Singapore. It is also important for the House to know that the Malay/Muslim community had embarked on this process long before the appearance of the White Paper. During the past two years or so, Muslim community leaders and institutions have come together to work on measures that will strengthen Islamic religious education and development in Singapore. The Muslim Religious Council of Singapore (MUIS) has initiated a variety of programmes to strengthen both the full-time and part-time madrasah systems, and to train and upgrade the skills of Islamic religious teachers in Singapore so that they understand the context in which they operate. MUIS has also sought to organise public seminars for both the public and community leaders on issues of importance, and to invite non-Muslim Singaporeans to visit our mosques. MUIS has formed a committee with other Malay/ Muslim organisations to study ways to improve the training of local religious teachers. These are but a few examples of the efforts that are already underway within the Malay/Muslim community. What more will be done? Other measures are also being considered.”
“For the Muslim community in Singapore, this is an entirely new phenomenon - the group's total disdain for the sanctity of human life is totally unfamiliar to the community. Nonetheless, this new phenomenon brought undue attention to the Muslim community here in Singapore. For the non-Muslim community, it was a test of their trust and faith in fellow Muslim Singaporeans. It was a difficult time for all Singaporeans. Now, we have the White Paper - a report that puts into perspective these issues and provides enough clarity about the JI group and the threat of global terrorism to establish a rational basis for all Singaporeans to move on with their lives. The Paper has correctly defined the threat of terrorism as a national problem, which must be tackled by all Singaporeans. The Paper has also made it clear that the JI ideology and its exclusivist tendencies and millenarian orientation is but the belief of a small group of Muslims in Singapore. The Paper has also outlined steps to be taken by all groups and Government agencies to tackle the threat of terrorism. In view of this, is it possible for us now to go back to the pre-9/11 and pre-JI arrests days? Things cannot remain unchanged. What has happened cannot be erased. Negative impacts will take time to be addressed, or removed. But, Sir, I am encouraged by the strong consensus shown in this House and by the public in general on the need to unite against the terrorist threat. There is a strong determination by everyone not to let this issue sow suspicion and destroy the bonds between Singaporeans. There is a recognition that greater security challenges are a given in the foreseeable future. There is a valid concern that the security threat is one, which also poses a challenge to social harmony.”
“The four Chinese gentlemen who contributed to help the JI members' families are one, and this was highlighted by the Minister yesterday. I was also heartened to see the Buddhist Lodge volunteers helping out during Thaipusam last week. There are many more fine examples. However, it is equally important for the minority communities to be engaged and to participate actively in community events. Stay away at your own peril for history shows the necessity for interaction by the minorities. The majority can live without the minority, but the minority cannot do the same. So I would like to call on all communities to come forth and work together. Let us strengthen the Singapore Team. On that note, I support the motion. Assoc. Prof. Dr Yaacob Ibrahim: Mr Speaker, the White Paper on the Jemaah Islamiyah Arrests and the Threat of Terrorism brings into focus several issues, which have dominated much of the past year, both locally and internationally. Since 9/11, there has been much discussion about the threat of global terrorism by extremist Muslim groups, and the need for more moderate voices within the Muslim world. To some extent, the discussion has also centred on the faith itself. Being a Muslim and believing in Islam became the subject of intense scrutiny and, in some instances, even the receiving end of hatred and violence. The arrests in Singapore of a group plotting violent terror and with links to other terrorist groups, both regionally and internationally, brought home a chilling reality, which all Singaporeans hitherto could not have imagined: that there are Singaporeans who are prepared to sacrifice innocent lives for their cause.”
“They want their own rich heritage to identify with. The Middle East offers an alternative to them. But that package also comes with its own idiosyncrasies and others like Arabism and Arab political views, etc. But I saw the pride in my Muslim friends when heritage centres like the Lieutenant Adnan Centre was opened at Pasir Panjang Hill. They need more such icons and symbols and rich heritage to identify with. Sir, the hon. Member, Mr K. Shanmugam, highlighted a few more reasons for the prevailing self-esteem among the Malays. These are subtle matters which are not discussed openly. But the problems are there. We must identify the pull and push factors that are prevailing in the Muslim community and take the necessary steps. Perhaps we can focus on these and work with them and help resolve them. As an MP, I try very hard to get the various communities to mingle and bond. To community event organisers, I emphasise the importance of having multi-racial programmes, multi-racial participation, and to have programmes in the language that all Singaporeans can understand. Despite this, I am aware that many community organisations overlook the same. Just last month, my sister bought many tickets for her family for a RC block party near her home. Imagine, to her disdain, all the organisers had was karaoke singing in one language. I am quite sure that there are many more culprits out there. What they do not realise is that first impression counts for them. If increasingly community organisations ignore participation by all communities, then many will withdraw to their own communities and that will not augur well for our future. But I am equally heartened that there are gems in our midst who are shining examples of those who help and work with different communities.”
“Many are too polite to discuss the matter openly as they consider it a sensitive matter. If such a trend is true indeed, then I think all the communities have to share the blame for perpetuation of this negative trend. A good starting point is to ask some pertinent questions: (1) Are we truly interacting with people of other races? Do we harbour prejudices and do we pass these prejudices to our children? (2) Do the different communities, as a whole, encourage interaction and an attitude of give and take or have we become too rigid? (3) Do the minority communities sincerely try to accommodate the desires of the majority community? Does the majority community, in turn, sincerely encourage the same? Or is it a case of each community only desiring engagement on their terms? (4) In the public domain, have we put sufficient effort to ensure that there is no room for all communities to participate and develop true bonds? (5) Have some of our community's attitude changed to the extent that it is a futile effort to turn the clock? Is the religious and racial divide a temporary divide or is it a permanent divide? It is important that we address these issues squarely as the answers to these questions will determine what kind of society we will evolve into and whether we are going to encourage more radicals or even terrorists, be it a Hindu, Muslim, Christian or a Buddhist one. I asked a good Muslim friend what causes many of our Muslim friends to look to the Middle East and absorb Middle Eastern cultures, traditions and even dressing. His simple answer was that for the Malay Muslims, there is no history in Singapore beyond the period before Raffles. It is a sore point among the Malays but one that sometimes we overlook. They want to identify with a rich and proud tradition.”
“If there is one thing that is clear, it is that all in the Muslim community, whether they are individuals or organisations, must work together and overcome the problem and challenge boldly. If they are unable to do so, there would come a time when there will be a call for the state to get involved to police religious teachings. Sir, there are religious deviants and religious extremists to be found in all religions. History is full of them. They will claim divine and exclusive right to interpret their religions. Tackling them is no easy task. But not tackling them will only allow bigger harm to befall the wider community. In that respect, the White Paper has starkly projected the challenge that all religious communities in Singapore will face at some stage of their development. It is a matter that I hope all religious leaders and groups will take heed and pay attention. If necessary, they should also build safeguards and monitor religious teachers and preachers in their own communities so that problems like the JI and extremist religious teachings do not surface among their flock in future. Now, let me move on to the third topic, which is strengthening social cohesion and religious harmony. The vast majority of Singapore Muslims are moderate, tolerant and law-abiding, and they do not support the actions of the Muslim militants. The setting up of the IRCC and Harmony Circles can help in building better understanding and trust among the various communities. I believe that it is essential that all communities assess how they can create better bonding and better interaction between all races in Singapore. There is an increasing number who think that Singaporeans from the various races are not interacting enough, although the official statistics show otherwise.”
“I am confident that this measure will go to some measure in tackling the spread of extremist Islamic teachers and teachings and help identify deviant teachers and teachings. One cannot deny that it is not an easy task to build consensus within the Muslim community in the light of the fact that just like many other religions, there are different schools of thought and differing interpretations of the holy text. The crux of the issue facing the Muslim community in the area of religious teaching and the regulation of Islamic teachers was raised in an article by a Straits Times journalist, Mr Marfoot Simon, on 12th January 2003. He stated some of the difficulties: (a) It was difficult to look out for individuals like Ibrahim Maidin as it is not easy to distinguish them at the registration stage. (b) That the power to require the asatizah (religious teachers) to register does not exist within the power of MUIS and also that MUIS has no real authority to monitor and take the necessary action. (c) He highlighted the weakness of MUIS in not having control over madrasahs or even their curriculum - save for one madrasah. He also raised the question whether the same fate will befall a MUIS-led regulatory framework for religious education. Sir, it is perhaps timely to see whether we need to strengthen the hand of MUIS by making necessary legislative changes and also consider other ways to empower MUIS and the other relevant organisations to ensure that deviant teachers and deviant teachings are always in check. Sir, it is clear that the Muslim community has its own set of problems and priorities to sort out just like all the other communities.”
“Mr Barry Desker in an article entitled "Islam and Society in South East Asia After September 11", published in the Australian Journal of International Affairs recently, summed it up crisply by stating that "there is struggle for the soul of Islam within the global Muslim community today". He states that "the small Islamic monarchy of Brunei and the significant Muslim minority populations in Thailand, the Philippines and Singapore are influenced by trends and developments affecting Muslims in Malaysia and Indonesia". He cites "that Islamisation race in Malaysia has resulted in the Islamic discourse domain being dominated by conservative ulamas and advocates of Wahabi austerity". The tidal wave of influence from our neighbouring countries has made inroads into our Muslim community. Where do we go from here? I endorse the call made in the White Paper for greater cooperation of the Muslim community and the wider community of all Singaporeans. I am heartened to note that both the Malay/Muslim MPs and the Malay/ Muslim organisations, together with the Malay/Muslim religious leaders, have come out to condemn the JI and its extremist agenda. I support their call that non-Muslims play a critical role by getting to know better their Muslim neighbours, workmates and classmates. I am equally inspired that MPs have urged the community to contribute in the mainstream and actively reach out to other Singaporeans to strengthen understanding and trust. I am glad that MUIS has taken upon itself the task of regulating Islamic religious education and development. The online registration system and the formal accreditation system are moves in the right direction.”
“Let me now move on to the software part, which is the second topic, policing the spread of terrorism and extremist ideology. Sir, the method adopted by the JI is that they start out as legitimate religious teachers and only later isolate the vulnerable ones and recruit them as cell members. The method of recruitment of JI in Singapore is well explained in the White Paper. One cannot also overlook the excellent details furnished on such recruitment practices which are contained in the ICG report dated 11th December 2002 on "How the JI Terrorist Network Operates". The JI method of recruiting from an internal process within the Muslim community does pose a challenge for the Muslim community in what measures they should adopt to nip the problem in the bud. The JI leaders exploited the trust and respect that members of the Muslim community traditionally accord to religious teachers and scholars. And this is something which is also common in many other religions. The foreign terrorists also exploited the deeply felt sense of Islamic brotherhood among Muslims. The important factor that stands out is the involvement of foreign religious teachers. They stayed away from mainstream religious activities and kept to themselves. They also had a code of secrecy and they took an oath of personal allegiance. The emergence of Political Islam and the extreme manifestation of Wahabism in the world are issues that need to be addressed within the Muslim community. To a casual observer, one cannot deny that there are changes that have occurred in our Muslim community. To assert that one has become pious and is now a true Muslim is a simple overt answer to thwart a deeper understanding of our Muslim friend's complex make-up today.”
“Our security forces have shown that they can deal with any class of terrorists and deter them with our counter terrorist efforts and measures. I thank our security forces and their services for a job well done. Our security agencies must continue to address the security challenges thrown up by this new terrorism that is facing us. The creation of the Home Front Coordinating Committee to oversee the terrorist threat is a welcome move. Greater inter-agency cooperation and devotion of more resources are needed to check the threat in its formative stage. No doubt, many of these security measures will entail inconveniences and loss of privacy to many, but it is a price to pay for a safe and secure homeland. We must also continue with regional and international efforts and share intelligence to cripple the terrorist movement. I am confident that the comprehensive range of measures taken to counter terrorism will help to deter terrorist acts in Singapore. Tighter border controls at the airport, causeways and ferry terminals entail great inconvenience, but we must accept these as the necessary price for a secure homeland. Of course, at times, we have misinformed and mischievous politicians in neighbouring countries who make frivolous and scandalous allegations when we conduct such searches within our territory. Every Singaporean must not think that the Government will take care of the problem and go about their life complacently. As responsible citizens and residents of Singapore, all of us must be vigilant and alert and be on the lookout for matters which arouse our suspicion and alert the authorities. I am confident that collectively, Singapore can overcome the challenge of the terrorist threat. But that was only the hardware part.”
“There are also many sleeper cells lying low and can be activated when required, as shown repeatedly by recent arrests in Indonesia and the Philippines. In fact, what is clear is that because the heat is on, many have gone underground in the region. In fact, it is estimated that many of these JI members and their ideological partners are to be found in some of the pesantren in Indonesia, so much so that among the pesantren members, there is a feeling that what JI members and the ideological partners have done is right and not wrong. Sir, in the light of what I have stated, I support the strong action taken by the Government against the Jemaah Islamiyah group and other militant and extremist groups in the region. I also support the many recommendations put forth in the White Paper in the three areas. Let me now focus on the three areas. First, enhancing security measures. It is clear that the Al-Qaeda and its affiliated regional associates, like the JI, KMM, MMI, Laskar Jihad, have well educated and intelligent leaders and members who understand Government terrorist counter-measures, and accordingly target soft targets to achieve their goals. They pose a real challenge to the security forces in the region by adopting asymmetrical warfare as their modus operandi. In the aftermath of September 11, they have shown their creative side by targeting new targets in novel ways - explosives in shoes in an aircraft, surface-to-air missiles in Kenya, suicide boat bombs off Yemen, car and suicide bombs in Bali and many more. Stocks of ammonium nitrate discovered in Philippines and Indonesia clearly show that the preparatory materials for terrorism are always in place. All these show that the terrorists we are dealing are on a class of their own.”
“Sir, I rise in support of the motion moved by the Minister for Home Affairs. Sir, the White Paper documents in detail the seriousness of the threat posed by terrorism to the peace and security of Singapore. That the terrorist threat is real and present is highlighted by many recent events in the region. The Bali bomb blast and the subsequent arrests of the personalities involved confirmed earlier information and intelligence that many were key JI leaders and operatives. The discovery of bombs, weapons and ammunitions in the Philippines, Malaysia and Indonesia, showed that the JI movement and its associated ideological partners are operating in the vicinity of Singapore's security perimeters. The confirmation of information that the JI attempted to purchase 21 tons of ammonium nitrate to be used as truck bombs in Singapore worries everyone. Further confirmation that some of the Singapore JI members had gone to Afghanistan, Mindanao and Indonesia for military training and were ready to serve as operatives to sabotage action in Singapore is a poignant reminder how lethal they are and how close they came to carrying out their plans. We also know that many local sites were carefully selected for destruction of both lives and properties. They were surveyed and matters had progressed to the planning stage. Further confirmation that two of the Singapore JI members had hands-on experience in bombing civilian targets as shown in their participation of the Batam bombings on Christmas eve in 2000 is another important factor that is very worrying. With some key JI leaders like Hambali, Malaysian JI member Azahari Hussain and Singapore JI member Mat Salamat are on their run and have yet to be apprehended is also a cause for concern.”
“Sir, I would like to ask the Minister to confirm whether the Malaysians are buying more water than what they are obliged to buy under the existing Water Agreements with Singapore. Secondly, if so, what is the price, as well as the quantity that they are taking which is extra, ie, beyond what they are obliged to take? Thirdly, can the Minister confirm whether it is true that the Malaysians are actually buying treated water at 50 sen from Singapore and selling it to the Malaysian public at about RM4 and, in the process, profiteering at Singapore's subsidy, and then, at the same time, attacking Singapore that we are the ones profiteering at their expense? Prof. Jayakumar: A lot of allegations have been made about Singapore profiteering, selling to industries, profiteering from the treated water. We have made the facts known before. The first point to realise is that what Malaysia does not say is that the raw water that we get from them is not drinkable as such. It has to be treated. And when it is treated, it is at the cost of RM2.40 per thousand gallons, and we sell it to Johor at 50 sen. Therefore, Singapore is really absorbing RM1.90 of the cost. Malaysia then sells this treated water at RM3.95 per thousand gallons. So, we can make the calculations. In answer to the Member's question, Singapore is only obliged, under the Agreements, to sell 17 million gallons a day (mgd) of treated water. That is what we are obliged to. But Malaysia buys well above that amount. They buy 37 mgd of treated water, well above the amount that Singapore is contracted to provide and calculations make it clear as to why they are doing that.”
“Could I ask the Minister what is Singapore's position with regard to a preposterous statement made by a Malaysian Minister by the name of Mr Rais Yatim, that Malaysia would enact a local law to make the Water Agreements null and void?”
“Sixthly, in the past, reverse mortgages were not feasible, because HDB properties were considered sacrosanct. But now, with the liberalising of the HDB property market and by allowing banks to provide loans, my question is whether reverse mortgages can be considered as a serious alternative; and, as such, whether we can allow more Singaporeans to cash out of their property while they are staying in it. Sir, on those notes, let me once again welcome the major recommendations of the Economic Review Committee, and I am quite sure that many of the intended purposes of the Committee will see light.”
“And I am quite sure the number of people who are going to take loans from the private banks for purchasing HDB flats will only grow in number. The next time a recession comes along, I think there will be a greater expectation on the part of this group of Singaporeans to pressure the Government to pressure the banks to withhold taking action against them. Sir, I wonder whether the Government will take into account the interest of the bank or the interest of the borrowers in trying to arrive at a solution that is palatable to both groups. Sir, the second element is that, at the moment, the interest rate in the market is very attractive. As such, many will go and take a loan. But in future, interest rates will increase and many of the borrowers will default on their loans. Again, the question arises: how do we temper the pain that the population will face when interest rates rise? Fourthly, another issue that again arises is that when the bank repossesses the property and the mortgage sale proceeds are unable to satisfy the amount withdrawn from the CPF account, will the CPF Board pursue full legal remedies against the members? Because, at the moment, if one has paid up the CPF account and the bank is not paid in full, the bank will take legal action to recover the full amount. But with the new scenario, when the member is unable to pay up the CPF amount in full, my question is: will the CPF Board take legal action, including making one bankrupt, to make sure that his account is repaid back? Fifthly, Sir, by allowing the 10% downpayment to be paid from the CPF account, whether this will kick start the property market and actually go against the anti-speculation measures that we have in place as far as the property market is concerned.”
“Upgrading their skills, creating more jobs would have been a better option and even perhaps having this as a short-term measure and reverting back to a 20% employer-employee contribution would be better when the economy recovers. Sir, let me now move on to the changes in the CPF housing scheme. Here, there are many questions which are thrown up, which I am quite sure many Singaporeans want to know the answers. First of all, was there a real necessity to tinker with the system which has served us well? CPF members' savings were protected, as the bank mortgage took second priority to the CPF charge in private property purchases. However, this has now changed. When there is nothing fundamentally wrong with the present arrangement, why change the regime? Secondly, once the banks are given priority in unsubsidised housing loans for HDB flats and they are entitled to take possession and sell these flats when the owners default, it throws up a bigger question. Many creditors whose debtors are staying in HDB flats will now pressure and ask the Government if private banks can now take over HDB properties and realise their loans. Certainly other creditors out there will pressure the Government to open up the HDB property to be seized by other creditors to whom the owner of the flat owes them money. And do we move on to the second stage and remove this protection for subsidised HDB flats away from these creditors? Thirdly, to-date, HDB is very sympathetic to HDB borrowers. It grants them extended periods to pay if they are in financial difficulties, and repossession is a measure of last resort. How will the Government then ensure that such measures will be in place to provide a buffer for such people?”
“Sir, I understand that the unemployment figure for this age group is about 11%. This is due to the present economic climate. I remember watching a Channel NewsAsia interview last week which highlighted that for many employers, the reduction of the employers' CPF rate would not make them recruit older workers. Sir, I sincerely have my doubts whether this measure would really help the older workers. For a start, I would like to ask the DPM as to how many older workers have been recruited by the Government over the last few years and whether the latest CPF cut would mean that the Government itself would set an example by recruiting older workers. Sir, it would help to give us a better gauge as to whether this measure will have the impact that it really intends to have. My sense is that we have unnecessarily cut the wages of 89% of the workers in trying to solve this problem. In addition, I would like to ask whether we can expect the private sector to reward older workers by channelling the reduced CPF contribution to the monthly variable component of the salaried staff. Sir, as Mdm Halimah highlighted, as it is, only 4.8% of the private sector employers contribute to this or have started implementing this monthly variable component. For a start, to expect the employers to include this is itself an uphill task. And I wonder whether this will have the desired effect in asking the employers in the private sector to pass on the cost saving in this CPF cut to the employers. Sir, as it is, it is not a mandatory measure and to expect the employers to do so without any mandatory requirement, I think is a very difficult exercise and I am not sure whether we will succeed. Perhaps, we could have carefully considered this particular measure.”
“Sir, we have literally come one full circle. When the CPF scheme was set up in 1955, it started off as a very conservative scheme. In the 1980s and 1990s, we started on a liberal track and now, we are trying to be back on the conservative route. Sir, on the whole, I congratulate the ERC Sub-Committee on its recommendations in focusing on the three key aims of the CPF, which are housing, medical care and old-age subsistence. Sir, the recommendations remove the uncertainty in the property market and, hopefully, will bring about a sustainable and rational property market. I welcome the proposal to increase the contribution to the Special Account by 1%. Sir, I remember when I sat on the Inter-Ministry Committee on Ageing, one of the concerns of the Committee was whether, when people reach old age, they have sufficient savings in their CPF account. I am very happy to see that this recommendation has been included in the ERC and is seeing fruition. Sir, I agree with the ERC that the amount set aside for our old-age subsistence should be increased gradually to adjust for cost of living and increasing income. I also welcome the measure to give low-income workers more take-home pay by raising the employee CPF wage band to $500-$750. I am confident that this would also encourage more to join the workforce and enjoy a bigger take-home pay. Sir, let me now move on to the issue of employability of older workers in the age group of 50-55 years whose employer and employee CPF rates will be capped at 16%. I would like to ask the DPM whether reducing the CPF rates for this group will increase their employability. The market mechanism, as it is, determines the salary of these older workers. Many who were re-employed after their retrenchment were actually re-employed at lower salaries.”
“Sir, in conclusion, I would like to say that we have a duty to ensure that essential services are provided at reasonable prices and even at subsidised rates, eg, health, education and sports. One of the arguments that the Government has stated in allowing some of these public fare increases, or essential service increases, is that we provide rebates, or we provide some form of financial help to the poor by giving them money in the form of Singapore bonus shares. But having talked to many of the people in the poor income bracket, it is basically a shot of ecstasy for a while. They take the $600, or whatever amount that is given, and spend it, and that is it. They come back to normal. So we have to think of a way whereby such amounts are directly going to help people cope with these increases, if need be, rather than giving them one shot and then having them spent by the public in one go. Somebody said to me that it is basically a one shot of ecstasy. After that, they get high. Then, the next day, they wake up, and it is back to solving the same problems. Sir, we must remind ourselves, at the end of this debate, that the public are like a balloon. They can take a fair amount of air pressure and expand, but too much pressure and they will burst. And burst they will one day, if we do not look after their interest and welfare. Let us never take the public for granted. On that note, Sir, I support the Motion.”
“In the case of some essential services being provided by the Government, I would urge the Government to ensure that cost recovery should be its policy rather than profiteering. As many of the cost structures and profit numbers are not found in the annual budget numbers, it becomes an impossible task for any researcher to identify these culprits. I would urge the Government to give the mandate to the Auditor-General to look at the Government agencies that provide essential services and determine whether they are operating on a cost recovery or profit-making basis, and to highlight these cases in its annual report. This will provide a good example of our Government leading by example where its essential services are scrutinised by an independent authority. Perhaps CASE, or a committee made up of the general public, can start a list of such essential services to be scrutinised by the Auditor-General (AG), and this list should be made available to the Government for scrutiny by the AG. This will certainly arrest the trend of some essential service providers, including the Government, charging unreasonable fees and charges under the pretext that they are affordable to the public. Sir, whenever a fare increase comes about, or some increase in fee comes about, the usual words are that it is "affordable to the public". This argument is going down less and less with the public, because affordable does not mean it is cheap. It can be cheap and affordable but, in many cases, the yardstick that some of these essential service providers equate is that if it is affordable, the public can tolerate. This should not be the way in which we price essential services. The way we should price it is that we must make it cheap and affordable, not merely affordable.”