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 Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.”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 Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.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 5 of 8.
“There have been cases where some of these businessmen, who are bringing these perishable products from across the border, are actually selling directly to customers. By doing this, (a) they are not registered as a business here; (b) they do not pay tax, although they are doing business here; and (c) they seem to be using labour from across the causeway as cheap labour to sell directly to customers. So I do not know whether the Ministry can look into how we can check on these businessmen to ensure that they are properly registered here, they are doing direct business here, and that they pay not only GST but also other business taxes that they are liable to pay.”
“Sir, as there are many small and medium-sized businesses using some of these rent-controlled premises, could the Ministry possibly look into giving some kind of relocation benefits or arranging alternative business premises for them, either through HDB or in collaboration with JTC?”
“Sir, I am glad to note that the Minister, in introducing the Bill, referred to the touch-screen method to be used for the DRE system of voting. From my experience in dealing with senior citizens, I think the best way to get senior citizens to use IT services is through the provision of touch-screen solutions which are very easy to use. Sir, this is something that many elderly citizens will find easy to use and will certainly catch on very fast. Sir, I would also like to ask the Minister as to whether electronic voting will give voters the same choices as they have now, which is (1) to vote for any one of the candidates, or (2) to spoil the vote or abstain from voting. Perhaps, some clarification of the actual process involved will go towards removing some nagging suspicion on the part of some individuals. Sir, let me move finally to the question of recounting of votes. New section 49B seeks to introduce some finality to the recounting of votes. It imposes the requirement that the recounting of votes can only be allowed when the difference in votes exceeds 2% between the winning and losing candidates. Even then, only one recount will be allowed. Sir, I believe that this margin is reasonable, and a sound margin for any possible error in counting. This will certainly put some finality to frivolous requests for recounting. Sir, I support the Bill.”
“As a good number of Singapore students are studying overseas due to their inability to get into the local universities, it will be a pity if they are excluded from being eligible to vote due to the proposed provision. This is particularly so if they are pursuing post-graduate education. Sir, it is essential that we get as many Singaporeans as possible to participate in the election of the future government, as it will certainly create a greater sense of participation in determining the future of the Singapore Government. Sir, secondly, let me move on to electronic voting or new section 50A. Sir, I commend the Minister for taking the bold initiative to introduce electronic voting in Singapore. It is the way to go for the future. It will certainly speed up the counting of votes and the announcement of the election results in future. We have seen the speed and accuracy of electronic voting in this House when votes are taken. Sir, the new section 33A proposes that the DRE voting system cannot be used unless the voting system is approved by the Auditor-General or any other person appointed by the Minister in consultation with the Auditor-General. I would like to ask the Minister to explain who this other person will be. I would urge the Minister, if possible, to define this other person, for example, a High Court judge or any other person, whom he wants to appoint precisely in this Bill so that everybody knows that this person who is going to audit this system is a person who is impartial and above board. I would also like to suggest that in view of the high respect and independence enjoyed by the office of the Auditor-General, whether the Minister could consider changing the consultation process into a concurrence or consent of the Auditor-General.”
“Some of the friends that I met today in the course of my work were also surprised by the statement he made because many Singaporeans, when they go to vote to exercise their selection of the Member of Parliament for their constituency, do it with confidence and do it with free choice. As such, Sir, I would like to reiterate that not only myself but many Singaporeans have great trust in the integrity of the election process in Singapore. Sir, let me now move on to the specific clauses, and highlight matters which are of concern. First of all, on the overseas voting (clauses 3 and 9). Sir, the amendment seeks to impose a requirement of residence in Singapore of two years out of the preceding five years. I would like to ask the Minister the rationale for the imposition of this 2-year residential requirement. If the object is to enable all Singaporeans overseas to participate in the elections and to determine the future government of this country, I find the requirement a little onerous. Some could be employed overseas, and the only time they come back to Singapore would be during their short leave period. I would request the Minister to consider lowering the residency requirement to about two months, with the provision that the period not be one that runs consecutively but the aggregate number of the total number of days spent in Singapore during the 5-year period. I would also like to ask the Minister as to why the exemption provisions do not provide for students who are studying overseas, either on a private company scholarship or at their own cost. Sir, I notice that scholars on Government or statutory board bonds are excluded from the 2-year residency requirement.”
“Sir, the Bill aims to introduce serious changes to our election laws. For a start, it will introduce overseas voting by Singaporeans who are working or studying overseas. It is certainly welcomed by many Singaporeans and is in line with Singapore 21 to make every Singaporean count. Sir, first of all, I would like to reiterate that in Singapore, many Singaporeans trust the voting system that we have in Singapore. Yesterday, as I sat in this House listening to the speech made by the hon. NCMP, Mr Jeyaretnam, I was indeed not only embarrassed by the statements that he made - and I, in fact, endorse the statement of the Deputy Speaker earlier that he made nonsensical statements - because for a start he cited the examples of the 1980 election, the 1993 presidential election, and the 1997 Cheng San general election results to highlight that the results were not favourable to him and, as such, he has lost faith in the election system and in the voting process. But what he failed to highlight - and I think perhaps due to selective amnesia - was that in 1981, he was elected as the Member of Parliament for Anson and he did not explain how he won and whether he won at the behest of the Government. And he further did injustice to the other two Opposition Members in this House, namely the Member for Potong Pasir and the Member for Hougang, because by hinting that the process was not something proper, he again hints that the election of these two Opposition Members to Parliament itself was not a proper process. This again does injustice both to the two hon. Members of the Opposition and to Singaporeans at large who voted for them and for the other MPs of this House. So, let me say, Sir, that many Singaporeans were indeed surprised.”
“The proposed amendment in the Singapore Broadcasting Authority (Amendment) Bill seeks to impose the same requirement on foreign broadcasters who rebroadcast in Singapore, to prevent them from engaging in the domestic politics of Singapore. Sir, it is critical that foreign broadcasters be subject to the same conditions as the foreign print media as, otherwise, this loophole will be cleverly exploited by the foreign broadcasters. Sir, with cable television, Singaporeans can now receive five channels, namely, CNBC Asia, CNN, BBC, CTN and Bloomberg. Subscriptions to SCV now stand at 260,000. The penetration rate is expected to increase from 26% to 40% by 2005, as stated by the Minister. Multiply the subscription numbers with the household number of four per family, and the reach becomes more than one million people. Sir, it is timely that this amendment has been introduced. It will ensure that the arena for domestic politics in Singapore is only for Singaporeans. Sir, I support the Bill.”
“Sir, we are a small country. We are a young society with different ethnic, language and religious groups. Our society can be torn into pieces if race, language or religion is played up and exploited by anyone. We have tried to ensure that Singapore's destiny is determined only by Singaporeans. We have always been wary of foreigners getting involved in local politics as their motives and agenda will be very different from Singaporeans'. Sir, the media play a critical role in any modern society. They influence opinions, mould minds, and even have the ability to direct the course of events. Foreign intelligence agencies are known to have infiltrated media organisations to influence the editorials and the colour of reporting. At times, western countries' foreign policy objectives are achieved by cleverly feeding the western media with bias or slanted facts and incomplete data. These are carried as factual reports by many renowned news organisations without verification, in many cases due to fierce competition and timely reporting. Even big businesses are known to have penetrated media groups to lobby business interests and also sabotage Third World countries. Even some global NGOs, democratic foundations and human rights groups cultivate journalists and media owners to project and further their agenda. Sir, the western nations know the influence of the media and, in some countries, have imposed conditions that the local media cannot be owned wholly by foreigners. Sir, I am glad that our Government has already imposed the requirement that the foreign print media cannot engage in domestic politics.”
“Sir, I think the Senior Parliamentary Secretary has missed the point. The point is that, under the proposed legislation to be put up by the Ministry, membership of the SBF will become compulsory. So companies whose paid-up capital is more than $1 million do not have a choice. They must join as a member. Naturally, the question that will arise when these companies join as members is why do they join another organisation like the Chinese Chamber of Commerce or the Malay Chamber of Commerce or the Indian Chamber of Commerce. So by making it compulsory, I think that is something which is of concern to members. That is why the concern in the business circle is whether the existing chambers of commerce can be members of SBF. The second point is with regard to membership fees. It is something that SBF, in its legislation, has to provide whether such a discount can be given when one joins as a member of the existing chambers. If the matter is not resolved at the outset, it would be very difficult for these matters to be decided subsequently when SBF is set up with full legislation.”
“Sir, the question is whether the Ministry, in moving the legislation to set up SBF, would consider making provisions whereby membership is through the existing chambers of commerce or other business organisations and whether, if such a set-up is allowed, membership fee to SBF can be given on a discount basis, perhaps 30% or 40% discount, to those who are members of the existing chambers of commerce. If they want to join SBF, they will be given a discount in the membership fee so that the existing chambers of commerce can be relevant and many will continue to remain as members or join as members.”
“Sir, there is a serious concern among the chambers of commerce, particularly the ethnic-based chambers of commerce and the business community, that once the SBF is set up, it will become the premier business organisation in Singapore and representing Singapore both locally and overseas. So there is a serious concern that the ethnic chambers of commerce will lose their importance and many may even stop joining this organisation as members and, instead, join the SBF directly, particularly the bigger organisations. In fact, it is these big business organisations ---”
“Thirdly, as for the measures in 1998, particularly the JTC and HDB rentals which the Member referred to, as I said in my answer, we will be reviewing the rental position of JTC and HDB, and we will take the environment into account in deciding this. Once you have measures to deal with a difficult economic situation, I appreciate that it is quite hard to take away the measures, because everybody is very happy when the rental comes down; and everybody is very happy when the economy recovers. But when the moment comes to remove the concessions, everybody says, "I haven't quite recovered yet. Can I have the medicine for a little bit longer?" This year, there might even be a case, because it depends on how the economy develops, and we will see. But as I have explained in the main answer, what we need in this situation is not what we needed in 1998, because it is not an across-the-board problem. Across-the-board, we are still expecting to make positive growth this year. But certain sectors of our economy have structural problems, either because of upgrading or because our whole economic structure has changed. The retailers have difficulties in HDB estates; our market stallholders, many of them, have difficulties; our older workers have difficulties. So what we should do is to have targeted measures to deal with these structural problems, rather than across-the-board stimulative measures to try and make up for the slower external environment.”
“If you look at the actual trade-weighted index since February when we set and announced this policy, the index has weakened but it has remained within the band. Our policy has not changed, and we will review it again in the middle of the year. So we are not using the exchange rate as an instrument to depreciate the currency and maintain our competitiveness. We are maintaining a slightly strengthening exchange rate on a trade-weighted basis. Secondly, the US Federal Reserve reduced interest rates last night, and the Member asked whether we should also reduce interest rates or do something similar. There is a difference between our position and the American position. They are the locomotive. We are being pulled along. They have an enormous economy. They set the regulator to keep it going just right, not too fast, and not too slow. And when it slows down, they adjust the regulator; the economy, hopefully, will respond and will speed up. And indeed last night, after the US Federal Reserve cut the rate by 50 basis points, the stock market went up. There was an immediate psychological reaction. But they are a big economy and there is internal feedback which determines whether they are going too fast or too slow. For us, we are a small economy, and it is the external environment which determines whether we go fast or not. And our external environment is set by the US, Europe, Japan, and to some extent also by our region. So we hope that the Americans recover, and we will go with it. But we do not have instruments like the exchange rate which we can adjust and, as a result of that, boost our businesses in Singapore, because so much of our demand is overseas.”
“Two supplementary questions, Sir. There is some concern among analysts as to the rapid depreciation of the Singapore dollar vis-a-vis the US dollar. The question that I would like to ask the DPM is whether we are using the currency as a means to get out of this slowing economic growth. The second question is this. In the light of the bad economic situation in the USA, the Federal Reserve last night reduced the interest rate by half a point to ensure that the US economy can be on track for economic recovery. I am just wondering whether, on the part of the Government, we can also introduce measures like these which can also kick-start the economy so that we are on track to achieve the original goal of 6-7% growth, and also whether some of the measures that the Government introduced during the recession in 1998 can be relooked at again, because some of the agencies, like JTC, have already brought up some of their rentals closer to the market price. So I am wondering whether the Government can look at some of these measures to be introduced not only on a short-term basis but on a long-term basis. BG Lee Hsien Loong: Mr Speaker, Sir, on the Singapore dollar-US dollar exchange rate, the Government put up a monetary policy statement update, I believe last week, to state the position, and it was carefully phrased there. I will paraphrase it, but the position is exactly what was stated last week, namely, we stated that we settled on an appreciating currency band for our policy for the Singapore dollar, measured against the trade-weighted index of our trading partners, not just the US dollar but a trade-weighted index. Our policy remains to maintain a gently appreciating band.”
“Sir, in the light of the predicament faced by many of the shopkeepers in the HDB heartland, particularly because of this high rental and poor business due to these mega supermarkets and shopping centres in the HDB estates, would the Minister consider giving a once-and-for-all cut in rentals and also adopt other pro-business practices to ensure that business returns to these shops in the HDB heartland?”
“Sir, I requested for additional sports facilities at the local precinct level.”
“They will make friends and that will lead to the creation of bonding at the local level. What I have noticed is that, in my constituency, whenever there is a vacant piece of land, I will tell my grassroots leaders to put up a goal post and let us see what is the response. And I notice that, on weekends, people will naturally come and play games. This is the way we create friendship and bonding at the local ground level. Here, I would like to ask the Minister whether he could seriously consider what is the land use planning norms in each of the constituencies as far as sports facilities are concerned. I notice that whenever I ask civil servants where do the residents go, they said if you want bigger facilities, you can go to the stadium. But actually the stadiums are not quite located in the best locations. We cannot expect the residents to go to the stadium to use facilities on a daily or weekend basis. In any event, what I have heard is that there are complaints that there are not enough facilities even in the stadiums. People have told me that those who want to play badminton have to queue up on Monday morning and within half an hour, all the facilities are booked. Similarly, if those who want to play football, they do not want to go to a stadium where there are inadequate facilities. So I would like to ask the Minister, when reconsidering the land use planning, whether we can see how we can develop better sports facilities at the constituency or even precinct level.”
“Sir, land use planning is actually a sophisticated piece of work which is done by urban planners. For example, when an airport is being built, one makes sure that in the nearby areas, residential housing is not constructed, or if buildings are constructed, high-rise buildings are not constructed because it may pose noise hazards to the residents who may subsequently occupy the place. For example, one does not locate housing next to a reservoir because we do not want the water to be polluted. But being in the Jurong area, I was surprised that, despite this land use planning guidelines, Jurong West Neighbourhood 6, which is a HDB housing estate, was built in the first place on the path of a RSAF airbase. Not only was this housing estate built, but the housing estate was built with very high rise blocks so much so that, as I have stated in this House before, some of my residents can actually see the faces of the pilots. So I would like to ask the Minister how come there was such an urban planning usage whereby a housing estate was built on the aircraft flight path in the first place. The second issue I would like to raise here is pertinent because the Minister himself is the FAS Chairman. I would like to ask the Minister what is the norm for planning sports facilities in HDB estates. Because one of the sad facts about today's HDB estates is the lack of sports facilities in the housing estates. At most one sees in a precinct is a basketball court or a sepak takraw court. And I am one of those who believe that if we want to integrate and bond people at the local level, which is at the precinct or constituency level, we must provide sports facilities because people will come down and participate.”
“Myanmar has been dealt with differently by two opposing groups of countries and regional groupings. On the one hand, we have ASEAN, China, Japan, etc, who hope that constructive engagement would democratise and bring about change in Myanmar progressively. On the other hand, we have states that are using the stick approach and advocate liberal democracy at a quicker pace of change for Myanmar, eg, the European Union and the United States. I would like to ask the Minister for an update as to whether Singapore's and ASEAN's approach to Myanmar has bore fruit and also whether Myanmar, as an issue, has held back relations between ASEAN and the European Union.”
“Sir, Indonesia continues to be compounded by a myriad of economic, social and political problems. The implementation of regional autonomy had meant that many decisions would be made locally at the regional level. The situation in Indonesia is precarious and volatile. I would like to ask the Minister, in the light of all these circumstances: (a) What is the state of our relations with Indonesia; (b) What is the usage of all the financial assistance packages that we have so far offered to Indonesia; and (c) What is the impact of regional autonomy within Indonesia and how Singapore intends to position itself to deal with many of the regional governments near us, like Riau province, South Sumatra province and Jambi province?”
“Sir, the recent visit by the Deputy Prime Minister of Malaysia to Singapore has created a sense of optimism that the bilateral relationship between our two countries has turned around for the better. At the end of the visit, the Malaysian DPM also indicated that outstanding bilateral issues could be resolved with some urgency. However, no deadline has been disclosed for the resolution of the outstanding bilateral issues by both sides. I would like to ask the Minister for Foreign Affairs to give an update on the state of bilateral relations with Malaysia and also whether any deadline has been set for the resolution of these outstanding issues.”
“Sir, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The sum of $223,554,120 for Head R ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. The sum of $188,232,200 for Head R ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head R of the Main Estimates be reduced by $10 in respect of Code RI 3100. Sir, the heritage centres being set up by the Government are a very commendable effort to showcase the heritage of the different communities of Singapore. These heritage centres would certainly transmit the cultures, traditions and sense of history of the different communities in Singapore. They also have the potential of attracting tourists and other visitors. I would like to ask the Minister to update the developments on the Chinese and Malay Heritage Centres. I would also like to know what steps the Ministry has taken to develop the Indian Heritage Centre and whether the Ministry has taken any pro-active steps to bring together interested organisations to move on with the projects.”
“Sir, I do hope that MCS will have the creative juices to think how to make use of this broadcast time between 6.30 am and 9.30 am, because if they cannot even make use of this simple time-slot, I do not know how they are going to compete when MediaWorks comes on the scene, because naturally, people will tend to move towards MediaWorks. I guess this is what competition is all about. Sir, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.”
“I would like to ask for clarification on the point of broadcast times of Channel NewsAsia between 6.30 am and 9.30 am.”
“If the broadcast media does not understand this important role and do something about it, then we can continue to talk about multi-racialism and integration until the cows come home, literally, the task of preserving and promoting multi-racialism would certainly become an uphill one. Let me move on to Vasantham Central and be brief here. First of all, I must say that programmes on Vasantham Central have improved very drastically. Last year, I highlighted that there was a need to reconsider whether Hindi movies could be moved to Suria. Indeed, what I notice is that Suria now has Hindi movies, but in addition to the slots on Vasantham Central. My first question is: is there a need to broadcast Hindi movies on both Suria and Vasantham Central when the idea was to free up Vasantham Central for more Tamil educational programmes? The second query that I have is, in the light of comments made on Hindi movies in Malaysia, whether there have been similar comments on Hindi movies in Singapore and whether the Ministry is looking into this matter. Lastly, in respect of local sporting programmes, I would like to urge MCS to see whether we can increase funding for local sports broadcasts, particularly live events and especially school competitions. Those are my comments, and I hope that the Minister can look into them.”
“It is no use for the Prime Minister and other leaders to talk about multi-racialism and integration if the broadcast media, which is a macrocosm of Singapore society, does not reflect the same in its programmes. We must show Singaporeans and the world which watch our programmes that we are indeed a multi-racial society and our programmes must reflect this. We do not want the world to think that Singapore is a Chinese, Malay or an Indian society, depending on what language is used in the Singapore drama. I have given up hope that MCS has understood the numerous calls from the public to re-assess the way it portrays Singapore society, especially one that involves Singapore society and multi-ethnic Singapore. The new dramas fail to truly reflect Singapore society. This could be due to the fact that both Channels 5 and 8 are under the same corporate management, while Suria and Vasantham Central are under a different corporate management. We have to carefully look to see whether the MCS management, producers and scriptwriters of local programmes really understand Singapore society, whether they do mingle and have friends from various ethnic groups, and if they do not, whether there is a need for a process of orientating these key individuals on what makes Singapore unique and their important role in reflecting this tapestry of Singapore society in their work. I look forward to the day where many more television productions, which are truly local and multi-racial, are produced and which reflect Singapore society as they are. I hope the new station under MediaWorks will not follow the ingrained footprints of MCS, but is creative and bold enough to reflect the real Singapore society in their dramas and other programmes.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head R of the Main Estimates be reduced by $10 in respect of Code RG 3100. Sir, first of all, I must commend the Media Corporation of Singapore (MCS) on the improvements made in the quality of television programmes. I would like to highlight some good and negative points of the various channels run by MCS. Let me first start off with Channel NewsAsia. I am happy to note that Channel NewsAsia has distinguished itself as an Asian television station with a deep understanding of Asian affairs. Their current affairs programmes have intellectual depth, and they have always got the best in the different fields to comment on issues affecting the region. In doing so, they have managed to capture a good segment of the political, business and academic audience. I congratulate them on their excellent work and I hope that they will make this Channel a station to be watched by everyone with a keen interest in Asia. However, I must ask MCS to look at two important issues. The first is the inadequate reach of Channel NewsAsia in the neighbouring countries. There is no provision for Channel NewsAsia in many of the leading hotels in the region and I hope that MCS will work harder to sell Channel NewsAsia in the region. The second is the parallel broadcast of Channel NewsAsia programmes in the morning from 6.30 to 9.30 on both Channel 5 and Channel NewsAsia. I think this is a pure waste of time and I hope that the Ministry can look into how best the broadcast time-slots can be better used on Channel 5 during this time period. Let me move on to Channel 5. The issue of having multi-ethnic casts in local dramas is a matter of concern to many Singaporeans.”
“First of all, let me congratulate the National Library Board for doing an excellent job in developing the new libraries, particularly, at the regional centres. Let me move on to the topic of CCLs. Sir, the Prime Minister, in opening the first Community Children's Library in Marine Parade, called for the creation of 100 CCLs in Singapore. Since then, many CCLs have been developed in many HDB estates. However, with the creation of these regional libraries, there appears to be a tussle for the same target users of children below the age of 12 years group. The only difference in the two types of libraries is that membership at the NLB libraries is free, while at the CCLs, they are charged $24 per year. In view of the location of the regional libraries, there are books catering also to adult family members and an equally good collection of children's books. They actually end up competing with CCLs for the same age group child users. In the light of this competition and the fact that CCLs are heavily subsidised by the local PCF committee, I would like to ask the Minister whether MITA intends to fully develop all 100 CCLs as originally envisaged or whether there will be a rethink on this matter.”
“I would like to ask the Minister as to the measures that have been taken by MITA to provide the necessary international exposure to these young budding local artistes.”
“Sir, I am delighted with the multitude of art events that are taking place in Singapore daily. In fact, on some days, Singaporeans have a difficult time choosing what art events to attend. I must congratulate MITA, in particular, the National Arts Council, for implementing many of the public suggestions and recommendations contained in the Renaissance City plan. I am particularly glad that NAC has started using the $50 million Government fund to fund various performing arts groups in Singapore. With all these efforts and the completion of The Esplanade - Theatre at the Bay in 2002, we can certainly proclaim ourselves as a global city for the arts. I would like to ask the Minister to give us an update on the progress made on the implementation of the recommendations contained in the Renaissance City plan and the future plans of the Ministry to bring arts to the people, particularly to those in the HDB heartland. 5.00 pm Sir, one of the concerns that has been raised by those in the arts arena is to have greater transparency in the grant of funds by the NAC, for arts groups. I have often heard complaints of certain arts groups being favoured over others. I would like to ask the Minister to explain the process of how NAC considers grants, and how far the NAC can go, to make the process a transparent one so that the public can see for themselves how the funds are disbursed. Sir, the other point that I would like to raise is that one of the yardsticks for success as an artiste is to gain international recognition. I am sure that we have many local artistes who are well known internationally. There are many more local artistes who will need international exposure to continue their learning through exchange programmes and overseas performances.”
“Sir, I certainly hope that MINDEF can do much more than that, and I look forward to measures along those lines. Sir, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The sum of $7,090,000,000 for Head K ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. The sum of $730,000,000 for Head K ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. Head I -”
“If not, whether there are plans to coordinate such future developments, so as to prevent the recurrence of such a problem again. Sir, I would also like to ask the Minister how MINDEF could immediately help alleviate this serious problem and suffering of these unlucky residents, and whether there are any long-term plans to solve this aircraft noise problem.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head K of the Main Estimates be reduced by $10 in respect of Code KA 1500. Sir, the RSAF is a vital component of the Singapore Armed Forces. The Singapore Armed Forces enjoys tremendous support from the public, as it is both a credible organisation with a credible deterrent capability, and it enjoys tremendous support on the ground. However, I would like the RSAF to address the issue of RSAF aircraft's loud noise over residential parts of Singapore. The affected areas include parts of Jurong West and Sengkang. Many of the residents living in these areas had purchased their homes, hoping to return to a home for a peaceful rest or to study. However, the regular aircraft training schedules of the RSAF have become a serious nuisance to residents in these two estates. Many residents have complained that they are unable to tolerate the extremely loud noise levels emitted as aircraft fly at low altitude to land at the nearby airbases. Some residents have stated that they can even see the pilots' faces as they fly by. I sympathise with these residents, as I have personally witnessed the loud noise generated during these RSAF training stints. Sir, in my speeches to my residents, I usually highlight to them that they should show the thumbs up to the pilots. But I fear that when they are irritated by a noise, they may show the thumbs down to the pilots, and that may not motivate the pilots. I would like to ask the Minister whether there is regular consultation between the Ministry of National Development and MINDEF prior to the development of new HDB estates. If yes, then why were new HDB estates built on the approach path of these RSAF aircraft?”
“Sir, the Auditor-General, in its Report for the year 1999/2000, has once again highlighted certain financial lapses and irregularities in the accounts of the SAF. Last year, as a Member of this House, I raised the point that MINDEF needs to pay greater attention as to how financial matters are handled within the SAF and as to what MINDEF will be taking in terms of steps in ensuring that such financial lapses and irregularities do not occur. The fact that the SAF has once again been picked up in the Auditor-General's Report causes concern to me as a Member of this House. Once again, I would like to seek the assurance of the Minister for Defence on the measures or steps that the Ministry of Defence will be taking to ensure that such lapses and irregularities do not occur again, particularly when some of the sums of money which have been highlighted as being the matter in question involve substantial amounts of money.”
“First, I would like to thank the Deputy Prime Minister for paying tribute to the contributions of National Servicemen to the defence of Singapore. Sir, our full-time National Servicemen are the frontline soldiers ever ready to defend Singapore. The small allowance that MINDEF pays to National Service full-time men is often inadequate and the family usually supplements the allowance to allow the young men to have a quality of life that their station in life requires. However, not all National Service full-time young men are as fortunate to be supported by their family members. There are many who struggle on the meagre NSF allowance. I have known cases where the young man had gone on AWOL as he could not support the family on the NSF allowance and he had to go and seek employment to support his family. Sir, the allowance NSF are paid is a matter that must be reviewed regularly as the allowance is often inadequate. The last review was done some years ago. I am sure that inflation and the cost of living have gone up for these allowances to be reconsidered. I would ask the Minister for Defence when MINDEF intends to review the NSF allowance. I also like to call upon the Minister to increase the allowance substantially so as to allow the young men, who sacrifice their youth for their country, to enjoy a decent standard of living.”
“I would like to ask the Minister for Defence to share with us how MINDEF sees the regional security situation, and as to how Singapore and the SAF are prepared, and positioned, to ride the tide in the midst of this turmoil.”
“Sir, the events over the last few months highlight that the regional situation continues to be an uncertain one. Big power rivalry continues in the Asia Pacific. The recent increase in China's defence budget cannot go unnoticed, and raises questions as to its long-term policies and ambitions in the region. The recent visit by President Putin to Vietnam seeks to reinforce the view that Russia is not completely out of the race in Asia. The change in the US administration again raises the question as to the new policy orientation of the US towards the Asia Pacific region. Will the new Bush administration continue US involvement in the region and maintain its military presence in Asia? Both North and South Korea have shown good improvements in their bilateral relationship. But uncertainty in the relationship continues. The China-Taiwan issue remains unresolved and sabre-rattling can be expected from China when the US arms sales to Taiwan is reviewed in April 2001. Sir, numerous claims of sovereignty over disputed territories in the South China Sea still continue to plague the region. Besides these, political manoeuvering, greater regional autonomy, independence movements and ethnic clashes continue in Indonesia. The threat of refugee outflow from Indonesia is there, as was recently seen in Kalimantan. That the threat is near can be seen in the recent troubles in the Riau Islands when riots broke out. People power and democratic change have changed the political scene in the Philippines and Thailand. In Malaysia, the political situation is tense, and analysts are wondering how the government will respond to the many challenges facing the country.”
“I would ask the DPM how the civil service will respond to these expectations. On that note, Sir, I support the public sector salary revisions tabled by the Government.”
“Sir, I support the rise in the salary of all civil servants as it will certainly go towards building a first class public service. What I would like to ask the DPM is whether exit interviews are conducted when civil servants resign from the civil service. I am sure many Singaporeans will be interested in knowing whether salary was the reason for the resignation of the 284 senior officers from the Senior Officer Service so far this year. The details, if they are available, will enable Singaporeans to better understand the dollar pull of the private sector. If the reason disclosed is family commitments, pursuing further studies or other reasons, then improving the financial package will not address the problem. I do hope that the Government will pay attention to the detailed reason for the resignations and take the necessary action. Secondly, if the Government benchmarks the salary of the public sector to the private sector, the public also expects the tough practices of the private sector, such as in the area of human resource management to be introduced into the public sector. In the private sector, non-performers are given adequate notice and shown the door. Some have expressed concern whether the public sector will be able to fire non-performers. It will be no use if "non-performers" are transferred to other departments as such non-performers will only continue to "non-perform" in the other departments within the public sector. Is the public sector really able to bite the bullet and fire the non-performers at all levels of the public service? Lastly, Sir, with better pay and bonuses, the public will expect even higher standards of public service. The public will become less tolerant of long queues at polyclinics, delays in replies and average service.”
“I highlighted this to show that we pay them well but we also expect and extract a lot from them. I am sure that such officers will be in high demand in the private sector and employers will pay a premium to recruit men of such quality. The more such men are lost in the civil service, I think the bigger the loss for Singapore. Sir, I would like to urge the Government to ensure that the career route to the Administrative Service continues to be fair for entry by all others at all levels. The Government must ensure that the Administrative Service is not a closed club of Mandarins who only get admitted through Government scholarships or academic excellence. The more it remains a closed club, it would invite resentment and criticism. It must continue to recruit the best talent based on academic performance and proven performance. It must also continue to remain open to proven talent at all levels both from other Government departments of the civil service and also from the private sector. My bigger concern is whether our new class of Mandarins will lose touch with the average Singaporeans. With better pay and bonuses, many will climb the ranks of the well-off too quickly. I already sense that many Singaporeans are feeling that our policy making top civil servants are losing touch with the ordinary lives of Singaporeans. How do we ensure that they remember that many Singaporeans are working class people with real problems like balancing their bank accounts every month? How do we ensure that they keep in touch with the ordinary Singaporeans and not just the top income groups? Lastly, Sir, let me move on to the civil service general salary revision.”
“Sir, having added the above, there are two important issues that I would like the DPM to address, and these are: (i) whether our well-paid Ministers will continue to share the aspirations and concerns of the ordinary Singaporeans, particularly the low-income groups and the disadvantaged in Singapore; and (ii) whether the new salary structure is adequate to attract and retain the best in Singapore to become Ministers and political appointment holders. Sir, let me now move on to the civil servants' pay revision. While I recognise the need for the Administrative Service to continue to recruit and retain the best talent, I think it is the best approach to ensure that the civil service remains the backbone of a good and clean government. I am convinced after my interaction with the Administrative Service officers over the years that they are both hardworking, have great minds and that they are also creative and, most of all, have the interest of the State in their minds. Some are at times mistaken that Administrative Officers have a cushy job. I thought I will highlight an instance so that we recognise the heavy burden and responsibility that some of our Administrative Officers carry. While serving on the Inter-Ministerial Committee for the Ageing last year, I gave a tough assignment with a tight schedule to an Administrative Officer supporting my sub-committee. He produced the required work in 24 hours. Sir, I saw his very red and tired eyes the next day and knew that he had worked overnight. I asked him whether this was common to him. And he informed me that he provides administrative support to four to five committees usually and this was on top of his regular job at the Ministry.”
“So there are many other perks which if one packages it in, I am quite sure it well exceeds what our Prime Minister or many of our Ministers earn, and that is something that was missing, I thought, in the debate that took place in this House today. Similarly, Sir, not many are also aware that not all Ministers are paid the same salary and bonuses but a range of salaries and bonuses according to appointments held, performance and other yardsticks, as also similarly indicated by the handout by the Prime Minister in respect of bonuses. Not many also remember that Ministers, just like all big income earners, also pay a large income tax which basically creams off 26% of their income. Not many also remember that Ministers are not permanent tenure holders but individuals whose tenure is decided by the people once in five years. Not many also remember that they manage an economy that has a GDP of $154 billion as of 1999 and a foreign reserve of about $128 billion. Not many also remember that we hold our Ministers responsible when anything goes wrong in the country. If I remember what happened in 1997, everyone, particularly the workers, was asking what were our leaders doing about the recession and their loss of jobs. Similarly, Sir, not many also remember that we hold our Ministers responsible when anything else goes wrong in this country. Literally put, Singaporeans expect our Ministers to be "Superman". My call is: let us then pay them what they are worth and what they deserve. Despite these criticisms at home by Singaporeans, many Singaporeans I met overseas usually take pride in stating that Singapore has a corrupt free environment because our Ministers and public sector employees are well paid.”
“Only when they increased the salary of the US President could they then increase the salary for the whole administration. Similarly, when we benchmark the pay of the Ministers, we are not only talking about the pay for the Ministers, but we are also talking about the pay for the whole civil service. Although we are asking our Ministers to sacrifice and forgo salary increases, the reality is that below them there is a big group of civil servants who are all waiting for their pay increases and will constantly compare with what the private sector is paying and what is the attraction in the private sector. Although we are calling for Ministers to restrain pay increases in the course of the debate, the reality is that we can never keep the pay of the Ministers low and yet try to keep our civil servants by keeping their pay high. We have to ensure that the whole public sector, which includes the Ministers, is always paid at the level with what the private sector is able to afford and also attract the same talent. Sir, nevertheless, it is essential that the Government continually explains the transparency of our Ministers' pay. Let me highlight many other things that the public is not aware. Not many are aware that our Ministers' pay packet is a whole package and there are no hidden benefits. There is no free housing, no free cars for private use, no servants' allowance, or paid holidays for them or their family, as it is like in many other countries. Even the US President's pay is not merely what he gets in terms of the US$400,000 but he enjoys many other perks, including a special jet for himself.”
“Some even expressed the view that the new increases will trigger a wage spiral in the economy as it becomes a case of many chasing fewer job candidates in the market. Sir, what became clear to me after yesterday's feedback was that there are two groups of people. One group is those whom I would call the "I know" group and the other the "I know not" group. Those whom I refer to as "I know" group are the people who are very familiar as to what is happening in the job market, particularly for the top talent in the economy and they know that it is very difficult to get good talent even when you pay high price. The other group which I call the "I know not" group is the group that has basically no knowledge as to what is happening in the top talent market and they do not know how much it takes to pay them and how difficult it is to recruit top talent. What has become clear, even when listening to the debate that took place today, is that even some MPs are not clear as to how tough it is to get good talent in the market. Some MPs have expressed the view, particularly the Members for Potong Pasir and Hougang, that our leaders' salaries, particularly the Ministers' salaries, be pegged to a reasonable level and they compare to the salary of about $50,000 or the salary of the US President. Sir, Mr Chiam, in his address, stated that the US President's salary was increased from about US$200,000 to US$400,000 which works out to about S$630,000. But when the pay of the US President was raised in 1998, one of the reports indicated that the President himself was embarrassed. However, the reality was that they had to increase his salary because the US President's salary formed the benchmark for the whole US administration.”
“Even critics are known to have conceded due credit to our Ministers. The original benchmark formula adopted in 1994 was not the best as is recognised by the further refinement announced recently. But it has to be so as the compensation package in the employment market is one that is never static. Stock options were something new here in 1994. But now these are becoming basic in many new companies, particularly in the emerging new economy companies. Change is the only constant thing in the new economy, and I am glad that this Government is tackling the issue of compensating public employees head on. Talking to some Singaporeans yesterday, I felt that many do not really understand the details announced. To many what mattered was that the increase was substantial. The usual criticisms were raised. I thought I would raise them here so that they can be discussed openly in this House. Some of these have already been highlighted by the Prime Minister. Some felt that political office is an ethical and moral one and not one that is purely pecuniary based. They felt higher salaries will translate to cynicism and less respect for the Ministers. Some stated that the benchmark formula used is not representative of the pay of employees but are that of entrepreneurs who make big bucks not due to hard work but due to connections, guanxi, high risks and sheer luck. Some also felt that Ministers should set the right example by withholding salary increases in an economy that is still recovering. Their point simply was that the timing was inappropriate. Another view was that the new pay packet was one drafted by civil servants for civil servants and one that was not subject to external evaluation.”
“Sir, Singaporeans take pride that we have a Government that is efficient, corrupt-free and, more importantly, one that is far-sighted. However, in any country where salaries of politicians are raised for discussion, it stirs emotion and public talk. Hence, it comes as no surprise that the topic of salary revision has become public topic today. I am glad that the Government, in a true, open and transparent manner, has chosen to table these salary revisions despite it being not the best of times to do so, especially when we are recovering from a recession. Sir, I commend the Government for tabling these salary revisions timely for public scrutiny and debate. Sir, let me first comment on the salaries of the Ministers. Few can deny that our Prime Minister and the Ministers are a fine lot. They sacrifice much to take on political appointments. They sacrifice career certainty for political uncertainty. They sacrifice privacy for a regime of taxing Government and community work. Many also sacrifice private and family life for the country. Sir, they manage a Government whose foreign reserves are in the billions, an economy that is vulnerable and they are also responsible for the well-being of three million Singaporeans. Sir, the critical issue is whether our Ministers focus on running the country or constantly worry how they will meet the present and future needs of their families. If we want the best, let us then pay the best and expect the best from them. That the ruling party sets very high standards for the recruitment of Ministers is there for public scrutiny. Our Ministers are questioned in Parliament, by the media and even in international forums. Their impressive knowledge, thought process and management skills are there for everyone to see and to scrutinise.”
“The Ministry of Defence wishes to thank Members for their questions and contributions during this debate and also for their support. Mindef will continue to endeavour to do its best with the resources allocated to it by this House to fulfill its duty of defending Singapore and Singaporeans.”
“During the INTERFET phase - from mid-September last year to the end of February this year - Singapore contributed three Landing Ship Tanks, a C-130 aircraft, a medical detachment and a military liaison team. Our LSTs were the main strategic lift assets of INTERFET. I understand that they carried some 60% of the sea lift cargo for INTERFET. They helped meet INTERFET's surge requirements during the build-up phase and transition to UNTAET, lifting about 2,400 tonnes of cargo in all descriptions, shapes and sizes. As of last month, our medical team had treated about 6,500 people, both INTERFET personnel as well as East Timorese. All in all, close to 400 SAF personnel participated in INTERFET. And this number includes 43 full-time National Servicemen who have volunteered for the mission as well as eight regular servicewomen. For UNTAET, Singapore has contributed a 21-member SAF medical team, three military officers to UNTAET headquarters and 40 civilian police from the Singapore Police Force. Singapore is also prepared to provide technical assistance to East Timor within our means. We hope that East Timor will be able to achieve a smooth transition to nationhood under UNTAET. But East Timor's requirements for rebuilding the country are enormous, and the assistance of the whole international community and not just the regional countries will be needed. As for the threats to the safety of our personnel in East Timor, when we send our people to such missions and in such situations, there will always be some inherent risks. But our people are professionals, and I am confident that they are trained to deal with such eventualities. Sir, I believe I have dealt with most of the issues that Members have raised.”
“Mindef actively seeks out centres of excellence in our industries, universities and research institutes, as well as those in other countries who are open to collaborate with us. Of course, there are some limitations because of security considerations, both on their part and our part. Mindef will continue to do this in the new Defence Science and Technology Agency (DSTA). Funding is awarded to the most competitive proposals and joint funding is the norm where two or more parties are interested. The DSTA will continue to look at the best ideas regardless of their origin for the benefit of Mindef and the SAF. In fact, today, defence R&D is not just done in the DSO National Laboratories but also at our two universities and national research institutes as well as with foreign partners. We have been doing this with our universities for over 10 years and a number of dual-use research centres have been established to better tap universities' expertise. This effort will be expanded further with the setting up of DSTA. DSTA's funding for science and technology will be directed at solving problems of defence. But this can often be applied to commercial arena. And where such applications are beneficial to the nation, DSTA will be open to explore their exploitation. Currently, Mindef does set aside a portion of its R&D funding for the exploration of future technologies and system concepts to ensure a good balance between technology push as well as the demand pull. That is, what the users want today and what the technology can offer perhaps tomorrow. This has been an integral part of Mindef's policy on research and development for many years. This approach will continue with the establishment of DSTA. Sir, Mr Ravindran also asked about East Timor.”