R. Sinnakaruppan
Singapore
“In the first place, is the reporting system of the hand, foot and mouth disease cases by the GPs to the Ministry quick enough? Could it be that by the time the Ministry gathered all the data, the disease has already spread?”
“It is, in some ways, like what the Government has done for our university by setting up a private university, the Singapore Management University.”
“Sir, the question I really have is this. While it is very encouraging to see that the Government has started this scheme late last year, I would like to ask whether, in addition to looking at the priority for older estates, there are wards where there are more private estates than public estates.”
“I would also like to ask that this lift upgrading programme, on a pilot scheme that has been planned, can be expanded and more of the mature estates in the city centre can be considered for this upgrading.”
“It must have greater compassion and greater commitment to level up the lower strata of our society. Like the call by Mrs Lim Hwee Hua, it must do much more on public education on what we want to achieve as a nation. It must rally our citizens to help them cope with the impending changes of our economy.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, we welcome this more calibrated approach to killer-litter offences by MND as well as MHA. I would like to ask the Minister whether, in the light of this approach, the Housing and Development Act could be reviewed to raise the maximum penalty from $1,000 to $5,000, same as the penalty imposed by the Town Council, for the n…”
The complete record
Every one of 370 lines we hold for R. Sinnakaruppan, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 2 of 8.
“Sir, Singapore's success in the last 40 years has been largely economic, to some extent, social. In the 60s and 70s, we used labour capital, we created jobs, we attracted MNCs. In the 80s, we used our financial capital to grow, and in 1986 we faced the recession, and we came out of it. The Economic Committee headed by BG Lee and the Cabinet did very well. In the 90s, we were moving towards KBE and when we faced the last recession, the young generation of leaders took us out of it pretty quickly. Socially, we have done well to some extent; meritocracy and social harmony have been key pillars, but we have some way to go. We have set up CDCs and so on, but our social habits still cannot make us a developed nation yet. Sir, the Internet economy is opening up tremendous opportunity for the people of the world - the young and enterprising can move from rags to riches pretty quickly in what people call at Internet speed or Internet year. In my definition, the effort is 100 days. It is moving very fast and many people can become rich. But having said that, there are many others who would be left behind in what is called digital divide and become digital outcast. Sir, I am talking about the larger portion of Singaporeans. Many of us have spoken about why Government should do a lot more on the economic front for businesses in this Internet economy. I am confident, given the Government's track record, that we will do very well and do all that is needed to make Singapore Inc succeed in the Internet world. But I think more of us need to speak here in this Chamber about the number of constituents that we represent who would not make it from rags to riches, but who may become digital outcast in the coming years.”
“I think he has not answered my question. When he says more than the present amount, would it be near the $4,000 benchmark? Assoc. Prof. Koo Tsai Kee: As I said in my reply to Dr Wang, we are looking into the final details of the budget.”
“Sir, I will speak more on this when we consider the estimates under PMO. In conclusion, Dr Hu's E-Budget 2000 signals a new age. As we move forward, let us remind ourselves of some of the axioms that we often hear and speak of. We must create a thinking people and a learning nation. We must try and maximise the potential of not just every student or undergraduate in our universities or schools, but also every citizen, young or old, skilled or unskilled, who is in the workforce, and the housewives. We must develop and maximise their potential. Let us not allow the tentacles of the digital age divide us. Let us remain one nation, one people and one Singapore for many more years to come.”
“Sir, presently, the SBA has under its wings the National Internet Advisory Committee (NIAC) (in both I sit as a member of the board and committee). The SBA and NIAC promote, among other areas, the use of Internet for housewives, senior citizens and non-working people, young, school-going children as well. It has set up Project I-Senior and the Family Access Network led by Mrs Carmee Lim, retired RGS Principal, and this has gone on for about two years. This pioneer work, I would say, is excellent, very commendable and has tremendous challenges ahead. Sir, in Singapore, I estimate that the bottom 20% of the population can be regarded as relatively poor. My fear is that the digital age may increase and accentuate this percentage and the number as our population grows. This is compounded by two factors: a rapidly ageing population and a higher computer illiteracy amongst those who are above the age of 45 years. Sir, the point I want to make is this. Singapore is known internationally as the first country in the world to be broadband networked completely. There are sufficient political, social and economic reasons why we need to prevent a digital divide in Singapore. Can we also become the first country in the world whose population is entirely Internet ready? To underscore the importance of computer education for adults and senior citizens, I wish to ask the Government to consider setting up a Ministerial Committee with a social focus that can coordinate a national drive in this direction. Providing money or computers is but only a first step. The human psyche, the apprehension, the fear for computers amongst the older Singaporeans need much more attention. To support this effort, a new multi-agency can be set up under the Prime Minister's Office to achieve the same.”
“Personally, I think we are one of the few countries in the world where the Government has proactively done so many things to move us to, what we call, the KBE. And one of the MPs who spoke earlier said that, although Hong Kong had started later than us, we are behind because of this SingTel-C&W HKT deal. I think the deal did not come true for different reasons, and it has nothing to do with whether they were faster or working at Internet speed. I think it is much more complicated than that. To be accurate, some of us who went on a Parliamentary visit to Hong Kong last year found that Hong Kong had started almost the same time as we did. And Hong Kong is a different environment. They have entrepreneurs for more than 20-30 years and an entrepreneur culture which we are just starting. But coming back, many MPs here, with the exception of a few like Mr Simon Tay, had said that we should not just focus on the business world. Yes, we have to succeed economically. But I think we have to be inclusive of the society at large. When I sat here on 25th February to listen attentively to Dr Richard Hu's pronouncements on the economic challenges and opportunities that we face in this Internet world, I was somewhat saddened that the important aspect of the social dimension of the digital divide was not being addressed in his fiscal policy statement. Perhaps, I thought it may not need some fiscal treatment at this point of time. I told myself that perhaps it would be the key point that I would raise in this debate. I was however pleasantly surprised when MCIT announced a few days ago that IDA will get $20 million to address the digital divide issue in Singapore. Sir, I think it is a very good start, but much more needs to be done, and not just in terms of money. Let me elaborate.”
“I like to just use this example that BG George Yeo had used, some years ago, when he talked about pornography on the Internet. He said that we should keep the main pornographic sites out of the main streets and if someone does go through the alleys and the lorongs and get there, well, we cannot help it the way technology is. Let me follow on his analogy and just make this point on how this Internet economy is going to move. Suppose we were in the age when Raffles founded Singapore in 1819, or thereabout, when Singapore was just a fishing village, and suppose there was no PWD, no state agency to build roads, and if everyone who had his little kampong hut, had to decide to put a road in front of his house, and some of us did more extensively and succeeded in attracting more users to the road in front of us, and we did it together with others, then we will have some roads that would become Orchard Road, others would become Shenton Way, and some others who might not have been more successful might become the small lorongs, others might do it wrongly, or in their minds, might do it for different reasons, might become the Desker Road. But whatever the case, as more and more people use a particular road, it is going to become more important and the infrastructure around it is going to develop. And that is what the technology infrastructure is all about. As more and more companies go into this, the infrastructure is going to be there. But when we link it to the equity markets, it is a different phenomenon. It is something that nobody can foretell. But the Internet technology infrastructure is here to stay. Sir, many of the MPs from the private sector, who spoke earlier, spoke at length about what Singapore should do to move towards this direction.”
“Over the centuries of retelling, the Robin Hood legend grew: peerless archer, noble fighter against injustice and tyranny, champion of the little guy. A hero. Thanks to the Internet revolution, we cosmopolitans live in a Robin Hood economy, where redistribution of wealth in significant proportions is taking place. It is not so much robbing the rich to pay the poor, but it is not far off. And, irony of ironies, it is the money men, the venture capitalists who play Robin Hood. Sir, I want to say that I am an advisor to one of these venture capital firms and declare my interest, if any. And the twist is that in the Robin Hood economy, everybody who is involved wins, at least thus far. Globally, North America, Europe, Asia, Australia and South America are the key continents that are very quickly adapting themselves to the new Internet world. But let us ask ourselves where Africa features in this new era. Already, Africa is far behind the rest of the world in the industrial age. Will Africa become a victim of the digital divide and become a digital outcast? Or will there be resources and the political will amongst the African leaders, to change this sad state of affairs? One distinct advantage if the above problems can be resolved, is that the absence of legacy systems would help Africa leapfrog into the Internet technologies faster. But at this moment, I am very sceptical. This is something that the world leaders have to address. Zooming back to Singapore, very many of our cosmopolitans and our young are the immediate and future beneficiaries of this wonderful new money world, and the new technology infrastructure. And many of us in Singapore, unfortunately, just link the many dot.com companies to the equity market and we say that this Internet economy is going to burst.”
“The operational and developmental expenditure for the Ministry of Education is significantly higher at 15% and 22% respectively, signalling our commitment to prepare our school-going children for a knowledge economy. "E" for elders or senior citizens. Senior citizens will benefit through this CPF top-up and through the new Supplementary Retirement Scheme which appears good in concept to prepare Singapore for a rapidly aging population. But as Nominated MP Noris Ong pointed out, there are a number of issues there and we would have to wait and see how this will be implemented and its full tax implications. "E" for extended families. Extended families will benefit from increased income tax concessions for their dependants who are their aged parents. Let us hope that this will be one of the additional factors in increasing the number of extended families in Singapore. Sir, finally, almost everyone has something to gain from this year's Budget. My congratulations to Dr Hu for delivering not an exceptional or excellent Budget this year, but an efficient Budget. Sir, now I would like to move on to talk briefly about the advent of the new global knowledge economy and its impact globally and locally, and the role of our Government in this regard. The Internet economy is rapidly changing the way of life for people the world over. New developments are not only happening every day but every morning and afternoon. Sir, the Internet economy, through the equity, money and debt markets, has been the catalyst in the redistribution of wealth of legendary proportions. Let me relate a folklore that is familiar to all of us here: Robin Hood and his band of merry men stole from the rich to feed the poor.”
“E-budget for estate duty - the exemption for residential properties will certainly facilitate many budding entrepreneurs to work from their home, as many do in the garages of their homes in the United States and Europe. Sir, some MPs who have spoken earlier had said that Government has not announced too many incentives for entrepreneurs. Against the background of $1 billion that has been set aside for promoting technopreneurship, many have expectation of the Government doing more for the entrepreneurship. Sir, an entrepreneurship is an entrepreneur if he finds his way given the facilities that the Government can provide and the environment that the Government can provide is for the entrepreneur to see a way through to make his money to succeed in his business. Sir, the best definition of entrepreneur is perhaps given by one American magazine that I read many years ago, and they talked about the logo of an entrepreneur association in America where it had a stone sculpture where a male's body up to his waist was already sculptured and he was leaning forward with a hammer and a chisel, trying to carve his own legs and putting himself into shape. That is how perhaps an entrepreneur should be evolved. He does not know what is ahead but he is constantly evolving and trying to make use of the environment before him. And the Government's job is to provide that environment, not to do everything for the entrepreneur. Sir, in this regard, I am happy to see the changes that the Government has made so far and it must continue to open up the facilities so that more entrepreneurs can surface in Singapore. Sir, I would like to move on to a few other "e"s that relate to society and education. Education of the young has indeed received a significant boost.”
“They and others who feel that way must recognise that Manpower 21 was just launched late last year and that MOM's development expenditure has increased by a whooping 684% from $7 million last year to $52 million this year. But I agree that the skilling needs much more financing beyond the $52 million and much more attention from all quarters of Government. Sir, let me move on to the many more "e"s of this Budget 2000. E-budget for Government expenditure. Sir, the Budget book says that this expenditure will increase by 12.5% to nearly $29 billion this year. Whereas the Nominated MP Noris Ong, and I think Mr Simon Tay as well, pointed out that when the year is out, this 12.5% increase would really be spent and not seen as surpluses in the following year. I hope that the Government will make up for the less expenditure last year by meeting this target of 12.5% increase. Entrepreneurship has been given more boost through various incentives, particularly for non-manufacturing sectors and for foreigners who carry out their work in Singapore. For example, the employee stock options scheme (ESOP). Changes have been announced and I welcome the Government's move in this much awaited direction to reduce taxes for employees when they exercise their options. This would help both budding high-tech start-ups and established companies attract and retain both local and foreign talent. Along with this, employer's CPF restoration of another 2% is a welcome gesture though there was greater public expectation for restoration of a higher percentage, despite DPM Lee's earlier announcement about the Government's schedule of CPF restoration.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, thank you for allowing me to join in the debate. I am much obliged. Sir, the Nominated MP, Mr Noris Ong, said that it has become common practice to use a single word to describe the budgets in recent years. He used Millennium Budget, Cyber Budget, Withdrawal Budget, and many other words. If I were to follow that, I would call this year's budget an "e-Budget". Delivering the millennium's first budget, Dr Hu signalled the entry of Singapore in the world's burgeoning knowledge economy. I use the alphabet "e" not to just describe the new Internet economy, but rather I use "e" as the first alphabet of some of the key points that Dr Hu has raised in his Budget Statement and the tax changes that he announced. First, e-Budget for economic recovery. This Budget signals our region's economic recovery. That was the reason why many found that the Santa Claus, Dr Richard Hu's gift-sack was much lighter relative to last year. This has even led to some people to dismiss the Budget, very unfairly in my opinion, as a non-event. Dr Hu, in his statement, emphasised that, given the favourable external environment, and I quote: "Unless we are among the world's best, we will be relegated to playing a peripheral role in the global economy". And this could be achieved through an educated and highly skilled workforce augmented by external ("e" for external) or foreign talent, promoting technoprise or technopreneurs, and by throwing open our financial services, communications, and power sectors. Budget 2000 commentators, like Price Waterhouse Coopers, feel that there is not much tax incentive for skilling our workforce and the job has been left very much to the Ministry of Manpower.”
“The question is this: in his Review Committee, I would like them to consider the executives being part of the rank and file union. The leadership question is an important question to unions because today's trade unions in Singapore are a model for the world because of the leadership that we have in our unions. I think this should continue and, therefore, I would like to request that this Review Committee ensures that there are sufficient executives who are part of this rank and file union.”
“Point of clarification, Sir. First, I would like to thank the Minister for his reply to my questions. I am very pleased to hear from him that he would look at reviewing the Industrial Relations Act and that a Review Committee has been formed in his Ministry. Sir, I am, as he has said, fully aware of executive unions and executives are able to form and join unions. All I am saying is that because of the change in ---”
“Some time ago, I made a call to the then Ministry of Labour, the new Ministry of Manpower, to play a more pre-eminent role in labour related issues as NTUC had done. I am very happy to note and acknowledge that during the past year or so, the Ministry of Manpower has launched major initiatives and charted new directions for Singapore through Manpower 21 and Construction 21 and many other initiatives like that. These have become blueprints for our workers' future and for the future of all Singaporeans. Sir, I congratulate the Minister and the Permanent Secretary and his team for a job well done. Sir, I support the Bill.”
“I therefore call for further amendments to the Trade Unions Act, as well as the Industrial Relations Act, if necessary. I remember some years ago, the Secretary-General of NTUC had made this call to broaden union membership by proposing a 80-20 rule, meaning that in any organisation, 80% of the employees should be unionised. This point has been brought up many, many times in various forums where even the Minister himself was present and he felt at that point of time that there was no need to legislate. But some years have passed and I think with these amendments and with the change that is taking place in our economy, I think it is time to look at the legislation. Sir, I would like to move on to some other amendment in this Bill - purchase of property. Section 46 has been repealed and re-enacted to give greater flexibility to trade unions to directly purchase properties while also making possible for decision making through the delegate system. This change will certainly be welcomed by the unions, I believe, for at least two reasons. Firstly, it gives them the direct opportunity to own and develop their own buildings, to give unions a status symbol and a public recognition that they truly deserve. Secondly, it also gives all their members more facilities within their own premises for their members and their members' families to use. Therefore, it takes away the need to work through other labour institutions or labour foundations to achieve this. Sir, finally, in conclusion, I am generally pleased with the amendments put forth by the Minister for Manpower on the Trade Unions (Amendment) Bill, though I feel more can be done.”
“As Mr Thomas has pointed out, changing job designations, job re-designs, job enrichment and many other changes for employees necessitate a complete review as to who can be a union member. Sir, with the advent of the knowledge economy, or knowledge-based economy, as we call it in Singapore, it has blurred the distinction between a worker and a manager in today's context. I remember the Trade and Industry Minister, BG George Yeo, had some two or three years ago, at a NTUC Ordinary Delegates Conference, made a keynote address. He had said that in the knowledge economy, everyone, including managers, and even the CEO, is a knowledge worker. So, everyone is a worker. So, who can join a union? And in this context of a rapidly changing knowledge economy, and it is something that we ourselves are very much involved through Singapore 21 and many of the moves that Dr Tony Tan and his committee are looking at, we would certainly need to take it a step to the unions to see how union membership has to be extended. Sir, I may still sound like a unionist who had spoken for workers many times in this House, though I have now returned back to the corporate world. This is because of the impact that NTUC had made on me during my stint there, a certain sense of passion for helping workers and unions. I want to use my personal experience, both in the union and management, to contribute in whatever small way to building a stronger tripartite model in the new knowledge-based economy. Sir, the point that I want to make here is that union membership and collective bargaining rules have to be revamped in this context, and union membership has to be broadened through legislation, not just by convenience through union constitutions or rules.”
“All these have led to major impacts on the way the unions organise themselves and has therefore made it a necessity to have a major union restructuring through either dissolution of some of the older unions, or having amalgamation of unions, new statutory board employee unions and also the registration of new unions. It is therefore appropriate that the delegate system is being recognised and extended to simplify vote taking by allowing decisions on the change of union names, amalgamation of unions and in the change of use of union funds. I am confident that the larger unions particularly will find this a more efficient and effective means for decision-making. The only question I have in this regard to ask the Minister is: why is there a provision to say that there is a need for a two-thirds vote delegate system, while a simple majority is needed for an ordinary members' meeting? I recognise that it is a form of safeguard, especially in today's context where most unions are well-run, but you never know something in the future. But I want to know why this magic number of two-thirds. As I have said, all these changes have come about because of the changing corporate manpower landscape due to globalisation, technology and corporate restructuring and so on. But these changes and response, while it is necessary, I think it is not sufficient. I feel that corresponding changes that relate to the unionisation of a wider range of employees to join rank-and-file unions may be necessary and the Nominated Member of Parliament, Mr Thomas Thomas, has touched on this point. I think the Ministry needs to examine, for example, section 16(3) of the Industrial Relations Act and look at a major review of this section. And the reason is as follows.”
“Sir, I join my former colleagues from NTUC in supporting this Bill. As the Minister had pointed out earlier, a major review of the Trade Unions Act was carried out way back in 1982. Although this Bill should have been introduced some years ago, it is, nevertheless, timely that the Ministry has brought to the fore some major amendments to the Trade Unions Act, especially because in the last few years, there have been significant changes and this changed circumstances in the administration of trade unions in Singapore. Sir, I just want to touch on two or three key points in this amendment Bill. First, the delegate system, as pointed out in sections 33 and 34. As Mr Seng Han Thong has pointed out, many unions, for many years now, have been facing this problem of having annual ordinary members meeting, particularly unions like AUPE, UWEEI, SMMWU, SEAHSU and many others. They have as many as 30,000 members, and to have 30,000 members to come for a meeting is an impossible thing in Singapore. Even the World Trade Centre conference halls cannot hold these people. Therefore, they had to work within their union constitution to come out with this delegate system, and I am very pleased that the Ministry now recognises this delegate system and has actually empowered more provisions through this delegate system. Looking broadly, globally there have been tremendous changes, particularly in the corporate world - company globalisation, corporate restructuring, together with some of the changes in Singapore, for example, corporatisation of statutory boards and other Government bodies, going from corporatisation to privatisation like PSA.”
“We have said that we will no longer be freezing the civil service salaries. How we make the adjustment, what form we will evolve to and how quickly we get there are things which we have to consider. We may take one or two years to get there, but I think it would be the wrong thing for us to say we do not do anything and we freeze it, because we are going to lose good officers. It has happened before and we are already beginning to notice this because the opportunities are in the private sector. You can say, "Tighten your belts." He says, "I will go the other side." So we have to be realistic. We have had a system which has worked and which has got us through quite a major crisis without an accident. I think we had better look to improve and strengthen the system. We will work out the schemes and the sums, and a proper statement will be made in due course.”
“If we were to apply the formula rigidly, we would simply multiply and apply. I think that would be the wrong thing to do, because it is quite a significant adjustment, and we should take this opportunity to free up our public sector salaries further. Presently, we rely too much on fixed salaries without enough room for adjustment within a grade, and also without enough weight on the performance element of the overall salary package. We have built up the performance element over the years. It is now up to six months out of the 20-month total package for the year, but that is quite small compared to what you can get in the private sector. Because in the private sector, in a good year, you can go to 12 months, sometimes even 18 months in some industries. And then next year, if it is no good, you come down again. Or next year your responsibilities are lighter, you come down again. We do not have that flexibility. Also, in the private sector, you do not have a person at a single grade at a single point. You have a person in the rank and his pay can vary from X to Y, and he might get a pay adjustment without getting a rank upgrade promotion. And it gives you some flexibility to reward individuals in a way which fits the organisation and which fits what he deserves. Whereas in the civil service, you cannot. If I want to pay somebody more, I have to promote him, and similarly with the Ministers or the Parliamentary Secretaries, and this is a rigidity. So we have got to find some way to make this more flexible and to build up the performance bonus for the top, just as we are intending to introduce a performance bonus across the board, even for all civil servants. It is something which we are studying and which we hope to work out by the beginning of next year.”
“Jeyaretnam on wage freeze and salaries for the public sector. I gave Members numbers just now which showed that the private sector benchmark which the Government is supposed to follow went up 13% in 1998 and 29% in 1999. And this was based on private sector earnings two years before, because there are lags in the way we calculate. Actually, this meant that private sector earnings went up 13% in 1996, calculated in 1997, and applied in 1998. It went up 29% in 1997, calculated in 1998 and to be applied in 1999. And 1996 and 1997 were not bad years for the economy. If we had followed the formula, we should have just applied this to the civil servants, as we applied the earlier reductions in 1997 when the private sector went down 7% and we followed them down 7%. So if you go down, you go up again. But because we could see difficulty coming up over the horizon, so in 1998 and 1999, we froze the adjustment and let the private sector go its own way. Now the economy is recovering. For the year 2000, the adjustment for next year - we do not have the data yet - we think that the figure has gone up compared to last year. And the reason is that even though the economy, as a whole, was not doing well, there were companies which were doing well. Many foreign banks were doing all right. Many multi-nationals had chief executives who had stock options - these are stock options of MNCs on the American market - so they were worth something and benefited the CEOs. Other professions like the lawyers or the accountants, which are not salary-based but are fee-based - they get a profit share from their business - their services were in demand and so their earnings went up. And so our benchmark is likely to go up again next year. The question is what do we do?”
“So I would not say that their costs have gone up sharply, which is why we have to watch our costs too. In a tight labour market, wages will settle for higher than last year but, at the same time, we have to try and ensure that the wage settlements are justified by productivity improvements, so that while we pay people more, they are also producing more and, overall, the companies are able to maintain their competitiveness. As regards weak sectors versus across-the-board measures, although the CPF adjustment is across the board, the focus of our continuing rebates on industrial land, flatted and standard factories, as well as the rebates on port and airport dues, is more on the manufacturing sector. The reason is because many of the weak industries are in the manufacturing sector, either weak because of costs like petrochemicals and petroleum, or weak because they are in the process of restructuring, like disk drives or computer manufacturing. So we have tried to make an effort to focus on the manufacturing sector. Beyond that, it is not possible and I do not think it is desirable for us specifically to direct rebates or Government assistance to particular industries, because it is really for the market to sort out which industries do well in Singapore and which do not. We will make sure that there is a manufacturing sector in Singapore, but which particular industry, that depends on supply and demand and on our cost structure. What we can do is to help the industries which are in the process of restructuring to make the transition and help the workers, who are being phased out by one industry, find new jobs in another industry, and that we will continue to do. Lastly, the questions by Mr Yeo Guat Kwang, Mr Ong Ah Heng and Mr J.B.”
“As Members will know, right now the construction sector is still in recession. Volume is considerably smaller than last year. Building programmes have come down, and there is a slack capacity. It is a good time for us to invest in infrastructure, including reclamation. I do not believe that it will cause prices to go up or cause any tightness in the construction industry. Mr Simon Tay asked a series of questions. Firstly, potential versus actual savings. Most of our package were actual savings because it was statutory like the CPF cuts and Government charges. The only one which was potential was adjustment to bonuses in the private sector which we projected would have accounted for about half of the reduction of 15% in wage cost last year. My guess is that it probably accounted for somewhat less than that because as the economy recovered, the pressure on companies to cut back on bonuses and for workers to settle for less diminished. I do not have the number but my feeling is probably we might have made 3% or 4%, rather than 7% or 8%, as we were hoping for. But the CPF cuts, the Government rebates, the rental rebates, all those are actual. As for external comparison with other countries, if you look at the nominal exchange rates of Thailand, even Indonesia and Korea, they have strengthened. In so far as the nominal exchange rates reflect the cost to exporters, because they are exporting in US$ but their costs are in Won or in Baht, then this means that their costs would not have gone up very sharply but would have firmed. Their internal costs within their countries, I believe, have been stable. Their inflation has been stable because they are in the throes of restructuring and unemployment is still quite high.”
“Sir, I just like to touch on the CPF restoration. Will the full restoration be done within the five years or is there a possibility of reducing the total 40% to any lower level? BG Lee Hsien Loong: Mr Speaker, Sir, if I may take all the questions together. Mr Chng Hee Kok asked whether we are on track to make 4-6% growth. The answer is yes. The storm is not over yet because we still have to see how the region recovers, particularly Indonesia, where there are political complications which may take sometime to work out. Also, our own internal restructuring is continuing. While we are making the growth, there is restructuring, people are being retrenched, industries are being phased out and new industries are coming in. So we have to continue to make the effort, to be able to manage this turnover and make the growth. If we do well and continue to make 4-6% growth year after year, then as I have said, we should be able to fully restore the CPF contribution rate in about five years to 40%. Of course, once I have said that, MPs have asked whether we cannot do it even faster. Let us not count our chickens because the eggs have not hatched yet. If all goes well and we can do about 2% restoration a year, then in five years, we will get back to 40%. But if there is a setback, we may be unable to restore. We may have to restore 1% or 1/2%. On the other hand, if we do exceptionally strongly, we might be able to get away with 3% in a good year. Let us put that as something to prepare our minds but not a hard target that we definitely will hit. You cannot tell. Mr Iswaran asked about cost pressures from the stimuli. Most of the stimuli are in terms of spending by the Government in infrastructure, meaning schools, MRT, airport, roads and so on.”
“Sir, even today, there is a report in the Straits Times about another accident at a construction site. I would like to ask the Minister of State whether there is an increasing trend of accidents at construction sites this year as compared to past years.”
“Sir, I would like to find out whether there is a possibility of setting up a Singapore-Indonesia Business Council, as we have done for bilateral business relationships with other countries.”
“Batam will then be on par with Singapore because Singapore is also a free trade zone. This will increase Batam's attractiveness for foreign investments and create more employment opportunities for Indonesians. Singapore can also work with Indonesia to intensify tourism cooperation. Indonesia's tourism potential is enormous and we are prepared to work with Indonesia to re-launch the Indonesia-Singapore Tourism Cooperation programme. Apart from bringing in foreign exchange and creating jobs, there will also be positive spin-offs for the other sectors and industries in Indonesia. In the coming months, we will have close consultations with the Indonesian government on these ideas. Prime Minister Goh has announced that he will lead a business delegation to Indonesia sometime early next year. To lay the groundwork for the Prime Minister's visit, Mr Philip Yeo, Chairman EDB, will lead a delegation of senior officials to Jakarta at the end of this month to hold discussions with the Indonesian authorities.”
“Sir, before I ask my question, I would like to declare my interest, if any, that I work for a group of companies that has interests in Indonesia. Question No. 1, Sir. The Minister for Foreign Affairs (Prof. S. Jayakumar) (for the Prime Minister): Mr Speaker, Sir, if I am not mistaken, the Member had filed the Question before the official visit of the Indonesian President but since then the Prime Minister Mr Goh Chok Tong has set out Singapore's views on the subject quite fully when President Abdurrahman Wahid made his official visit to Singapore on 6thNovember 1999. Indonesia is one of our closest neighbours and a major trading partner. We would like to see a prosperous and stable Indonesia. We are ready to work with Indonesia to assist in its economic recovery. Singapore is a small country and our contribution can only be modest. However, Singapore can play a catalytic role to help restore investor confidence through practical measures. Our existing cooperation platforms can be leveraged to help Indonesia achieve early results in bringing back investor confidence. In particular, we can focus on the Riau cooperation projects, which are symbols of the close bilateral cooperation between Indonesia and Singapore. These projects have withstood the regional crisis. But their potential has not been fully realised. We can explore how the Riau cooperation projects can be further expanded to bring in more foreign investments into the Riau islands - Batam, Bintan and Karimun. This would have a demonstrative effect on international investor confidence for the rest of Indonesia. President Abdurrahman Wahid disclosed in Singapore that Indonesia was thinking of turning Batam into a Free Trade Zone (FTZ). We believe this is a good idea.”
“On that wish, Sir, I support the motion.”
“Sir, we started off then by catering to a migrant population of different races and cultures with different needs, leanings and aspirations. We now have a population whose cohesion as a people has been manifestly evident during the current downturn. We enjoy racial harmony and high standards of living, something which we know did not happen by chance, and we have achieved this in spite of our short history as a nation. The common thread running through the decades can be found in the confidence the electorate has in the integrity and openness of our parliamentary system. This has been fulfilled and established by the unequivocal commitment of past Members. Sir, we will continue to sail in uncharted seas. But the key is to mark out the reefs and rocks and to avoid them as best as we can. The challenges will continue to be different even as we strive to build a first world economy in an era that is marked by intensifying competition and borderless business dynamics. Singaporeans will increasingly cater to a global economy and be forced to adopt the necessary skills and perspectives. Demands on the family unit will be ever present. Whilst we can never be sure how challenges will be shaped in the future, we can be certain of our responsibilities as Members of this House as the same qualities and attributes are required of us. Our responsibility is to guard against complacency, to embrace a willingness and the moral courage to make the necessary changes and, most importantly, to preserve the integrity of this House in order to maintain at least the same level of confidence. Only then can we move ahead with conviction and commitment. Sir, whilst I may be short on experience in this House, I intend to be long on my sense of duty and responsibility to the people of Singapore.”
“Institutions which we now have for nation building and community upliftment and which have been a source of irritation or controversy among some quarters, for example, the community-based self-help groups and the SAP schools, will have to be continually monitored to provide more opportunities for cohesive and harmonious relations. Similarly, the present creative parliamentary democratic institutions unique to Singapore, such as the GRC and the Presidential Council for Minority Rights, need to be periodically reviewed and refined, whenever necessary. Two, more opportunities should be created for Singaporeans, especially the younger and succeeding generations, to appreciate the trials and tribulations of our efforts at establishing and enhancing parliamentary democracy. Our school's effort at civic education and understanding Singapore's post-war history should include such highlights. Mr Speaker, Sir, may I conclude by saying that we at Punggol East, Cheng San GRC, have a slogan which emphasises progress in harmony. That, to me, sums up the case in point. For democracy is nothing without progress in harmony. In the spirit of that important pillar of our parliamentary democracy, multi-racialism, allow me to close my comment by repeating that slogan in three languages: majulah dalam harmoni, inakkathudan munneru and he xie qian jin. I support the motion in the name of the Prime Minister, Sir. Mrs Lim Hwee Hua (Marine Parade): Mr Speaker, Sir, the challenges confronting Members of this House have been vastly different in each of the last four decades. We went from creating an economy virtually from scratch to building it to what it is today, a well diversified composition of manufacturing and services. We achieved this in spite of our lack of natural resources.”
“But common sense prevailed and thanks to former MP, Mr Chan Chee Seng's power of persuasion, Mdm Sahorah voted for the motion and history took its course to bring us to where we are today for prosperity and harmony. From the swamps of Jurong to a world-class model industrial estate, to a wealth we can bank on in Shenton Way, to the futuristic Marina Bay hotels, Millenia Walk and Suntec City, Singapore has shown what can be done when we have a stable and workable parliamentary democracy. This is especially true when the Government and the people can work together in harmony. For our parliamentary democracy to continue to work, social cohesion is critical. We cannot take it for granted. Singapore Parliament recognises this and this is evident in the Acts it has passed to enhance racial harmony and social cohesion. Whether the establishment of the Presidential Council for Minority Rights, Islamic Religious Council (MUIS), the Hindu Endowments Board, the Maintenance of Religious Harmony Act and the GRC, it shows a Singapore well grounded for racial and religious harmony. But even then, we cannot take that for granted. Mr Speaker, Sir, to enhance the parliamentary democracy we now enjoy, may I propose two points. One, we need to ensure that multi-racialism continues to be a critical pillar to parliamentary democracy. We must also continue to be bold and creative to strengthen that position. The more pillars we have to strengthen the base for democracy, the better we are.”
“To me, this motion today is also like a call for a vote of confidence on our parliamentary system of democracy. This reminds me of the fateful debate in Parliament on 20th July 1961. It was then a battle between the PAP non-communist and the pro-communist elements. In the words of the then Prime Minister, now our Senior Minister Lee Kuan Yew, it was a motion, as the Senior Minister said it earlier today, "to sort out the goats from the sheep". To achieve their agenda, the pro-communists had even consorted with their arch-enemy, the British. That is how complex the situation was. An American scholar, Prof. Robert Tilman, who had studied South East Asia for 25 years, once wrote in his book, South East Asia and the Enemy Beyond, said "how geography, history, language and culture had all conspired against the countries of ASEAN to make their task of nation building and economic development more difficult." Luckily for us today, we do not have to bring an MP on a stretcher by a hospital ambulance to muster a simple majority vote for this motion. This happened in that Parliamentary debate in 1961. Mdm Sahorah bte Ahmat made that difference by delivering that deciding vote for the non-communist PAP. For those who have read The Singapore Story: Memoirs of Lee Kuan Yew will learn that even securing her vote was like a parliamentary cliffhanger. Mdm Sahorah was holding back her vote, not because she liked the pro-communists, nor was she a communalist, but rather because her other Malay colleagues were ostracising her and thus she refused to give them her support. So we can see it was not just ideology and race but also human feelings, if not ego, coming into play in deciding the fate of our efforts at establishing parliamentary democracy.”
“Before that, Sir, I could not resist just to mention that it is indeed an honour for us that the session at the old Parliament House ended with the most senior speaker in our Senior Minister Lee Kuan Yew and that we start the new Chamber with the youngest speaker this evening. Mr Speaker, Sir, I think it bears well for multi-racialism that the first three speakers in the new Chamber are all from the minority group. Sir, this motion today and the historic move from the old faithful High Street Parliament House to the modest, yet high-tech, spankingly new Parliament House at North Bridge Road give us an opportunity to remind ourselves and Singaporeans just how far we have come since the embryonic years of parliamentary democracy. In the words of our PM, not just the lesson of how people vote at general elections and democracy, but also the progression from hardware to heartware. But yet 45 years are still "budding", in terms of an evolving democracy and, indeed, nation building. Lessons however are plenty, as a guide for us and future generations to avoid the dangerous rocks that could sink us asunder. Yes, we have weathered many trials and tribulations in the chart of parliamentary democracy. But the journey is never complete. While we have to continue to keep a lookout for the OB markers, let us also not be too keen to see pebbles for the rocks and reel back with over reaction when meeting future challenges. Our road ahead in this more open, global and interdependent world to build on the accomplishments of our predecessors requires a firm but passionate hand and heart. This might sound contradictory to some. But to me, that is tomorrow's reality today, that is, a balance between the clarion call for the strong-willed, the lion-hearted and the care for the weak.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, today is a day of historical importance for Singapore Parliament. The old Chamber which was founded 45 years ago had been nurturing parliamentary democracy in a consistent manner. Parliament has been functioning with integrity and openness. It has been debating the country's laws in depth, providing pragmatic suggestions and solutions. It has earned the people's trust, respect and praise. It must be stressed that the basic reason for Parliament to have earned the highest regard of the people is the excellent performance and moral uprightness of the first generation leaders. Some of the best leaders of our country have been Members of this Parliament, especially our Senior Minister, Mr Lee Kuan Yew, who has been in this House since its early days till today for about 44 years. This really adds dignity to this august Chamber. The old building was built in 1826 with bricks from Malacca and China and Indian chunnam or plaster. Accordingly, Members of the various ethnic groups, including Indians, have been serving in this Chamber. It reflects Singapore's present multi-racial society. Apart from the present Indian MPs, 18 other Indians had served as Members of this Parliament. Among the former Indian Members of Parliament, Mr A P Rajah, Mr Punch Coomaraswamy served as Speakers and Mr G. Kandasamy and Mr John Mammen served as Deputy Speakers. Mr Speaker, Sir, let us at the new Chamber continue to play our part for the development and progress of our nation. The Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Foreign Affairs (Mr Zainul Abidin Rasheed): Mr Speaker Sir, thank you for allowing me to speak on the motion by the Prime Minister. I rise in support of the motion.”
“Like the Deputy Prime Minister, Dr Tony Tan, my family and I have known her since I was appointed the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Communications and Culture. I was the Parliamentary Secretary to President Ong who was at that time the Minister for both the Ministries, and what has been said in this House by my colleagues is true. For my wife and I, whenever we had special meetings with her at Istana or at other places, we always talked about the future, our children, their experiences in National Service and what we have done for them. President Ong and the First Lady have given us strength when we have to perform our duties during a period of certainty and uncertainty. Her departure has left an impact on the people - the students, the workers, as has been said by Mr Lim Boon Heng and including those who are unable to come close to her but have seen her from far away - who have found her departure as a loss. And that is what I feel about her contribution to the prosperity of Singapore. Just like the Malay idiom that says that when a tiger dies, it will leave behind its stripes but when a human being dies he will leave behind his honour and respect. That is the actual meaning of death and whether we die at the age of 30, 40 or 50 years old, is secondary. The important thing is that we have made our life meaningful in many ways, like contributing to our society. My family and I feel this loss and we are grateful that we have got friends who are older whom we treat like our sisters and brothers. I fully express my condolences to President Ong and his family, as stated by the Prime Minister just now.”
“Singaporeans from all walks of life, different races and religions feel the loss with great sorrow. It is this emotional bind that bonds us as one people. Mrs Ong will be deeply missed and fondly remembered by us all. The Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Defence (Dr Tony Tan Keng Yam): Sir, thank you for allowing me to join in this debate. My family and I have known Siew May for over 20 years since I entered politics in 1979. We always found her to be kind and gracious and considerate in the concern for others. Siew May was a brave woman. My wife and I last saw her on 20th July when she was in hospital having a blood transfusion. She was sitting on a couch holding a pillow, speaking to her grandson. She spoke animatedly about family matters and preparations for the opening of the Nanyang Girls' High School. She was at that time in pain but she showed no signs of it and conducted herself cheerfully and as graciously as ever. In the work for education, particularly for the Nanyang Girls' High School, for charity, in the way she carried herself and lived her life, Siew May was a model for many women in Singapore. Her passing away is a sad loss, not only for the President and his family, but for the whole nation. Sir, I support the motion. The Senior Minister of State for the Environment (Encik Sidek bin Saniff) (In Malay): Mr Speaker, Sir, every living thing has to pass away. But that has many ways and, according to a Malay idiom, when a tiger dies, it leaves behind its stripes but for us human beings, we will leave behind our good name and respect. Khairil Anwar, a poet, said that one's legacy remains even after it has passed away. I believe all these idioms can make ourselves understand about Mrs Ong who has passed away.”
“Sir, I join the Prime Minister and the Members of this House to express my deep sympathy and condolences to President Ong and his family on the loss of his wife, Mrs Ong. Mrs Ong, whom I have known for the past eight years, was indeed an outstanding person, an outstanding First Lady, who in her own quiet ways has won the hearts of Singaporeans. Those of us who know her personally, know her for her kind and gentle ways in which she carried herself. She had won admiration and respect for her simple and humble personality. Sir, I had the privilege of attending a number of receptions and dinners hosted by the President and the First Lady. At these occasions, she was always an excellent hostess who went out of her way to show her concern and care for the guests, in fact, every guest. She would be deeply missed. Singaporeans have also come to know her as a brave and courageous person who had carried out her duties as First Lady, despite her illness. Her smile, an infectious smile, often gave away little clue of her physical condition and often made us believe that she was feeling better. During the past weekend, at several of my constituency functions, many grassroots leaders, residents and even children had expressed words of sympathy and sorrow at her sudden demise. One resident who was emotional said that she felt as if she had lost a member of her family. Such are the feelings of Singaporeans. Many Indian Singaporeans and Indian organisations have also expressed their grief and sorrow at the passing of Mrs Ong. They share the sorrow of President Ong, his family and the nation. The Hindu Endowments Board plans to hold special prayers in memory of Mrs Ong at its four temples tonight. Many Hindu devotees are expected to join in in the prayers.”
“Sir, it is not enough for each of these Ministries to work in isolation to tackle different aspects of family life in Singapore. What is necessary is to initiate bilateral and multilateral inter-Ministry committees so that various aspects of family life can be looked upon from a holistic point of view as policies then can be formulated in building stronger families. Sir, the Singapore 21 Committee, as the Chairman has explained, does not set any milestones or targets and for the reasons he has explained, and we agree with him. But I feel that building strong families is a very important aspect for Singapore's continued success and existence. I would like to urge the Government to follow up the Singapore 21 Report with a Family 21 Committee so that more concrete and targeted measures can be worked out and we can take Singapore into the 21st century with stronger families which will lead to a stronger Singapore.”
“Third, the elder parents. The elder parents will find themselves in retirement villages in a world of their own, fending almost for themselves as their children are busy with their own careers or their own nuclear family. Sir, the S21 Committee makes broad recommendations as to how everyone, individuals, society and the Government, can contribute and do their part in building strong families. But what is going to be extremely difficult to do is whether families can find the balance between building careers and affluence with building a strong and caring family, against a backdrop of economic and social pressures that exist in Singapore. And this is the crux of the issue. Our Government, and quite rightly so, has pushed for economic success and excellence in every sphere of activity for more than three decades. Could we in the near future let up and say it is good enough to run in the second league? I think it is not going to be that simple. While I agree that individuals and society must do their part, I think the Government must steer the move to build strong families with the same vigour it has demonstrated in building our economic success. This would mean that fundamental changes to policies and radical approaches would be necessary. Various Ministries presently cater to different aspects of family life in Singapore. For example, the Ministry of National Development, through HDB, caters to various needs of housing for families, looking into multi-generational flats, and so on; the Ministry of Health looks at family healthy lifestyle, and so on; the Ministry of Education looks into the needs of children; the Ministry of Manpower, among other things, is looking into how to provide flexible work arrangements.”
“Sir, I would like to touch just on one ideal which, to me, is indeed very important in shaping future Singapore, that is, building stronger families. We are all aware of the concept of a family unit as the building block of society. Strong families would lead to stronger social fabric and stronger Singapore. And yet, the family unit and each constituent family member will be pulled apart in different directions in the years ahead. The dilemma has been well described in the report. Sir, first, the working parents. Although as individual Singaporeans, we have all become more affluent, our pursuit for more affluence will certainly be stepped up. We have become slaves of technology - the pager, the handphone, the computer, the e-mail - all these have made us do much more in much less time. All these mean that, as an individual, we will work harder than ever before to better ourselves to become more affluent so that our families can have it better. Ironically, the very desire to do better for ourselves and our families pulls us away from our families. Working harder means less time spent with the family. When husbands and wives spend less time together, more misunderstandings occur and carried to its extreme, divorces will increase. Second, children. With society's emphasis on education and rapid advances in IT, it will make growing up for children a stressful experience. The peer pressure and competition will mean that parents will need to spend much more time with their children. When parents cannot be around because of their work, their children will be open to more influences, perhaps undesirable influences, in this era of Internet and digital convergence. Our moral fabric, our Asian values, our traditions can indeed be diluted and perhaps disappear altogether.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of the motion standing in the name of Minister Teo Chee Hean. In the mid-80s, the Government developed Vision 1999 which was the blueprint the second generation leaders embarked on to make Singapore a global city and to bring about high standards of living and material well-being for all Singaporeans. Sir, today, we have achieved much of what they had set out to achieve, and much more. We are admired the world over by our perceivably miraculous economic achievements. Sir, in spite of our material and economic success, or perhaps because of its over-emphasis, we have not given sufficient attention in developing the heartware of Singaporeans, as the Minister has pointed out in his opening address. Although we rank among the top few countries in the world, in terms of GNP per capita, we have a long way to go before we improve our social norms, like keeping our public toilets clean or being more considerate in how we stuff our plates in a buffet meal. Although we have one of the world's most successful home ownership programmes in the world, we have a lot to do to deepen the rootedness of Singaporeans. Although we have an able and honest Government in power for many years, we have much to do to generate active participation of Singaporeans in civil life and in community development. Sir, it is therefore timely that the Singapore 21 Report has been tabled in Parliament. I would like to congratulate Minister Teo and his committee and all Singaporeans who have contributed for their excellent, comprehensive, innovative and thought-provoking report. While the report reaffirms our ideals of meritocracy, racial harmony, strong leadership and a Government free from corruption, it articulates a vision of five ideals for every Singaporean.”
“Secondly, I would like to know whether all our teachers in the schools have been trained in the pedagogical aspects of using IT in the classroom, and whether the older teachers, especially those in their 50s, are able to cope with such IT training. Also, after receiving training, are there sufficient computers in the schools, particularly in the staff rooms, for the teachers to continuously hands-on with computers either in preparation for their classes or just to keep them updated on the developments on IT? I would like to know how many computers are allocated to staff rooms, whether there is a particular teacher-computer ratio as we have for the student-computer ratio. Thirdly, I would like to ask whether the Ministry has introduced computer-based home or project assignments in schools. I hear from some parents that this has been done, and that some of these parents, especially parents who do not have computers at home, are fairly concerned that their children would lose out to those who come from homes equipped with computers and therefore they feel that their children will be affected by such assessment as they count towards the end of the year examinations. So I would like to know whether this is being done and, also, whether in the medium term, the Ministry plans to level this playing field whereby they will assist students coming from lower income families with some sort of financial schemes to also purchase computers, so that all children will have access to computers. So I would like to know whether the Ministry has any plans to introduce any finance scheme to enable this.”
“Sir, the Education Ministry unveiled a very impressive Information Technology master plan for our schools some two years ago. I would like to congratulate the Ministry for its bold vision to adapt our schools, our principals and our teachers to prepare our children to face the rapidly changing world of IT. Sir, I would like to find out from the Minister what progress has been made with respect to this overall master plan to-date, and whether the Minister is satisfied with the pace so far. The Ministry has also stated that it plans to equip the schools with a student-computer ratio of 2:1 by the year 2002. Sir, I would like to know what ratio has been achieved to-date and whether we are targeted to meet this target by the year 2002. In this regard, I would also like to find out the Ministry's approach in the implementation of IT in our schools. While it is important and necessary for the Ministry to determine how many computers each school gets and the various hardware that is necessary to make it Internet-ready, it is important that the schools are given sufficient flexibility and a free hand to implement various IT programmes within the school given the hardware. It is not appropriate for the Ministry to determine exactly what the schools should do in IT, because IT is an area that requires a lot of creativity. From the feedback that I have received from some principals and teachers, they feel that the process of IT implementation in schools has somewhat been very bureaucratic and that some of their enthusiasm has been stifled because of this approach to the implementation of IT in schools. I hope that the Minister can look into this.”
“Many of these management corporations of private apartments and condominiums over the years have been facing a lot of problems with the property managers they have appointed, because many of them are incompetent and they are not suitable to run this kind of estate management. The main reason is that there is no requirement for the licensing of property managers by the Commissioner of Buildings. I would like to ask the Minister whether he would consider the licensing of property managers so that management corporations can have more competent property managers.”
“Sir, my GPC colleagues have made a spirited plea for the need for upgrading of private estates. I join them to find out the status of the upgrading programme for private estates that the Minister has announced some years ago. Those of us who come from constitutencies with large numbers of private estates are consistently under pressure, particularly after the introduction of Neighbourhood Committees (NCs) where they look forward to some form of upgrading programme for them. While I undertand that with the deficit budget, it will be very difficult to spend too much money on private estates, nevertheless, I like to urge the Minister to consider starting a pilot programme for these private estates, especially now that the costs are much lower than before. Secondly, the upgrading of private estates need not necessarily be as costly as those of the HDB estates. What is really required is a coordination of the various agencies - the PWD, the Ministry of the Environment and maybe in some cases, the Ministry of Health - to help look after the environment, coordinate certain works in the environment, and that could go a long way and, for this, the Government need not spend so much money. But, where possible, it can spend money to upgrade or introduce children's playgrounds and so on. I hope the Ministry, despite the difficult times, would consider some form of help and some form of coordination of these works so that the private estate residents would also feel just as Singaporeans as HDB residents.”
“Sir, the Government introduced two upgrading programmes, Interim Upgrading and Main Upgrading Programmes, to help upgrade older housing estates. Over the years, the Interim Upgrading Programme has been expanded and now, with the inclusion of the lift landing at every floor, many residents find that IUP is almost as important as MUP. Perhaps, the main distinguishing feature in the MUP is the space adding item (SAI). But looking at the feedback from many residents, most residents are very happy with the lift landing in every floor and covered linkways that takes them to the bus stop. First, space adding item. During the pilot phase, it was allocated 10 square metres. But over the years, it was reduced to 6 square metres and to build a bedroom with 6 square metres is indeed very difficult. I am sure, Sir, you will find it very difficult to go into a 6 square metre bedroom. Sometimes, it is used for toilet, utility room or an extension of the balcony, and so on, of the living room. Sir, given the size and cost, as Mr Ang Mong Seng has just pointed out, it costs about $25,000 in total to build this SAI for 4-room or 5-room flat and the residents pay about $15,000 for a 4-room flat and about $17,000 for a 5-room flat. This works out to a total cost of about $4,200 per square metre which by HDB cost standards is relatively high. Sir, given this and given the trend that many 4-roomers and 5 roomers are starting to upgrade to ECs and low-end private properties, I think we need to question whether there is a need to offer, as an option, SAI for 4 roomers and 5 roomers. I believe that 3 roomers will still find that having this SAI will be very useful, particularly with the larger Government subsidy. But maybe it is time to review the SAI option for 4-room and 5-room flats.”
“In this regard, I would like to ask the Minister whether it is feasible to form a Land Sales Review Committee which could comprise not just representatives from the property sector, but also with sufficient representation from consumers through grassroots organisations and perhaps the NTUC. Such a Committee can function similar to the National Wage Council for determining annual wages. In the same way, this Committee can recommend to the Government how much land has to be released on a yearly basis.”
“Sir, every year the Government decides on land sales based on its assessment of the supply and demand for that particular year. With the downturn in the property market, the land sales announcement has generated a lot of interest, especially those associated with the property market. I believe this year many property developers are very relieved by the delay of the land sales. By the same token, there are a lot of Singaporeans, particularly younger Singaporeans, like what Dr Wan Soon Bee pointed out, who are thinking that although the prices have come down, they are still relatively high. I join Dr Wan in appealing to the Government not to delay the land sales for too long. In fact, in assessing how much land to release each year must perhaps be a very fine art of judgment of market conditions for the Ministry. At the moment, the process in which it is being done is not very clear and transparent. Perhaps, I would like to ask the Minister how this process is done every year. Also, there are certain problems in this assessment in so far as the public is concerned, for example, how the Ministry determines whether a particular unit is occupied in assessing the total supply and demand. There has been a lot of controversy and much debate about this in the media. I would like the Minister to clarify this matter. Secondly, we find that very often it is the property developers who come out to the media to say various things and put some pressure on the Government not to release land for development.”
“Intellectual properties and rights, whether purchased or created in-house, are like plants and machinery in a knowledge-based economy. These are the tools with which businesses are done and carried out. Such costs should be given tax deductions, just like plants and machinery. Third, there is a need to encourage employee share options especially as we try to attract foreign talent to build our knowledge-based economy. In the US, many IT firms have succeeded in attracting and retaining IT professionals because of their very attractive employee stock options. The US tax laws also facilitate this use of employee stock options. In Singapore, tax is imposed at the time the options are exercised. The taxable amount is based on the excess of market value at the time of the exercise over the cost of acquisition. This does not necessarily encourage employee share options because share options are exercised when the market values are higher than the option price but the full amount is taxed in the year of exercise. As the values of quoted shares move up and down over time, the tendency is to sell at least some of the shares immediately to fund the tax payment and to lock in the reward. The current tax code does not encourage employees to hold on to their shares, and there is a need to make fundamental changes in this regard. The present system could be adopted in a number of ways to encourage share ownership and long-term employee commitment. Sir, I do hope that the Finance Minister would consider these three tax change suggestions to develop and grow our human capital as we move towards a knowledge-based economy.”