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 7 of 8.
“This demand comes particularly from polytechnic diploma holders who have a strong desire to acquire a degree qualification so that they can get ahead in their careers. The Ministry has recently announced that a part-time B.Tech programme will be offered and that the programme will be offered at the National University of Singapore. This came as a surprise to many as the natural place for such a part-time programme would have been the Open University. This move has raised a question as to whether the Open University would offer engineering degrees at all in the future. I hope that the Minister can clarify this concern. I also understand that the development grant for the Open University would run out by 1998. I would like to know if the Government would continue to provide the Open University with sufficient funds for its future development and administration. In this regard, I would also like to know whether there is a renewed thinking about the long term role of the Open University.”
“Sir, for decades now, the GCE "O" and "A" level examinations have been set and marked in Cambridge. Last year, the issue of whether the examination scripts should continue to be marked overseas came up for discussion and many parents expressed their concern about the loss of some 200 examination scripts sent to Cambridge for marking. While we recognise that such an incident is rare and isolated, the Ministry must nevertheless set the long term direction as to whether we should continue to be dependent on Cambridge. There are certainly several merits in continuing with the present arrangement. For instance, the GCE certificates are internationally recognised as a benchmark. Also, the wealth of experience of the Cambridge examiners allows for consistency in maintaining standards. But on the other hand, we have established ourselves as a centre of educational excellence in this region. As such, it may be necessary for us to work towards becoming self-reliant. Also, over reliance on an external source can prove to be fatal in the event of a major crisis in the United Kingdom. Last year, the Minister informed the House that his Ministry would study the matter more carefully before a decision is made. I would like to ask if the study is completed and what is the outcome of the study. Now, I will take the next amendment. The Open University was set up some two years ago to provide an opportunity for working adults to pursue a degree programme. Presently, three degree programmes leading to a BA or a B.Sc degree are being offered. Ever since the Open University was started, there have been numerous requests from the public as well as Members of this House to start an engineering degree programme at the Open University.”
“Ways of expanding the use of the fund should be explored. For example, the Ministry should seriously look into the possibility of allowing students to use the fund for enrichment programmes and other special projects undertaken by the self-help groups. This must not be seen as a welfare handout, as self-help groups play an important role in the education of our students, and the Government recognises this role. Another point that I would like to raise is that the block grant for schools is presently only extended to secondary schools. Last year, I asked if this grant could be extended to primary schools as well, and the Minister of State, Dr Aline Wong, had then replied that it would be considered at an appropriate time. With the additional $500 million given to Edusave, I wonder if this is an appropriate time to extend the scheme to primary schools as well.”
“Sir, I welcome the Government's move to accelerate the build-up of Edusave by adding another $500 million from last year's surplus to making it a total contribution of $3 billion, as Mr Chew has just pointed out. The Edusave Scheme has been in operation for two years now and most Singaporeans have heard of Edusave but many, including parents and educationists in our schools, may not be fully aware of how this scheme operates. The Ministry of Education allocates the Edusave income into three categories: (1) a pupil's individual account for both primary and secondary schools; (2) a block grant to secondary schools; and (3) scholarships to top pupils in secondary schools. 1.15 pm Presently, the fund in the pupil's individual account can be used for school-based enrichment programmes and, in some instances, for part payment of autonomous and independent school fees. However, in the two years in which this fund has been in existence, the withdrawal rate by pupils has been extremely low. For example, in 1994, the fund withdrawal rate by primary school pupils was only 3.5% and that of secondary school students was only 16.9%. The Ministry should carefully examine the reasons for this gross under usage of Edusave funds. The procedure for withdrawal of funds for approved use should be made simple and easy to administer. At the same time, it must have enough controls to prevent the abuses that Mr Peh had talked about. Also, the Ministry should step up its publicity drive on the entire Edusave scheme so that students and parents better appreciate the objective of the scheme and how students can effectively benefit from the scheme. The Ministry should also examine if the present designated use of the fund may be too restrictive.”
“It is so wide open that not only a double-decker bus can pass through but a super jumbo-jet can whiz past and still have enough space to make a U-turn. Let me elaborate. For example, clause 11(b) and (c) allows the parent to authorise a third party to apply for maintenance, on his behalf. This is a dangerous precedent as it is open to unscrupulous persons to take advantage of the gullibility of old people. While the maintenance would be paid to the parent, it would be possible to 'scout' for old people with well-off children and encourage them to apply in return for a fee or percentage, like brokering of houses. This is particularly so for lump sum maintenance. Another problem that the Bill does not address is who would administer the money sent to parents staying in old age homes and how would it be possible for children to track if all the money given by them actually goes to the parents. In addition, clause 5(3) and (4) may need to be deleted as it would further complicate matters. Sir, in conclusion, the youths of Singapore have made known their views on the proposed Bill and are of the opinion that legislation may not be necessary at this stage. But if it must be done now to protect parents of the errant few, then a conciliatory approach of a three-tiered Tribunal rather than an adversarial court approach is recommended. Personally, I reluctantly support the Bill as it is a necessary evil for the errant or recalcitrant few. I am of the strong opinion that the Bill must be re-written as it is too simplistic in its present form. I therefore propose that the Bill be referred to a Select Committee, where the Bill would benefit from public participation.”
“Like the Small Claims Tribunal, it should not be opened to lawyers to make representations on behalf of their clients. Aggrieved parties can be helped by the Registry. Mr Speaker, Sir, we have inherited the British legal system which is an adversarial system. Litigants have to attack each other's testimony in order to win the case. We are an Asian society. We could learn from the Japanese legal system which encourages mediation and arbitration. We should adopt the Japanese approach in Singapore especially in family disputes. Family dispute should be resolved in private rather than in public. We should try the conciliatory approach to resolve family disputes. Mr Speaker, Sir, we cannot run away from the problem of the aged. Ten years have gone by since the problem was first discussed. We cannot wait for another ten years. There are some signs that our elders are not getting the support and care which they deserve. All of us have enjoyed the love and care of our parents, and we must not forget them in their old age. One should not forget that we too will be old one day. In this, both parents and children must play their role positively. The parent could help in planning for their old age by setting aside a sum of money. Similarly, the children must also set aside a reasonable sum of money for their own future as well as taking care of their parents. With all due respect to Prof. Walter Woon, who was a fellow Rafflesian and who was my former lecturer in Company Law during my undergraduate Engineering Course, I must add some critical comments on the adequacy of the provisions of the Bill. Many legal experts and myself have observed that the Bill is far too broad and has many loopholes.”
“The general conclusion was that this matter should not end up in the court. We should, perhaps, set up a new tribunal which could act as a consultative, conciliatory and mediatory body to resolve the problem. The round-table discussion members were in agreement with the proposal contained in the letter to the Forum Page, Straits Times, 1st June 1994. The writer of the letter had suggested the setting up of a Community Court. The panel felt that legislation should not create antagonism and ill-will between parents and children. If the matter were to go to court, the end result would be confrontation between the parents and children. Therefore, the second panel recommends that a three-tier system be set up to resolve the issue between the parents and children. First, the aggrieved parents could go to a conciliatory unit set up by the Ministry of Community Development. The aggrieved parent could go and see the unit and if the children have failed to maintain, the unit could then counsel the children and try to persuade them to reconsider their position. If this fails, then the matter could go to the Community Court where again the Court Registrar could summon the parties to the privacy of his chambers and try to work out a solution. And if this fails, then the matter should go to the Community Tribunal which should be made up of a lawyer and, perhaps, two community leaders or Justice of Peace. The three could meet the aggrieved parent together with his children and then come to a decision. The decision of this tribunal should carry the same authority as that of District Courts. The hearing should be held in the chambers and it should not be opened to the public or to the press.”
“The groups, and in particular all the representatives from the different ethnic-based self-help groups, were opposed to legislation primarily because they felt that if the children were hauled before the court, it would further weaken their family ties. It would also add embarrassment to the family. In our Asian society "face" is very important. Going to the court would be embarrassing not only to the children but also to the parents. A young participant in the discussion spoke for all youths when he said that "legislation might have an adverse effect in that the young would, in the long term, view looking after parents as a legally enforceable requirement rather than as their responsibility as children." What is required is to inculcate and imbue filial piety, love and concern for the parents. Schools must emphasise to students family values and filial piety. Filial piety must come from the heart, and it cannot be a subject of legislation. While the children have a moral obligation to look after their parents, their parents also must ensure that they also plan for their old age. Another suggestion which emerged and is worthwhile considering is that more family support groups with greater clout be formed to help the neglected parents. This support group can act as a channel to help parents who are in need of help. Mr Speaker, Sir, the general consensus of the two groups was that legislation was not necessary at this stage. But if the House comes to the decision that legislation is necessary, then we have to look at how best this matter can be resolved by legislation. If legislation is a necessary evil, we must recognise that it will have salutary effects. The panel members felt that the present judicial set up may not be the best forum to adjudicate the matter.”
“Sir, I am a member of the National Youth Council (NYC) and I represent the Council to present the views of the youths in Singapore on this Bill. This Bill, if passed, would make the greatest impact on the youths and their future relationship with their parents. It is therefore important to take heed of the views of the youths in this matter. In July 1993, at the National Youth Seminar, officiated by the Prime Minister, two out of the four workshops focused on the theme "Looking after Aged Parents". These two workshops submitted their recommendations to the National Youth Council. After the Bill was tabled in Parliament, I chaired two NYC round table panel discussions to discuss this matter. The first panel consisted largely of youths and administrators of Homes for the Aged. The second panel comprised representatives from youth organisations, senior administrators of ethnic-based self-help organisations, senior citizens, and representatives from the Institute of Policy Studies and the legal profession. Both round table groups discussed extensively the approach in addressing the problem of caring for aged parents, ie, to legislate or not to legislate. There was an almost unanimous agreement by both panels and the NYC Seminar's recommendation, that legislation may not be the most appropriate vehicle in finding a solution to this problem. In the same breath, the group also agreed that if there was no other better solution, then legislation could be used as a last resort and as a necessary evil for the errant or recalcitrant few, as Assoc. Prof. Woon put it.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the problem of the aged has been occupying the minds of the people and the political leadership for a long time. In July 1984, this House debated the Report of the Committee on the Problems of the Aged. The problem is still with us, and has become even more pronounced. Currently, in Singapore, eight working persons support one aged person. By the year 2010, there will be four working persons to one aged person. And by the year 2020, there will be three working persons to one aged person. By 2030, one-quarter of the population will be aged 60 and above, compared to only 9% today. That is the scale of the problem. The Government has taken the necessary steps to address the potential social and financial burden on the State, in light of the increased life expectancy and potential shortage of manpower in the workforce, so as to sustain the economy in the future years ahead. The amendment to the Central Provident Fund Act this afternoon and the enactment of the Retirement Age Act last year are examples of legislation that have been set in place to address this problem. While the Government has done its part to ensure that the aged do not become a social and financial burden to the State, the problem may perhaps be best addressed by tackling it at its root � the smallest building block of society - the family unit. This private Member's Bill in the name of Assoc. Prof. Walter Woon has generated considerable public interest. While everyone in this House would possibly agree that addressing this problem at the family level is the right thing to do, we would, however, be divided in the approach and the form in which the problem can be addressed. Sir, the real issue is: to legislate or not to legislate - that is the question.”
“Studies in Western countries have shown that companies who adopt such programmes have evidenced a significant drop in absenteeism, industrial injury and staff turnover and has increased productivity, worker satisfaction and enhanced company image. Sir, I would like to ask the Acting Minister if the SSC can focus its attention in promoting sports and fitness programmes at the workplace. For a start, more companies can be encouraged to hold a 10-minute morning exercise session daily using the Singapore Workout steps. The SSC can also set up fitness corners in the industrial estates. The NTUC and the unions can play their part in promoting such programmes provided the employers and the SSC make the first move in this direction. If the SSC truly wants to promote the "Sports for All" policy, then it must go "all for sports".”
“Sir, almost every child is introduced to one or more sports in our schools. Several periods are allocated during the weekly curriculum time for physical exercises or sports activities. In addition, there are a number of sports activities in which school children can participate and even excel. And yet when they leave school and start work, much of the enthusiasm in sports or efforts in keeping fit disappear almost completely. Only the more disciplined ones continue to pursue sports and fitness. Last year, the Ministry of Health, in conjunction with the Ministry of Community Development, launched the "Great Singapore Workout". Lots of efforts were put in organising the event and the one-day event was indeed very successful. But it was like a "shot in the wilderness". It created much attention and awareness but the message of keeping fit has not been sustained. The Singapore Sports Council has been promoting mass participation in sports and fitness programmes with a "Sports for All" policy. However, its efforts have been targeted largely at the constituency level. About 1.6 million Singaporeans are gainfully employed and most of us spend more than 44 hours at work each week. In the much debated White Paper on Affordable Health Care, personal responsibility for one's own health by keeping fit has been advanced as one measure to curb rising medical costs. Some of the bigger companies, such as Hewlett-Packard and AT&T, for example, place a lot of emphasis in the promotion of employee fitness. They provide sports facilities and have embarked on wellness programmes. However, unlike in Japan and US, such companies are only the exceptions and not the norm. Many of our employers do not fully appreciate the benefits that they can accrue from employee fitness programmes.”
“Sir, in view of the reluctance of the Government to increase the university subsidies to 79%, as proposed by the Cost Review Committee, the NUS Students' Union has set up a trust fund to raise funds to provide bursaries and book prizes for deserving and needy students. They plan to raise about $1.5 million and have requested the Government to give $2 for every $1 they raise. I would like to urge the Government to recognise the positive initiative of these undergraduates and, at least, look into the possibility of granting and matching the NUSSU trust fund's effort dollar for dollar.”
“Sir, first, I would like to declare my interest as a member of the NTU Council and the views that I express here are my own. Sir, in the Budget debate earlier this week, I raised the point on the need to provide more opportunities for Singaproeans to pursue a university education locally, given the Government's stated objective of maximising the potential of every Singaporean. I believe that one of the impediments to increasing the enrolment of our local universities could be the high cost of providing a university education. The Government has announced that the long-term subsidy rate would be pegged to about 75% of the recurrent cost. The request by the Cost Review Committee to cap this subsidy rate at 79% has been turned down by the Government. With lower subsidy rates, the Government must not only look into increasing the university fees as the only means to meet cost but should also look into other ways of reducing cost. Sir, I understand that the average recovery rate for both NUS and NTU is at about 30-32% level. However, the recovery rate for NTU is much higher, perhaps, about 7-8% higher than that of NUS, despite being a newer university. Sir, I would like to propose that the Ministry look into the possibility of allowing each university to charge separate university fees so that the university fees can be lowered according to the individual university's efforts to increase the recovery rates. This would also allow for healthy competition between both universities to compete for students and, hence, they can strive harder to ensure that the university can be run more efficiently and also to introduce more innovative courses to attract students.”
“I would like to ask the Minister if the Education Ministry would look into the following suggestions: (1) To retain our teachers in service, the Ministry could perhaps look into providing more promotional grades and frequent promotion exercises so that 20-30% of each cohort of teachers have the opportunity to become principals within 10 to 12 years of service. (2) To look into providing opportunities for Senior Principals to be seconded to other Ministries, statutory boards, GLCs and so on, as training or personnel administrators so that this can be part of their career advancement, as it has been done in the SAF for top military officers. (3) To attract more young Singaporeans into the service, the Ministry can institute prestigious overseas teaching scholarships, like the SAF scholarship, so as to attract some of the top students to the teaching service and thereby projecting a better image for the profession. (4) The Ministry can also look into using role models of successful past and present teachers and principals at different forums to educate school leavers on the importance and value of the teaching profession to our society. In fact, there are many among the Members of this House who have spent a significant part of their careers in teaching. I hope the Minister can look into these suggestions.”
“Sir, during the past year, the GPC for Education and the resource panel visited a number of schools - primary, secondary, junior colleges, the NIE and the universities. In our formal and informal discussions with the school staff, the GPC found some common problems of the teaching service every time we meet these teachers. These included teachers' workload, the lack of sufficient recognition and reward for teachers and principals and the lure of other attractive jobs. With increased birth rate trends since 1988 and the new policy to provide students with 10 years of general education, we need to attract more Singaporeans to the Education Service. But according to available figures on the intake of trainee teachers at NIE, there is a 25%-33% shortfall in the intake to the BA and BSc courses with a Diploma in Education and the Postgraduate Diploma in Education for secondary schools respectively. The problems become more acute with the increasing number of resignations of young teachers from the service. I believe that the present resignation rate is about 8% per year. We read in the Straits Times on Tuesday that the Ministry is now recruiting expatriates in large numbers from abroad and hiring about 150 untrained graduates to meet this year's shortfall of teachers. The public, particularly the parents, have expressed their concern on employing untrained teachers and also having too many foreign teachers in our schools as their value system might be different from ours. To address the acute problem of present and future shortages of teachers, the Ministry must adopt a two-pronged strategy. One, to make service terms competitive enough so as to retain those who are already in the service and, the other, to make the teaching profession more attractive to newcomers.”
“It will be inappropriate to expect lower income workers, including civil servants, to meet the differential cost of co-payment as it is not by their choice that they have to be warded in a higher class. Before the Minister dismisses this appeal by saying that hardship cases can actually apply for Medifund, I would urge the Minister to consider the waiver of the additional cost of these treatments in B2 for at least the civil servants, if not the entire public, on the basis that Government is their employer and on the basis of their ward eligibility entitlement.”
“Sir, as Mr Othman has just pointed out, the medical benefits scheme has been the talking point of many civil servants and unionists the last three months. Much has been done since. The Prime Minister has taken a personal interest to allay the fears of civil servants. In fact, the Prime Minister met key civil service union leaders, not once but on two occasions, to clear workers' apprehensions on the scheme and to see if some of the unions' proposals on improving the scheme can be implemented. The labour movement is indeed very grateful to the Prime Minister for his sincerity and concern on an issue that is very close to the hearts of unionists and civil servants. Sir, I would like the Minister's response on two specific issues. One is that civil servants receiving treatment in OPDs have to pay the full amount of the bill, instead of the 15% co-payment amount. This has particularly caused tremendous unhappiness amongst the Division IV and the DRE employees, as many of them face difficulties in having to pay upfront the total bill amount. Besides, it is unfair to expect them to pay the full amount and be reimbursed at a later date. I would like to ask the Minister if this arrangement has been reviewed as it is an unnecessary burden on the lower income workers. The second point is that for five types of treatment which include cardiothoracic and paediatric surgery as well as interventional cardiology, Class C ward is presently not available. As a result, for such treatments, Division IV officers and DREs who are eligible for Class C ward are admitted to Class B2 instead and they are made to pay the 15% co-payment on Class B2 charges. In such wards, for example, for the treatment of burns, it can last for a prolonged period of several weeks or months.”
“Sir, if he has not mentioned, then I withdraw it. But he was quoting so much from the Straits Times that, I was not sure whether I was reading the Straits Times, or was listening to his speech.”
“Are we losing out? Perhaps, it is timely for the Government to set up a review committee on university education. Although in the past, steering committees have been set up for individual universities to chart their own direction, to my knowledge, an overall review of university education has not been done. Such a review committee can take a fresh look at university intake, curriculum, facilities and pay particular attention to the renewed manpower needs as we embark on a new dimension to develop an external economy. I support the Budget, Sir.”
“I understand that more than half of the 15,000 `A' level leavers who have applied to our universities each year are being turned away due to the limited number of places. Many of these students have to fulfil their dreams by enrolling in expensive overseas universities. According to a recent World Education Report, there are about 11,000 Singaporeans studying in overseas universities each year. This number is almost as large as the number of undergraduates in NTU. In other words, they could make up the enrolment size of another university. Have we taken into account this large number of returning graduates in our projections? Are we faced with a glut of graduates when they return to Singapore? Not at all. In fact, these overseas graduates get absorbed very quickly into our workforce and they draw salaries on par with local graduates. Why should a Singaporean aspiring to maximise his or her potential be made to take a very expensive route to a university education? Is it not possible to give Singaporeans a chance to pursue a degree locally? Why is a tight cap being applied to enrolment in the Open University? I realise that University expenditure and Government subsidy levels are very high. But can we do more to maximise the fullest potential of our prized resources? With both our universities adopting a modular credit system, the Ministry of Education should consider twinning local universities with reputable overseas universities for undergraduate studies. This would enable more Singaporeans to pursue a large part of their university education locally and at a lower cost than going overseas for three to four years. A few years ago, we talked about making Singapore a regional centre for education. Neighbouring countries are now making great strides in this direction.”
“In fact, the labour movement was hoping that the levy would be pegged at $1,500 salary level. Nevertheless, a gradual increase is still acceptable. Employers who complain about the marginal increase in the salary ceiling of the levy are those who do not fully appreciate the importance of training of their lower-income employees. They do not realise that the SDF pay-out to companies is three times more than what is collected from employers each year. This means that employers can actually reap much more benefits from the SDF training schemes than what they actually pay. So my message to employers is simply: "Don't complain about pain, for if you train, you will surely gain." Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to move on to another aspect of the Budget Statement. It has been stated that the Government's philosophy on education is to maximise the potential of every Singaporean. And, yet, we find that many Singaporeans are disillusioned that they cannot get a place in the local universities. Every year, when the GCE `A' level results are announced, we consistently note that there is a marked improvement in the overall performance of Singapore students over the previous year. Ten or 15 years ago, the number of students getting a minimum of two `A' and two `O' Pass levels used to be about 70% or 75%. This year, the percentages have surpassed the 90% mark to 91%. When our children do better in schools, it is only natural that they aspire for a university education. Although our university intakes have increased over the years, I am not sure if the projections of perceived demands of our economy vis-a-vis admission places are kept current enough. I wonder if we are too conservative in our admission policies.”
“Have employers conveniently forgotten the tremendous courage and sacrifice of their employees at a time of need? Have employers forgotten about the painful adjustments that their workers have to make to loan commitments and lifestyles? As it would have happened in other countries, our workers did not take to the streets. Instead they faithfully stood behind the reasons for the cut and helped companies pull out of the recession. After several years of high growth, low inflation rate and after achieving an outstanding productivity growth of 6.4% last year, the highest since 1984, employers have no case whatsoever for not endorsing the 1 1/2% CPF restoration. Let us also not forget that the employer's CPF contribution rate has only been restored to 20%, and not to the original 25%. The labour movement had not pushed for a full restoration to 25% because it understands the need for our companies to remain competitive. Our workers place a lot of trust in the tripartite relationship that we have built up very carefully over the past many years. The Government has kept its promise. It is now for the employers to positively demonstrate their commitment to this relationship. Another source of unhappiness stems from the raising of the salary ceiling for the Skills Development Levy from $750 to $1,000. As the Finance Minister has pointed out in the Budget Statement, over the years, collections through the Skills Development Levy have been falling. This is due to the reduction of the rate of levy from 4% to 2% in 1982 and from 2% to 1% in 1986. Also, fewer people earned monthly salaries of less than $750 with each passing year. Therefore, over the years, the cost to employers had actually been declining.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, thank you for allowing me to join in the debate. This year's Budget has touched the hearts of many Singaporeans. When a responsible and forward-looking company does well, it will reward its workers with handsome bonuses and will channel part of its profits back to the company to invest into its future operations. The Singapore Government has done just that. With a better than expected growth of 9.9% last year, the Government has decided to plough back part of the surplus to enhance the assets of Singaporeans, to invest in education and skills upgrading, and to develop an external economy. This balanced approach is indeed laudable. But not all Singaporeans seem to appreciate the balanced and forward-looking stance of this year's Budget. The business community, in particular, seems to have taken a somewhat short-sighted view of this year's Budget. One of their main disappointments is that there has been no cut in the corporate tax rates. This reflects a failure on the part of businesses to link this year's Budget Statement to that announced last year. Worse still, some employers, and even some Members of this House, including Mr Chiam, have expressed their unhappiness at the much awaited one and a half percent restoration to the employer's CPF contribution rate. Such griping will come to no good and will only result in generating workers' distrust in their employers. These employers certainly seem to have a short memory. If only they care to cast their minds back to 1986, they would surely remember the workers' gesture in accepting a drastic 15% cut in CPF, a 15% cut in their total salary. That 15% cut is 10 times more than the 1.5% restoration this year.”
“However, it is very worrying to see that these people have already increased the prices before GST has been introduced. With the implementation of GST, are they going to increase the prices again? How is the Government going to deal with profiteering? How is the Government to determine which type of price increase is reasonable? I think these are the questions which most ordinary citizens are very concerned with and the Government should pay more attention to them. No doubt the GST has to be implemented to improve and to enhance our competitiveness. But the Government should ensure that after the implementation of the GST, our people could still have a healthy and fair consumer environment. Sir, I hope that the reflection of the above reaction of the people would enable the Government to appreciate the unhappiness of our people against all these price increases. Mr Speaker, Sir, I support the motion.”
“For example, the increase in parking fees and the full-day ALS scheme which brought about a chain reaction. In order that the standard of living of our ordinary citizens would not be affected and the Government would not be blamed for all this, I think the Government departments concerned should look squarely on the problem and check on the businessmen and hawkers who are increasing the prices of their merchandise and services indiscriminately and citing the increase in operational cost as their excuse for doing so. Some irresponsible businessmen and hawkers are using the excuse of GST to increase their prices. Let me give you an example. One morning, I was at a hawker centre for breakfast. I discovered that the price for a certain type of food has been increased from fifty cents to sixty cents. I asked the stallholder why he had raised the price. He replied that he had to do so because the Government is introducing GST. We all know that this is not true, because GST has yet to be introduced, and even with the implementation of GST, it should not have much effect on these hawkers. Yet, these hawkers have no hesitation in putting the blame on the Government. I believe he is not the first hawker to raise his prices under this pretext, nor will he be the last one to do so. This misconception will just spread. Nowadays, with a large proportion of our people eating out at hawker centres and restaurants every day, this will unwittingly result in more people misunderstanding and grudging the Government. This is very unfair. Sir, I have no objection to reasonable price increases. If the cost of doing business has increased, then a reasonable price increase is a matter of course, just like a salary revision.”
“Some coffee shops are charging 10 cents more for each cup of coffee. Six taxi companies have applied to increase their fares. Bus fares and MRT fares are likely to be increased too. This series of price increases has brought about a great burden to our people. It is like a person falling into the sea and he has to face the impact of one wave after another. This impact is certainly very hard for people to tolerate. People are generally very puzzled and unhappy with all these price increases, and there is very little they can do about it. What can they do about the increase in TV and radio licence fees? They have to pay. Can they possibly forgo watching TV or listening to radio just because of the increase in fees? When the creches raise their charges, the parents will still have to pay because the working mothers have to depend on the creches to look after their children when they go to work. When the school bus operators raise their fares, can the school-children stop going to school just because of the additional charges? These price increases have also brought on a heavy burden to the lower-income families. The newspaper vendors are now beginning to charge three cents more for the delivery of newspapers. At certain places, coffeeshops charge ten cents more for each cup of coffee. Although some people may say that it is only an increase of five cents and 10 cents, which is no big deal, many five cents and many ten cents, added together, could become an enormous sum, something which not everybody could afford. Some operators are saying that they have to increase the prices because the cost of doing business has gone up and almost all of them are putting the blame on the Government for taking the lead in price increases.”
“Therefore, I would urge the Ministry of Health and the Ministry of Finance to show compassion for this group of civil servants by making the necessary administrative arrangements to allow them to receive treatment without the need to mete out any payment upfront. Their co-payment portion can be deducted from their salaries subsequently. I would therefore urge the Minister for Health and the Minister for Finance to accede to this simple request. On that note, Mr Speaker, Sir, I support the motion. Mr Teo Chong Tee (Changi)( In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I support the motion standing in the name of the Member for Kampong Glam GRC, Mr Loh Meng See, thanking the President for his Speech. In his Speech, the President mentioned that the short term issues of Singapore were well in hand and that the Government's focus would be on long term policies. The Government's decision to prepare for long term problems is a very wise one. However, I hope that the Government will not neglect some of the short term problems which affect the everyday life of our people. For example, the problem of price increases. This is an imminent and ever increasing burden to our ordinary citizens. To many ordinary citizens, 1994 is a year of many price increases. With effect from 3rd January 1994, the CBD hours were extended and people have to spend more money to get into the CBD during the day. The HDB and URA have increased their parking fees by five cents for every half-hour. Admission charges to various places of interest and scenic spots have also increased. Television and radio licence fees are increased by 10%. Some creches have also increased their fees by $10 to $50. School bus and newspaper delivery fees have also increased.”
“Civil servants have to decide on one of the three options available under the revised medical benefits scheme. Many of them do not understand how the scheme works and what is best for them. In fact, as Mr Chandra Das pointed out, there is utter chaos. The unions are doing their part to explain to their members how the scheme works. However, explaining the revised scheme should not be the sole responsibility of the unions. Government should organise the respective heads of departments to explain to their employees the changes in the benefits and the terms and conditions of service. Also, the extent of coverage of MediShield and how MediShield is paid out should be made clearer to these employees. I would also like to bring to the Government's attention of the plight of many daily-rated employees (DREs) and Division IV civil servants. Recently, a union leader told me that after working in the service for more than 22 years, his take-home pay is less than $800. With the need for co-payment of hospital bills, he, like many of his union members, is concerned about the high deductible and the claim limits of the present MediShield Scheme. I would therefore urge the Government to consider lowering the deductibles and to make MediShield claim limits more generous. Another problem faced by the DREs and Division IV civil servants is that when they receive outpatient treatment, they are required to pay upfront 100% of the bills and they have to subsequently claim 85% from their own departments. This may not be a financial strain for most Singaporeans. However, for this group of low income earners, it is a significant problem.”
“Presently, the income ceiling for employer's contribution to the SDF is at a salary level of $750. In today's context, it is common to find low skilled older workers who earn more than $750, especially in the private sector. SDF statistics on the training participation rate of older workers indicate that only 7% have gone through SDF-sponsored programmes. To ensure that more of such workers can benefit from the programmes, I would like to propose that the income ceiling of the employer's contribution be increased from $750 to $1,500. More funding will enable the availability of a wider range of courses. But funding would only solve part of the problem, as pointed out by Mr Chia Shi Teck. What is of equal importance is to ensure that employers and workers respond positively to the schemes and programmes that exist. There is an urgent need to promote greater awareness of skills training and to develop a training culture and mindset. The employer knows best the type of skills that his employees would need to keep ahead of competition. So, it is the employers who should formulate and implement training programmes. Some employers have come forward to show greater commitment to training by including the percentage of wage cost to be expended on training of workers in their collective agreements with the unions. More employers should come forward to emulate this commitment. At the same time, unions and Government institutions must do their part in promoting greater awareness and positive attitudes in workers as well as on-the-job training and retraining amongst workers. Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to move on to health care. The Government has recently set in place its health care policies.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of the motion of thanks to the President standing in the name of Mr Loh Meng See. The President's Address clearly spells out the Government's focus on long-term policies to take Singapore to the next stage of nation building. In this debate, I wish to touch on two important issues in this respect. First, skills upgrading and training of the workforce. As we face a keener regional and global competition, skills upgrading and training is no more a matter of choice but a necessity. Increasingly, more MNCs are giving Singapore a miss in their plans to set up or expand their manufacturing operations. We have read recently about a major disk drive company, Quantum Corporation, which preferred to site their factory in Penang instead of Singapore. The main reason cited by the company is that Penang offers higher skilled workers and in bigger numbers. According to labour statistics as at 1992, 46% of the Singapore workforce do not even have at least a secondary education. In comparison, in South Korea, Taiwan and Hong Kong, more than 70% of their workforce have at least a secondary education. Further, the 1990 census of population reveals that 53% of those between the ages of 30 and 39 and 68% of those between the ages of 40 and 49 do not have a secondary education. As this group of workers would continue to be a sizable part of our workforce in the next 20 to 30 years, every effort must be made to ensure that these workers receive skills upgrading, retraining and on-the-job training. In this regard, I am happy to note that the Skills Development Fund (SDF) will expand retraining programmes for older workers to help them upgrade and adapt to new technology.”
“This National Keep Fit Committee will play a very important role and should have representatives from the unions and the medical practitioners. They could be formed in conjunction with the National Arts Council or the Singapore Sports Council. In conclusion, I support the principles and objectives of the White Paper. I think the Government, as the biggest employer, should command the confidence of the people. When we implement the plan we should be more flexible. The most important thing is to let the private sector employers feel that the Government is doing the right thing and they should follow the example to provide adequate medical benefits to their workers and not reduce their medical benefits. Mr Speaker: Order. I suspend the Sitting and will take the Chair again at 3.10 pm. Sitting accordingly suspended at 2.40 pm until 3.10 pm Sitting resumed at 3.10 pm [Mr Speaker in the Chair] AFFORDABLE HEALTH CARE (Motion) Debate resumed.”
“There should not be discrimination between the male and female civil servants. We would have to continue "fighting" for this. Perhaps, we should have more female MPs in Parliament. Another matter I would like to raise here is how to make the people understand the purpose and contents of the White Paper. We should let the people know how to effectively make use of all the medical and health care facilities, such as MediShield, Medisave and some form of medical insurance for retirees. I think we should let our people know that everyone has a responsibility to keep fit. Of course, we have one Opposition Member saying that keeping fit is the Government's responsibility, not the individual's responsibility. But I feel that we should make the people understand that it will be for their own good to keep fit. We see in the newspapers every day many advertisements on "fat reducing tea" and all sorts of fat burners and other methods of slimming. I think we should also educate our people on how to choose the right type of medicine. They should also learn how to adopt preventive measures. For the factory operators, they should know how to look after their own health, such as their hands, their back and their eyes. We should inculcate in our people the habit of regular exercise. I think we should establish a committee for this purpose. In fact, I would suggest that the Government set up a "National Keep Fit Committee". The duty of the committee is to promote some long term health-care programme to educate the people on how to look after themselves and on occupational health and also the advantages of keeping fit. It will also help the lower income people to realise the importance of keeping fit.”
“We should encourage more people to set up voluntary or community hospitals. I know there are many organisations which have set up community hospitals to serve the chronic sick people. I think the Government should give them more support in their endeavour to set up such hospitals. Another point I would like to touch on is the formula for the control of medical cost, ie, CPI plus X variable. This variable has also caused some alarm to the people, because this X variable would be decided by the hospital authorities and the Ministry of Finance. It has no direct link to our salary or wage increase. I think we should take this into consideration when we decide the X variable. I hope that the X variable should not be increased more than the actual wage increase of the workers. We have been talking about how to control and reduce medical cost. On the other hand, we should emphasise more on how to encourage the people to keep fit, to be healthy, and to give them some incentive so that they would want to keep fit. Maybe we should give them better interest rate for their Medisave accounts. The Minister for Finance mentioned just now that female civil servants would also enjoy an additional 1% contribution to their Medisave accounts and that they could make use of this benefit to pay for their family members' medical expenses. We have been asking in this Parliament for more than 20 years for medical benefits of female civil servants to be extended to their husband and children, but the Finance Minister has persistently rejected our plea. I feel that we are also working very hard for our people. We are contributing to the country. Therefore, the Minister for Finance should consider giving us equal pay for equal work.”
“When the lower income workers go to the outpatient clinics for further investigations such as an X-ray examination, they would have to pay cash for the treatment. Some of these workers who are in the lower income group cannot afford the outpatient treatment fees which they have to pay by cash and so they opt to be hospitalised so that they could use Medisave. I think that is not the right thing to do. We should review this and allow Medisave to be used for outpatient investigations such as X-rays, etc. Now, let me talk about the basic medical package. The White Paper has recommended the setting up of a specialist consultation committee. I hope that this committee would regularly review the package so that the items included in the package will not remain the same all the time, because medical science is advancing every day. On the one hand, we do not want people to waste money by having too excessive medical investigations. But there are some surgical operations which need to be done, eg, coronary heart disease and some operations which are not available in the C class beds. I hope that this could be reviewed so that in future years, such an operation can also be included in the basic medical package. We can accept the package as it is today but it has to be reviewed from time to time. The White Paper has also mentioned the exclusion of certain chronic diseases which will have to be treated on a long term basis from the package. Of course, this would be a burden on the patient as well as his family members. Being sick is something which is inevitable. We cannot talk only about economic benefits all the time. We have also to look after old people who are suffering from chronic diseases. If they are to stay in a traditional hospital, it will be difficult.”
“We hope that the Government would ensure that those people who make use of B2+, B2 and C class beds would feel that they are getting what they have paid for so that they have more confidence in the Government, and that the people would feel that they are well looked after by the Government when they fall sick. As we know, all the expenditure of the country is being borne by the people who have to pay taxes. So we should look after them when they are sick. I believe our people would understand that they have the responsibility to look after their own health. But as an employer, particularly the Government being the biggest employer in Singapore, when they are implementing this new medical plan, they should not let the people lose confidence in it. We must let the people know that our purpose is not to reduce cost but to control cost in the long term. We must convince our people that they should share their medical cost by paying part of the medical expenses. As far as the employer is concerned, medical cost is part of their labour cost. But we must not reduce the medical benefits in order to save costs. As it is, the Government has already announced that there will be a capping of 2% of the total payroll which can be tax deductible. This is a reasonable percentage at this point of time. But five years later, it may not be appropriate. We should let this capping stagnate at 2%. In this White Paper, it is mentioned that part of the benefits would be replaced. In fact, many people are worried. I hope that as the biggest employer, the Government would further explain to the people so that they could understand the whole concept. I also hope that we would allow Medisave to be used for outpatient treatment.”
“While I support the principle set out in this White Paper, I would like to raise some of my personal views and to reflect some of the views of the workers on the White Paper. I hope that when the Government is implementing the recommendations of the White Paper, they would emphasise more on how to educate the people so that the people will have more confidence in the Government. The most important thing now is to let the people have confidence in us. Then we will be able to implement our plans smoothly. First, demand and supply. As I have said, I agree with the Government's control on medical cost and, if necessary, to intervene directly in the health care sector when the market fails to keep health care cost down. But we must also ensure that the employers will not pass the buck and will not reduce the medical benefits that are being given to their employees. Because when we implement this plan, the important thing is to control health care cost. So we must try and retain as much as we can the medical benefits that are now being given to the employees. As for those who are about to retire, particularly those in the lower income group and daily-rated workers, we have to look after their medical needs. On the demand side, as a unionist and a labour MP, we feel that we should educate the workers so that they would adopt a correct attitude when making use of medical services. Just now my colleague also mentioned that there were very few unions requested the employers to increase medical benefits for their employees. In fact, many of them are reducing the benefits given to them. As far as workers are concerned, the majority of them are adopting a very proper and reasonable attitude.”
“Singapore has great achievements today because the people of Singapore and the Government have farsighted planning and they have always made preparations for eventualities. In recent years, the development in our medical services and health care has achieved very good results. Many developing countries such as Malaysia, Vietnam, Indonesia, Hong Kong, and even developed countries like Sweden and the United States have sent their experts to Singapore to study our health care and Medisave systems. Many Western countries are facing the problem of rising health care costs. In the United States, about 40 million people do not enjoy medical insurance. In Canada, the United Kingdom and Australia, on the surface, the people are enjoying very low medical care but, in actual fact, they have to wait for a very long time before they could receive treatment for a very simple problems, eg, for surgical operations on cataract or piles. I am very glad to read from the White Paper on Affordable Health Care published by the Government some of the good suggestions or recommendations they have made on controlling medical cost. This once again proves that the Singapore Government and the people are able to make preparation and to discuss problems before they surface. I support this attitude and approach and I also support the basic objectives and principles of the White Paper. The White Paper recommends that everybody looks after his own health care and be concerned over his own health. It is imminent to provide affordable and good health care for everybody while we let the market forces decide its cost with Government intervention only when necessary.”
“Employers should not use the proposal to substitute in-house health care schemes with higher voluntary Medisave payments and cut back on health care benefits presently being given. It would be ironic that a proposal to ensure affordable health care is misapplied by some black sheep employers to reduce the coverage given to employees. I am confident that the good rapport between employers and the unions will ensure that the proposals are equitably implemented. The White Paper has emphasised the importance of the promotion of personal reliance for one's health. Employers should provide opportunities, facilities and education for their employees to maintain and improve their health. Funds spent by employers on such schemes should not be subjected to a cap specified for tax-free medical benefits. Such expenditure is an investment both for the employer, who would enjoy a healthy and productive workforce, and for the employee, who would be able to stay in good health longer and reserve his Medisave funds for the inevitable ravages of old age. Sir, I would like to conclude by saying that the White Paper is a landmark document that is both comprehensive and farsighted. It boldly addresses issues and problems that will arise and proposes appropriate solutions. The next step is to obtain feedback from the ground and fine-tune the proposals. A good start has been made and I am confident that we will have a health care system that will serve us well into the next century. Sir, I support the motion. Mrs Yu-Foo Yee Shoon (Yuhua)( In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, why are we here to review our health care service? Why are we discussing affordable health care now? Many people have complained that the expenditure on medical services by our Government took up only 2.5% to 3.1% of our GDP.”
“In countries like the United States, the availability of insurance coverage has resulted in some hospitals admitting and discharging patients based on the extent of coverage, rather than on the medical care required. If a wider role is to be given to the private sector to provide health care without increasing costs, then it is inevitable that a greater extent of control would be required for the good of all Singaporeans. The recommendation that greater emphasis be placed on primary health care, especially in the training of doctors, would play a critical part in reducing the high costs incurred in the treatment in hospitals, whether public, subvented or private. A strong commitment towards personal responsibility for one's own health, coupled with a good primary health care system would result in a healthier population. This means that less people would be hospitalised, and therefore leading to greater savings for the individual, employers and the Government. Now, let me move on to my second area of concern, ie, sufficient medical coverage for employees. Sir, the entire objective and thrust of this White Paper is the need to ensure affordable health care. The White Paper has encouraged employers to make voluntary Medisave contributions in lieu of part of their traditional medical benefits in kind. The tax free nature of such contributions would be capped at 2% of total remuneration. I am of the view that such a cap must be constantly reviewed and not only be decreased but also should be increased, if necessary. The fear that too much payment into the Medisave account would result in unnecessary health care expenditure would not come true, if there is a controlled fee structure for treatment and procedures.”
“Where an informed choice is not possible, it is the role of the Government to monitor and guide market forces. In this respect, the proposal to control the balance billing for patients using Medisave in private sector hospitals is certainly welcome. The White Paper, however, is somewhat terse on the details as to how this control of balance billing is to be carried out. I would suggest that a scale of fees for treatments and procedures be set out. The present SMA Guideline on Fees can be a good starting point. Such a list of treatments and procedures should be sufficiently wide and extensive to ensure that common and necessary treatments are covered. If the list is generally accepted by medical practitioners and patients as a list of accepted and effective treatments, then doctors who depart from the list of treatments would have to explain the need for such departure to their patients, who can then make an informed decision whether to proceed with the treatment. Mr Speaker, Sir, I am somewhat concerned about the suggestion in the White Paper that we move to a mechanism of Diagnosis-Related Group to control the total amount a hospital can bill for a particular type of illness, regardless of the number of days a patient stays in the hospital or the type of tests or medication ordered for him. On the face of it, this sounds like a good proposal to curb unnecessary stays in hospital and unnecessary treatment. However, the proposal would tempt some doctors and private hospitals who may be less high-minded to carry out all sorts of treatment right up to the limit of the cap and then to discharge patients, whether or not they have recovered.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of the motion. The White Paper is an excellent example of the responsiveness of the Government to the issues that affect and concern Singaporeans. The White Paper is indeed timely as many of us have been concerned about the rising costs of basic amenities and services. Mr Speaker, Sir, many of the hon. Members of this House have spoken about the various general issues that have been examined in the White Paper. I would like to limit my comments and suggestions to two areas. These are: (a) The importance of ensuring that the reliance on competition and market forces to improve health care services is sufficiently balanced by Government intervention to keep costs down; and (b) The need to ensure that employers are encouraged to provide sufficient medical coverage for their employees without creating a mentality of over-use of limited resources. Let me address the first point. Ideally, it is not a good idea for intervention by way of capping medical fees. However, we do not live in an ideal world. Singaporeans who would carefully weigh and choose the options available in purchasing their daily necessities and even their homes are far less likely to be able to exercise informed choice when it comes to medical care. Most of us would spare no expense in obtaining what is perceived as the best medical care for ourselves and our loved ones. In our minds, there is a mystique about the doctor and, very often, we do not question his or her judgments and pronouncements. Our perception of what is best, or even what is good, is often not accurate when it comes to medical care. A lack of information and knowledge would result in Singaporeans spending substantial funds on cost ineffective treatments. An informed choice is often not possible.”
“Sir, the Singapore Sports Council, like the People's Association, is currently under the purview of the Ministry of Community Development. Unfortunately, the promotion of constituency sports in Singapore has not kept up with the progress made in the area of community development. In every constituency, there is at least one or more community centres with four to five full-time staff to administer the running of the activities of the CCMC, the YEC, WEC and the SCECs. The Residents Committees of two to three wards usually share the resources of a regional Community Development secretariat and tap the manpower of the full-time staff there to organise their activities. However, there is no such structure in place for the Singapore Sports Council. The promotion of constituency sports has been largely left to volunteers, even as the Government embarks on the decade long healthy lifestyle campaign. I believe that there is an urgent need for greater emphasis and focus on sports. Therefore, I would like to propose that the SSC consider assigning at least one full-time staff to two or three wards and this staff can operate from either the community centre or the MCD secretariat to help organise and promote sports at the constituency level. Also, I wonder if the Ministry of Information and the Arts may be a more appropriate body to promote the aims and activities of the Singapore Sports Council. After all, arts, culture and sports, all belong to a group of the finer things in life and this would help it to have better focus on sports.”
“Sir, previously, under the Ministry of Education's pre-school programme, there were 20 primary schools offering preparatory year Tamil. Now that the programme has been scrapped, Indian children are left with only four PCF, two People's Association and three private kindergartens which offer Tamil during curriculum time. These are located in Yishun, Toa Payoh, Sembawang, Telok Blangah, Bedok and Serangoon areas. The result of the lack of kindergartens offering Tamil is that the majority of Indian students do not receive adequate pre-primary preparation in their mother tongue, unlike children from other ethnic groups. Most Indian children will have to spend extra time and effort learning their mother tongue during the initial years in primary school resulting in less attention paid to other subjects like Mathematics. The Action Committee on Indian Education reported that Mathematics is the main source of the overall under-performance of Indians in the education system. And for children from disadvantaged home backgrounds, pre-primary education plays an important role in helping them to overcome the lack of intellectual stimulation and support received in their early years. Sir, I urge the Ministry to consider and to facilitate the introduction of Tamil in more People's Association kindergartens. While it is not practical to do so in every constituency, there should at least be one kindergarten offering Tamil in every GRC or its equivalent.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, there has been some apprehension and concern amongst some members of the Hindu community on the rationale to give partial ownership of the property to another party in return for professional, development and management costs and services. I understand that the Board has explored extensively various other options of 'going on its own' and the management and financial scenarios have been analysed in detail. This present proposal is the best of the options available, and it is in the long-term interest of the community. This joint venture agreement allows the Board to buy back from a party, DBS Land or others, the share of the property in a period of years on a 'first right of refusal basis', and/or at market prices. Sir, I would urge the Ministry to ensure that the Board has the resolve and not detract from the objective to buy back the shares, so that the land that once belonged to the pioneer Indian merchants before they became endowments of the Board, will continue to be part of the Hindu community in modern Singapore. Sir, with that, I support the Bill.”
“Therefore, the proposed amendment to section 5 of the Act to enlarge the composition of the Board and to allow re-appointments of members beyond two consecutive terms is appropriate. The proposed amendment to section 11 provides for the setting up of the office of Deputy Chairman and Finance Member and this would further help to streamline the Board's operation. The insertion of a new section 15B to empower the Board, inter alia, to mortgage its property to raise funds to re-develop its commercial properties in "Little India" is certainly welcome. I believe that this amendment is long overdue and, when passed, it would certainly become a significant milestone in the history of the Board which dates back to 1906 when it was a Muslim and Hindu Endowments Board. The concept of this development revolves around reinforcing the Indian heritage of the district by integrating the existing three blocks of 26 units of two-storey pre-war shophouses into a commercially viable complex, comprising retail, food and beverage and entertainment activities. The arcade may possibly be owned and developed by a joint-venture company to be set up comprising the Hindu Endowments Board and, possibly, DBS Land. The project is scheduled to be completed in 1994. With its strategic location and exciting concept, this development is poised to be the catalyst for the revitalisation of the "Little India" district. When completed, the arcade will provide visitors with a flavour of both North and South India, something which even Indian cities cannot offer.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of the amendments in the Hindu Endowments (Amendment) Bill. First, I declare my interest as a member of the Hindu Endowments Board. Sir, as Mr Chandra Das said, the Bill is timely. It would help to structure and improve the administration of the endowments and the projects of the Board. The Board caters to the needs of Hindus in Singapore who comprise Tamil, Malayalee, Telegu, Hindi, Bengali, Punjabi, Gujerati and other origins. The Board, through its activities, has become a focal point for the entire Hindu community in Singapore. In addition to the day-to-day running of the four temples administered by the Board, the Board, for a few years now, has embarked on a number of community services, in response to requests from the Hindu community in Singapore. These include medical counselling, welfare counselling, educational counselling and other educational programmes, and the publication of an informative newsletter called 'Singapore Hindu'. In fact, in the field of education, the Board pioneered the first English-Tamil kindergarten. This kindergarten caters not only to Hindus but also to non-Hindus. In view of the Ministry of Education's decision to remove Religious Studies from the school curriculum, the Board is embarking on a mass scale correspondence course on Hindu Studies for young Singaporean Hindus. Worthy projects like these require additional resources and there is an urgent need to have more members in the Board. Also, for such projects to succeed in the long term, there must be continuity of leadership. At the same time, as my colleague, Mr Chandra Das has pointed out, we should not allow for a life-long Chairman or Secretary of the Board.”
“Sir, in my interactions with the senior citizens during my Meet-the-people sessions, I find that many of the senior citizens feel that they are a neglected lot and these senior citizens have contributed significantly to the growth of Singapore. By extending the concession from 65 to 60, it will only apply to a very small group. I would like to ask the Ministry whether it would reconsider this position in the light of the Senior Citizens' Week held presently. Mr Chiam See Tong rose ---”
“Sir, in addition to what the Member for Chua Chu Kang has said, would the Ministry consider admitting the Merit Scholars or diploma holders to the universities straightaway instead of waiving the three-year working experience requirement for the Merit Scholars?”
“Sir, some years ago, the Faculty of Science and the Faculty of Arts in NUS conducted a "sandwich" honours programme for bright students, which was such that, instead of the usual four years, it was a 3-year programme. Can something similar be considered for the teaching profession, perhaps for the top students initially, so that this will shorten the time that they have to do the university course, ie, three years instead of four years?”