Raymond Lim Siang Keat
Singapore
“Mr Chairman, Sir, we launched a slew of measures over the past three years to effect a major transformation to our land transport system. These cover not just big projects like our $60 billion investment to double our rail network but also smaller and equally important things like bus route information at every bus stop and parking guidan…”
“I think the better approach to help Singaporeans cope with the cost-of-living pressures is that which has been outlined by the Finance Minister. That is, instead of trying to bring specific costs down, it is better to give help on the income front.”
“From the experiences of these ongoing public education initiatives, CFC is in the midst of developing a set of guidelines on proper cycling behaviour on dedicated cycling paths. Apart from these efforts, TP has been giving customised talks in schools and at community-level events to provide tips on safe cycling.”
“Er Lee Bee Wah: Sir, I would like to thank the Minister for the comprehensive answer. I have four supplementary questions. Since the announcement of the NSE, I have been receiving overwhelming feedback from my residents from three condominium developments.”
“The Member's second question refers to the noise mitigation measures. LTA actually has considerable experience in doing these. This is not the first time that LTA, because of the compact nature of Singapore, has had to build a major road in close proximity to residential areas.”
“Yes, on a weekly basis. The second question is how much have been claimed to date. We started this on 18th December 2010. As at the end of last year 28th December, we have a total of about 169,000 transactions. We have refunded about $46,000. There was $300,000 overcharged and $46,000 refunded.”
The complete record
Every one of 704 lines we hold for Raymond Lim Siang Keat, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 13 of 15.
“At the broad level, the new penalties for incorrect trade description (clause 4) and enhanced cooperation with foreign customs authorities information sharing (clause 5) will engender confidence in existing and potential FTA partners. At the industry-level (clause 2) which enhances the regulation of textile exports, makes it possible for this sector to enjoy the benefits of liberalisation by a major trading partner. Under the US-Singapore Free Trade Agreement, the US was prepared to offer substantial tariff concessions to our textile industry, provided that we could ensure that these privileges would not be abused by non-Parties to the Agreement. The textile concessions are not insignificant given the political sensitivity of that sector within the US, especially in the southern states. Indeed, the estimated tariff savings to the local textile industry will amount to more than $130 million every year. Beyond the immediate benefits to the industry, there is potential for job creation as the industry expands. Mr Speaker, Sir, this Bill is, therefore, in Singapore's long term economic interests and a necessary corollary of our FTA trade strategy. It safeguards our position as a major international trading hub and enhances our reputation as a responsible FTA partner. By generating greater confidence in our trade enforcement regime, we can look forward to negotiating more liberal FTAs with our major trading partners. At this point, I would like to highlight that the domestic industries also have an important role in ensuring that the FTAs we negotiate are meaningful to our traders and businessmen. I would like to take this opportunity to commend the local textile industry for actively participating in consultations on the US-Singapore FTA.”
“These provisions enhance the enforcement of claims to preferential tariffs under our FTAs. The sharing of the information is not unqualified: the Director-General of Customs must be satisfied that the three conditions specified in clause 5 are met prior to the release of information. Finally, the Bill contains three administrative improvements to the RIEA. The first requires the provision of a security deposit to secure compliance with the RIEA or its regulation. The second allows appeals to the Minister in respect of any matter relating to the RIEA or its regulation. The third is a consequential amendment relating to powers to investigate offences under the new section 28A. Mr Speaker, Sir, the proposed amendments preserve the fundamental principles inherent in the design of the original RIEA. First, information sharing is subject to safeguards. We have specified three conditions for disclosure to filter out frivolous requests. In particular, we have included the confidentiality clause to safeguard the integrity of the information. The information exchange must also relate strictly to enforcement and investigative needs in all instances. Under no circumstances, should proprietory information on businesses be leaked to competitors. Second, the proposed amendments do not impede legitimate trade. There will be no fishing expeditions to enforce the law. Singapore Customs would only act when credible information has been assembled against the suspected errant traders. Checks would not be arbitrary nor burdensome. Compliance for traders and businesses would, therefore, not be onerous. Third, these amendments would benefit the business community.”
“This Bill creates one new provision relating to the sharing of information, two new substantive offences, and three improvements intended to streamline the administration of the RIEA. Let us first look at the new substantive offences. The first offence is found in clause 2, which permits the Minister to prohibit the export of certain goods, unless they meet certain conditions meant to ensure compliance with preferential tariff arrangements between Singapore and its FTA partners. These conditions will be specified in the regulations under the RIEA. Currently applicable to textiles and garments (the only scheduled goods for export under the RIEA), the conditions are aimed at ensuring the proper registration and documentation of these exports. The second new offence is found in clause 4 of the Bill. This clause, which adds a new section 28A to the RIEA, criminalises wrongful change of origin labels on all products traded through Singapore. When goods are transhipped through Singapore, they are repackaged at our warehouses. Errant traders could seize the opportunity to manipulate the goods' origin through false claims or labelling, with the aim of gaining preferential tariff treatment for entry into certain markets. The penalties for falsifying product information are commensurate with the other offences in the RIEA. For first offenders, this entails a maximum $100,000 fine or three times the value of the goods, or/and two years' jail. Subsequent offenders could suffer a maximum $200,000 fine or four times the value of the goods, or/and three years' jail. Let us now turn to the new provision on information sharing. Clause 5 of the Bill creates a new regime for the sharing of information, pursuant to a prescribed Agreement.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." Imperative for the Bill The Regulation of Imports and Exports Act (RIEA) requires all traders to apply for a permit to bring goods in and out of Singapore. The objective is to ensure that only legitimate trade passes through our port. The Act has stood us in good stead. Today, Singapore is renowned as a safe and efficient international trading hub. In recent years, we have strengthened economic links with major trading partners through the establishment of a network of free trade agreements (FTAs). These FTAs contain significant tariff concessions for goods that originate from Singapore. In the absence of an FTA, our trading partner would apply the same tariff to goods coming from all over the world. In ordinary circumstances, they would therefore not be concerned about where the goods were manufactured. With FTAs, and the preferential tariffs that are granted, there is a legitimate concern that non-qualifying goods may enter via the FTA provisions. The Bill before the House today seeks to address this issue. It marks a positive effort by Singapore to cooperate with our FTA partners to prevent origin circumvention activities that undermine our trade agreements. The Bill establishes the necessary legal and enforcement means to ensure that preferential tariff concessions will be limited strictly to Singapore goods. This will encourage our major trading partners to extend maximal concessions during future FTA negotiations and reviews of existing agreements. Key features of the Bill Mr Speaker, Sir, let me now turn to the key features of the Bill.”
“As I have said, it is a preliminary assessment. They have to weigh it and say yes, there is sufficient evidence, in order to proceed. But the actual merits of the case would have to be decided by the court. Question put, and agreed to. Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House. The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. - [Mr Raymond Lim Siang Keat]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. REGULATION OF IMPORTS AND EXPORTS (AMENDMENT) BILL Order for Second Reading read.”
“If you look at the Bill, we have empowered the panel, taking into consideration all it thinks is necessary in making the decision whether or not they will allow the matter to proceed to court. So they have the power to do that.”
“The panel does not decide on the merits of the case. It is a preliminary assessment whether or not they would endorse the application for an injunction. As I have said, this is to assure retailers that the cases that go up to the court have sufficient merit. It is a preliminary assessment. The actual merits of the case, as Mr Sin has correctly pointed out, is by the court. He is quite right.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I am very pleased that this particular Bill has generated such interest among Members. I think it bodes well for the Bill, as a key thrust of the Bill is to raise awareness of the issues involved in consumer protection. I have listened very carefully to all the suggestions. In particular, I would like to thank Members for the support that they have given to the Bill. But let me just put things in perspective to begin with. What is the underlying philosophy when we drafted this Bill? Basically two. One is that the principle of caveat emptor remains. That is the operating paradigm. What does it mean when we say "buyers beware"? It means that, as a society, we believe that the individual should take responsibility for his or her own action when he or she enters into a transaction. Two, we must all be aware that it is not just one interest here, but two interests to balance off. On the one hand, yes, we would like to give adequate protection for the small consumer not to be taken advantage of and enter into an unfair transaction. On the other hand, it is businesses and traders. There should be business certainty and not undue costs in complying with this proposed Act. So, let us bear that in mind, because this informs the Act and the drafting of the Act. Members have raised various issues. I will take them in a cluster, because quite a number of hon. Members have spoken.”
“This will empower consumers to seek civil remedies against errant traders, without having to rely on or wait for the Government to take action. Besides allowing for quick redress, this approach of self-reliance will encourage greater consumer responsibility and pro-activity. To minimise the need for litigation, MTI will work closely with CASE and business associations to educate consumers and traders, and encourage the development of alternative dispute resolution mechanisms. CASE's contributions Sir, MTI would like to place on record our appreciation of CASE for championing the enactment of this Bill to advance the consumer cause. In particular, we wish to acknowledge the tireless efforts of the past and present Presidents of CASE, including Dr Toh See Kiat, Dr Teo Ho Pin and, especially Mr Yeo Guat Kwang, for their contributions to this legislation. CASE has played a major role in the formulation of the Bill and has provided very useful inputs. It has also organised several seminars and dialogues to reach out to both traders and consumers to address concerns, as well as improve the understanding of this Act. Sir, our overall approach of 'caveat emptor' to consumer protection has served us well, and remains the best defence for consumers. However, despite the best care, consumers may still fall prey to unfair practices. The Consumer Protection (Fair Trading) Act will thus accord better protection to consumers. It will also benefit honest traders by weeding out the errant ones. This will help develop consumer sophistication and raise the standard of the retail sector. The outcome will be a fairer and more equitable marketplace, but without undue regulatory burden on businesses. Sir, I beg to move. Question proposed.”
“To minimise legal proceedings and costs, clause 8 of the Bill allows a specified body to offer a non-litigious alternative to an errant trader before the trader faces an injunction application in court. This will be in the form of a voluntary compliance agreement (VCA), whereby the trader agrees not to engage in an unfair practice. The trader can, however, choose not to enter into a VCA and, instead, face the injunction application in court. There have been many complaints against high-pressure sale tactics for time share and direct sales. As such, under clauses 11 and 20 of the Bill, regulations will be made to allow consumers to cancel time share and direct sales contracts within a 3-day cooling-off period, excluding Saturday, Sunday and public holidays. Balance between consumers and traders Sir, in drafting this Bill, we are mindful of the need to balance the interests of the consumers and traders. On the one hand, the Act must provide adequate safeguards for consumers and allow them legal recourse to claim against unfair practices. On the other hand, we do not want to over-regulate and add to business costs. Amongst traders, those who engage in unfair practices are a minority. It will be unfair to impose undue regulatory costs on the majority who conduct business ethically. This would also be bad for consumers, for such costs will in the end be passed back to them. We have also chosen not to criminalise unfair practices. This is because the more serious offences are already covered by existing legislation. There are no criminal sanctions in our proposed legislation. Instead the Bill will hold traders accountable for unfair practices by making them liable for civil restitution.”
“He should provide the consumer with all relevant and material information in order that the consumer can make an informed decision. Clause 6 of the Bill allows consumers aggrieved by unfair practices to obtain civil remedies from the trader before the court. They can do so within one year of the discovery of the unfair practice. As the Act is intended primarily to protect small consumers, the claim amount will be capped at $20,000. We expect most claims to be filed in the Small Claims Tribunal. In determining whether or not the trader has engaged in an unfair practice, the court will consider the reasonableness of the trader's actions in the circumstances surrounding the unfair practice. The court shall also have regard to whether or not the consumer made a reasonable effort to resolve the dispute with the trader, and to minimise any loss or damage resulting from the unfair practice. These provisions are in clauses 5 and 7 of the Bill. Some traders may persist in unconscionable practices which are detrimental to consumers and the reputation of our retail sector. Clause 9 of the Bill therefore provides for a District Court or a High Court, on the application of a specified body, to grant an injunction against a trader. CASE and the Singapore Tourism Board will be appointed as specified bodies under the Act to look after the interests of local consumers and tourists respectively. Before filing an injunction, the specified bodies must obtain the endorsement of an Injunction Proposals Review Panel. This Panel will review whether there is a public interest to be safeguarded through the injunction, and serve as an objective and independent check on the specified bodies.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." Sir, for some years now, the Consumers Association of Singapore (CASE), as well as several Members of this House, have advocated the enactment of a fair trading law. This is because while some particularly offensive practices like cheating or intimidation are prohibited under our criminal laws, many errant sales tactics, such as bait advertising, misrepresentation, and hard selling, are not clearly covered by any of our existing laws. In 2001, a joint private and public taskforce, co-led by CASE and MTI, was formed to study this issue. In 2002, the Government accepted the recommendation of the taskforce to enact a Fair Trading Act. Based on the taskforce's recommendation, my Ministry has drafted a Consumer Protection (Fair Trading) Bill, and conducted two rounds of public consultations in October last year and July this year. MTI also held dialogue sessions with various industry and business associations, and conducted with CASE about 10 educational seminars. We received many good suggestions and feedback to improve the draft Bill. These have been incorporated into the final Bill. We thank all those who have provided feedback for their useful inputs. Key Provisions of the Bill The Bill now before the House is principally designed to accord better protection to consumers by allowing them to seek civil redress against traders engaging in unfair practices. The primary focus is on small consumers who lack the expertise and resources to fend for themselves against unfair practices. Clause 4 of the Bill defines what constitutes an unfair practice, and 20 such examples are listed in the Second Schedule. The trader must not mislead the consumer.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I would give some figures so that we have a sense of our spending on R&D. Our gross expenditure on R&D as a percentage of GDP has actually gone up. In 1995, it was 1.15%. In 2002, it was 2.19%. What has actually dragged down our position in the Index, if you look at the breakdown, has really to do with our per capita public expenditure on primary and secondary school education. But this by itself is not a robust indication of the quality of our education. Despite our lower levels of education expenditure compared to some of the more developed countries, as Members all know, our secondary school students are consistently ranked among the best world-wide for Mathematics and Science achievements. Our education system is also well known for developing more fully the potential of students from less resources committed. BUSINESS AND FINANCIAL CENTRE (Launch) 14. Mdm Ho Geok Choo asked the Minister for Trade and Industry (a) with the launch of Singapore's Business and Financial Centre (BFC) already postponed twice and with weak investment sentiments in the BFC, what steps will the Government be taking to make BFC a reality; (b) what is his Ministry's reaction to the recent A T Kearny's FDI Survey, where the Confidence Index for Singapore was off the range of major global investors; and (c) what are the plans or steps being taken to improve this Confidence Index.”
“According to the report, one of the reasons why our ranking has gone down is that Government's spending on R&D has gone down, not only private sector investment in R&D. Would the Minister of State please give an explanation on that as well?”
“For instance, schools are now offering a greater diversity of education programmes that will give their students a strong multi-disciplinary foundation. To encourage life-long learning across all levels of society, we have set up the Workforce Development Agency to champion continuing education and training. We continue to scale up our R&D efforts and implement initiatives to improve the effectiveness of R&D and translate more scientific discoveries into commercial results. With the launching of Biopolis, the world's first integrated, purpose-built biomedical research complex, biomedical scientific talent and research will have a new focal point in Singapore. The Research Institutes are launching programmes and collaborative projects, with local universities as well as renowned international centres, to take advantage of pooled expertise and resources. For instance, the Institute of Microelectronics (IME) is collaborating with the Tokyo Institute of Technology, NUS and the Institute of High Performance Computing (IHPC) as part of the Nanoscience Initiative to develop the latest generation flash memory devices. Under the recently launched Growing Enterprises Technology Upgrading (GET-Up) programme, our Research Institutes are helping local companies upgrade their technological capabilities through seconding staff as technical advisors and joint development projects. With these efforts, we hope to improve our knowledge capabilities and close our gap with the more developed regions. This will however be a long-term undertaking. Mdm Halimah Yacob: Sir, first, I would like to thank the Minister of State for his very comprehensive reply.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, in the World Knowledge Competitiveness Index 2003, Singapore was ranked 90th out of 125 regions compared to 65th out of 90 regions last year. Our low ranking is due to two main reasons. First, our rating has been dragged down by cyclical factors, such as higher unemployment and low productivity due to the current economic slowdown. Second, two-thirds of the 35 new entrants in this year's Index are regions from developed countries such as Japan, Canada and Sweden, which typically have more established knowledge capabilities. Although Singapore's absolute rank has fallen from 65th to 90th, our relative rank has remained unchanged at the 72nd percentile. Nevertheless, the Index highlights the fact that competition occurs between regions rather than countries, and suggests that Singapore's infant R&D scene still has some way to grow before it can match the concentration of resources and talents in some of the mature centres. Our private sector expenditure on R&D and patent creation are lower when compared to the most competitive regions in the world. The ranking in the World Knowledge Competitiveness Index does not affect our efforts to move up the value chain in the manufacturing and services sectors. We are already doing many of the things that are necessary for Singapore to move up the value chain, which the Economic Review Committee had recommended. I will elaborate on our efforts to strengthen our knowledge capabilities in the two weak areas highlighted by the World Knowledge Competitiveness Index, namely, education and R&D. We place great emphasis on education and have been reforming our education system to equip our young with the relevant skills for a knowledge-based economy.”
“Already, initial business feedback is positive because they see us as united, responsive and committed to the need to be competitive. Bob Johnson, the President and CEO of Honeywell Aerospace, which has just announced its decision to set up a key international procurement office in Singapore, had this to say: "Singapore's highly skilled workforce, strategic location and world-class infrastructure are compelling reasons for Honeywell to have a significant presence here." He believes that the measures taken by the Singapore Government to help companies operating in Singapore will benefit them in the long term. Wong Ngit Liong, Managing Director of Venture Corporation Limited feels that the CPF reduction, coupled with continued efforts to improve capabilities and skills, would give a boost to attracting more businesses and investments to Singapore. So we are on the right track. If we work together as we have always done before, then Singapore will continue to hold its own in the First World. And we would have built a better future for ourselves and our children.”
“And just as we share our prosperity in good times - CPF Top-ups, New Singapore Shares and more HDB upgrading - so too must we collectively help shoulder the burden of adjustment of those dislocated during tough times. Thus, the Manpower Ministry, the National Trades Union Congress, the Community Development Councils and various other organisations are making common cause with those affected to help them make this transition. And we stand open and ready to consider views from all who proffer them, such as that by Straits Times' columnist, Chua Mui Hoong, who argued that we should look at revising our workers' assistance schemes to an employee- rather than an employer-based one. It is a valid point. We have taken some steps here by allowing the jobless to benefit from subsidised training under various schemes. And we will do more as we shift from a world where workers seek security in lifetime employment to that of lifelong employability. The Workforce Development Agency and the Home Ownership Plus Education programme (HOPE) are the latest initiatives in this direction. Hence, even as we focus on the big picture - to generate growth by embracing globalisation and liberalisation - it is vital that we pay heed to develop equally effective adjustment measures to facilitate the transition and cushion the worst of its effects for those displaced. For whilst the benefits of globalisation are often long term in nature, its adverse effects on those displaced are immediate. And unless we do this effectively, we would not have the national consensus necessary to successfully see through this economic transformation. That is the challenge. But I have every confidence that Singaporeans will rise to the occasion.”
“After all, China and India, for a long time, have much lower costs than us. But they were not a competitive challenge then. What has changed is that they are now opening up, part of WTO and in this globalised world, they are competing with everyone else, including Singapore, for the consumer and investor dollar. So, our costs cannot be seriously out of line with our competitors or we will simply be bypassed. But what is going to give us the sustainable edge must be the quality of our people. This is why we invest so heavily in education and continual skills upgrading. Despite the economic slowdown, education accounted for almost 22% of our total public expenditure in FY 2003 as against about 12.7%, on average, in the OECD countries. The OECD figures are 1999 figures, the latest I could find. The Skills Development Fund has increased from $88 million to $115 million in the last five years. In an age of rapid technological changes and porous borders, job security comes not from putting up the shutters and bolting the doors from the world, but from picking up new skills through lifelong learning. So Mr Low is wrong when he said that the Government has been asleep all this while, as the Government has been saying this all along. In fact, many of you would have heard this before, even ad nauseam, but I make no apologies for this, as it is the honest truth. Our job is not to shield workers from this reality but to empower them to deal with it and to assure them that they do not have to fight this battle on their own. We are a community and not a collection of individuals.”
“Consequently, there were blackouts in California until prices rose to prevent the lights from going off indefinitely. In short, Californians suffered both blackouts and higher prices. No jurisdiction, including Singapore, is immune to this if we distort the market. I know that, in times of economic stress, there is a great temptation to say that just this once, we make an exception to the principle that we will not distort the consumption of utilities. But you know a principle once breached is often impossible to resurrect. If we go for short-term palliative, we would end up with a long-term headache. So we should stick to our approach of helping people in need by subsidising the users directly - through utilities rebate and direct financial assistance, such as the Rent and Utilities Assistance Scheme (RUAS), rather than subsidising the service or product they consume. This ensures that the overall public interest is safeguarded by a competitive utilities market and at the same time caters to those in need. Mr Speaker, Sir, this leads me to my next point that we need to constantly review how best we can help those displaced by economic restructuring to make the transition successful. This is so because whilst it is true that labour markets work best when they are allowed to behave just like any other market, there is a huge difference in human terms. An unsold commodity is a nuisance and an unemployed worker is a tragedy. This is all the more so as we are now living in a different world. Globalisation has compressed space and accelerated time. It has become one world, whether we are ready or not. Some Members, for instance, are quite right to point out that the issue is not just about costs alone.”
“The two reviews in January and July this year have resulted in an average reduction of 4% for land rentals and 11% for ready-built rentals. For the industrial property market as a whole, prices of industrial space have slid about 25% since 2001, and rentals of industrial facilities have fallen approximately 13% over the same period. Going forward, the Government will also be looking into international benchmarking to ensure that industrial rents are competitive against alternative locations. So I agree with Members that we have to keep reviewing Government services, keep looking for more efficient ways of doing things so as to reduce costs, and trim charges wherever it is possible to do so while recovering costs. But what we should not do is for the Government to come in and subsidise certain public consumption items, such as utilities. I have no doubts whatsoever that there are people with genuine problems paying for their utilities because they have been retrenched or for some other reasons. I meet them every week at my Meet-the-People sessions. But the way to help them is by direct financial assistance rather than to provide for subsidised utility supplies for all consumers. If we do that, our utility companies cannot recover costs and will not make new investments in the system. Without new investments to match new demand, we run major risks of having to take turns to have our electricity blacked out. This, indeed, has been the experience of countries that subsidise in one way or another to keep electricity prices artificially low. In 2001, the price caps in California that forced their utility companies to sell at a low price to consumers brought the companies there to bankruptcies.”
“So we are rekindling this spirit of enterprise in our people. These young people from NTU give us hope for the future as they are practising, what I call, the Nike strategy towards life: "Just do it." Members have also argued that to keep costs competitive, it should not be confined to wage costs alone. I fully agree. It stands to reason that if we ask Singaporeans to take a cut in their CPF contribution rates, that they have a right to expect that other costs would be kept down too. The Government has been doing and will continue to do its part. We are getting rid of unnecessary licences and rules, putting them on-line and reducing Government fees and charges as a matter of priority. URA, for instance, recently announced significantly lower charges for businesses that wish to change their trades or alter their premises. The Registry of Companies and Businesses has reduced business registration fees by half. And HDB now allows entrepreneurs to start up small businesses in their own homes, thereby reducing start-up costs. Besides these ongoing efforts, the Government is seeking to keep industrial rents competitive through its industrial land sales programme. For greater flexibility, JTC introduced shorter-tenure land in 2002 to lower start-up costs. JTC also allows the conversion of existing fixed rate leases to floating rates with an escalation cap to moderate business costs and provide more certainty to business planning. Since 2001, JTC has offered rebates of up to 20%, amounting to savings of $1.1 billion for some 7,000 companies until December this year. JTC also conducts regular reviews of industrial rentals and prices to ensure that they match the prevailing market conditions.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, in this debate, Members have raised many valid issues and concerns. I would like to comment on some of them. On entrepreneurship, like Members, I was considerably cheered by the Prime Minister who said in his National Day Rally speech that, henceforth, the Government would set its default key at "Yes" in its dealings with business. I met an analyst, shortly after the National Day Rally speech, and he asked me, "What is the "big deal", because several people had been involved in the entrepreneurship movement and held this position for quite some time." But this is a "big deal" because Mr Goh Chok Tong is the Prime Minister. And as we all know when the Prime Minister makes a pronouncement, it has a wonderful effect of concentrating people's minds and speeding things up. But Members will be happy to know that the winds of change are already blowing. It may not be as fast or as hard as some would like it but it is beginning to shift old mindsets. Increasingly, our regulators are taking a pro-enterprise approach in their dealings with business. One out of two suggestions received by the Pro-Enterprise Panel is accepted. The Government takes cutting red tape so seriously that it has now set up a dedicated website to do this - www.cutredtape.gov.sg. I am optimistic about this entrepreneurship movement that we are embarking on. This is because societal attitudes towards entrepreneurs are changing. Recently, I was at the NTU's Technopreneurship Centre and I was told that close to half of the 49 graduates of its inaugural batch in the Technopreneurship and Innovation Programme had chosen to start up their own businesses. Many of these graduates had several job offers but they chose the road less travelled.”
“The issue here is whether or not they earn interest. I think that is the intent of the question. Did they earn interest? If they earn interest, can we use this interest to offset electricity tariffs? What I was saying is that when we net it all off, there is no interest that is earned - a 45-day deposit against a 45-day credit. The separate issue that Mr Chiam brought up is how can we use the security deposit. The real issue is that when you want the security deposit back, when you close the account, do you get it back? The answer is yes. CO-CURRICULAR ACTIVITIES (CCA) SYSTEM (Review) The following Question stood in the name of Mdm Ho Geok Choo - 8. To ask the Acting Minister for Education (a) how can his Ministry review its Co-Curricular Activities (CCA) system to include students' active involvement and participation in grassroots work as part of the CCA curriculum; and (b) how can his Ministry review its overall curriculum on holistic character development of its students through a more practical approach of linking project work to the community setting on a longer term period and for a greater number of students.”
“Yes, if you close the account, you get back the deposit. That is the issue.”
“I am actually puzzled with Mr Chiam's question. When you put money into an account, as you know, money is basically fungible ---”
“Let me explain it again to Mr Chiam. SP Services buys upfront the electricity that the consumers use. So, they are out of pocket. This is one part of the transaction. The other part is they have the deposits which they collect from the consumers. It gets offset. They do not make any money out of this. As I have said, there are $246 million in arrears and $148 million which they have collected.”
“I do not know the details of SP Services' practice with regard to the deposits. I think the intent of his Question was how much they have collected, which is $148 million. As I have said, this basically gets offset because it purchases the electricity without the consumers paying for it. The consumers get a credit of 45 days. For his information, only 75% of consumers pay on time and 25% actually pay after the 45 days. Right now, as at June 2003, the amount of arrears with domestic consumers is about $246 million. In other words, we have $246 million that is owing to SP Services and they have collected $148 million. So they do not make money on these deposits.”
“The schemes are actually pretty well publicised. All the chambers of commerce, for instance, are fully aware of these schemes; business associations, whether it be the Association of Small and Medium Enterprises, the chambers of commerce - we actually have satellite centres in some of these chambers of commerce to try to promote these schemes, so that they have a better understanding of the schemes. If the Member feels that more can be done, let us know and we will see how best to do so. RETRENCHED AND UNEMPLOYED HOME-OWNERS (Interim financial assistance schemes) 6. Ms Braema Mathiaparanam asked the Minister for Community Development and Sports if there are any interim financial assistance schemes available to the recently retrenched or unemployed home-owners to sustain them for a longer period as they use up their savings.”
“The short answer to the question whether or not there is too much administrative hassle in applying for a loan is that if that is the case, give me the details and we will look into them. Our aim is to facilitate. The fact of the matter is that there have been a lot of loans that have been approved. But if, at the margin, there are excessive rules that you think we can cut down, the answer is yes, we will look into them. On the point of the consultancy fees, there is still subsidy for the consultancy fees. As to the actual quantum, I do not have the details here, but I could give them to the hon. Member separately.”
“Actually that is not a difficult question. If I were to give you money, I would like to know what are your company's plans. Is the Government too stringent in approving applications under LEFS, LETAS and MLP? I think our philosophy must be that at the end of the day to use market mechanism to decide, because funds are finite and we will have to find a way to allocate the funds to those who are most deserving of help. The way we have gone around is basically to use financial players who are already in the industry, rather than for the Government to substitute itself for the financial players. So, in the case of LEFS, for instance, we have 17 participating financial institutions. How does the Government help? The Government helps by providing the credit line. The problem for SMEs is the perception by industry players that the risks are higher. By providing the credit line, the Government is actually lowering the risks for the financial player that is actually awarding a particular loan. So, the Government takes 80% of the risks and the financial industry player takes 20%. The other issue here is in terms of expertise. Does the particular financial institution understand the SME business well enough in order to assess it and give out the loan? Increasingly, the market will have players that specialise in SMEs financing. For instance, recently, OCBC Bank has announced that it is going into partnership with Hong Kong SME Loan, which specialises in cash-flow lending, which is important for SMEs. Hong Leong Finance is also positioning itself as a SME bank to help them. So, that must be the approach. The Government should not substitute itself for existing financial players, because that would be crowding them out.”
“LETAS was, right from the start, a co-funding scheme, and it was 50% by the Government and 50% by the company itself. This is to ensure commitment. As I have explained, the reason why we went up to 70% was for a particular period of time, which is promotional. The issue here is really to get SMEs to upgrade their capabilities. The other issue that the hon. Member brought up is really a matter of how best to help SMEs when it comes to cash-flow financing. That is the difficulty we have in an economic downturn - not just a question of upgrading capabilities, but how do we help them so that a liquidity problem does not turn into an insolvency problem. And here there is actually a whole range of schemes that has been launched by the Government and which is still in existence. As I said, LEFS is one scheme where you can actually tap on it for working capital. The Micro Loan Scheme actually helps very small companies to tide over difficult periods where they are tight in their cash flow. The Bridging Loan Programme, which was introduced during the SARS outbreak and which is still in operation, seeks again to help companies who are particularly badly affected during the SARS outbreak in terms of their cashflow requirements. So there is a whole range of schemes.”
“Sir, SPRING Singapore reviews and calibrates its various SME assistance schemes from time to time to ensure optimal use and effectiveness. The Government's co-funding share for LETAS was raised from 50% to 70% for first-time applicants in October 1999, and for the National Cost of Quality and Financial Advisor programmes in November 2001. The intent was to promote awareness of SMEs on LETAS and these two programmes. As the objective has since been met - for instance, the number of first-time applicants for LETAS doubled from 1,500 in FY 1999 to 3,000 in FY 2002 - the co-funding share for these categories has reverted to the normal 50% in July 2003. This will allow the pool of LETAS funds to support more SME upgrading and new programmes. Other than these modifications to LETAS, there are no changes to either the Local Enterprise Finance Scheme (LEFS) or the Micro Loan Programme. In fact, during this economic slowdown, LEFS has been enhanced twice, in November 2001 and June 2003, and both in terms of moving it up so that more medium enterprises, and down to the smaller companies, would qualify for LEFS. I wish to assure Dr Neo that the Government is aware of the importance of helping SMEs in these challenging times. We are in fact looking into expanding the Loan Insurance Scheme (LIS) and the Bridging Loan Programme to benefit more SMEs. Details will be announced when ready.”
“There are three key thrusts in the strategy going ahead. One is that we intend to expand our external ties and that is why we have the free trade agreements and the informal people networks that we have launched. This is one of the key thrusts, which is basically to have a globalised economy. The second thrust is to create an entrepreneurial economy and this is to create Singapore as a source of enterprise itself - a market for talents, ideas and capital. Finally, a diversified economy that, besides manufacturing, the other pillar of growth will be services and we will expand these services not just to strengthen our traditional areas of strength like logistics, finance or tourism but in new areas, such as healthcare, education and the creative industries. This is the broad strategy. How it actually shapes up, I think we will have to let the market decide, including the movement of labour and people into the different industries.”
“Size is not a criterion for the one-to-one consultation. It is open to all. For the US-Singapore FTA, we are working on a handbook, for instance, so that they can get all the information in a particular handbook, and there will be a website, going ahead. For the other FTAs which are under negotiation or which have been concluded, MTI is working very closely with SBF. So, SBF will be a key point of interface with businesses. TV AND RADIO (Use of dialects) 11. Mr Seng Han Thong asked the Minister for Information, Communications and the Arts (a) how effective has been the use of dialects on TV and radio in communication with the public during the SARS epidemic; and (b) what is the policy on the use of dialects on TV and radio in future emergencies where the audience is more conversant in dialects.”
“There would, of course, be a core resource group which will come from MTI, but it would include other agencies and private sector participation. Mr Leong Horn Kee asked if there are any outcome indicators to track the success of our entrepreneurship methods. We are watching a number of indicators, some of which include the number of start-ups, the number of companies that grow and eventually internationalise, and their contributions to the Singapore economy. However, the longer term impact of achieving the cultural shifts that I mentioned earlier will have to be measured in a more qualitative way. Ultimately, I hope to see entrepreneurship become a part of our society's DNA. Mr Leong has asked whether or not I should also be the SME Minister. Since taking up my appointment as the Minister in charge of Entrepreneurship, there have been numerous suggestions that I be patron of many things. If you read the Forum page, you will see that. But I have tremendous confidence in my Ministerial colleagues and the Ministry of Trade and Industry who are already looking after our SMEs. I have also been asked when the position of Minister in charge of Entrepreneurship will no longer be needed. As I said in the Budget debate, we will know that we have succeeded when Singaporeans look to the market, rather than the Government, to make their decisions. That is the final acid test.”
“Several Members have suggested the creation of a one-stop SME agency, including reviving the old idea of merging IE Singapore and SPRING Singapore. The Finance Minister has pointed out that SPRING Singapore is the designated SME agency. However, based on their feedback, MTI will see how best to enhance what SPRING is doing so as to increase the convenience and comprehensiveness of its service to SMEs and better coordinate with the other agencies like IE Singapore. But let us have realistic expectations here. There are crucial differences between EDB that targets the MNCs that it wants to bring in, and an SME agency that caters to about 100,000 firms with very diverse needs. Mr Leong has asked what are our next steps. There are three. First, we will look into implementing the ERC recommendations on entrepreneurship as quickly as possible. Second, we will take stock of the different schemes and the work done by the various agencies to see how best to position them to promote entrepreneurship. Third, to Mr Leong's question as to whether there will be private sector inputs, the answer is "Yes". Promoting entrepreneurship must be done in partnership with entrepreneurs as it is an iterative process where ideas must be validated, some discarded as they may not work out as intended, and new ones adopted. Some MPs have suggested setting up a statutory board to promote entrepreneurship. I feel that the last thing we want to promote entrepreneurship is to bureaucratise the process and that is why I think it is apt that the Minister in charge of Entrepreneurship is one without a Ministry. It gives a lot more flexibility to do things and not be weighed down by entrenched wisdom.”
“Our intent is to reach out to a larger group of companies by working with such multipliers. What is important is that through these various financial and upgrading programmes, many companies have been able to develop new business models to enhance their competitiveness. One such example is 77th Street, a trend-setter for hip streetwear in Singapore and Malaysia which was featured in yesterday's Straits Times. It has built a loyal following among the young and trendy, particularly aged between 14-28. Founded by Ms Elim Chew, who pounced upon a fashionwear niche which she saw emerging - 77th Street grew from a small retail outlet in Far East Plaza to 16 outlets and another 5 joint venture outlets in Malaysia. Mr Gan Kim Yong has suggested that we identify a few winners and groom them to be super-entrepreneurs, like Mr Sim Wong Hoo. The problem is that the Government has no superior knowledge to identify winners. Sim Wong Hoo was not identified by the Government. The market did. So the market is the best judge of potential winners. However, he is right that, given our limited resources, we should maximise them for the greatest impact on economic growth. Our starting point should be that companies at different stages of growth have different needs. Start-ups are different from companies that are ready and able to internationalise. Help will be available to companies at different stages of their growth, but the extent of help will be different. This approach is to be preferred. It makes no assumption of who the winners will be and, hence, excludes no one. It lets the market decide, while extending in a calibrated fashion to help the companies throughout their growth cycle.”
“I wish to assure Mr Arthur Fong and Dr Gan See Khem that our SME assistance schemes are periodically reviewed to ensure that they stay relevant. For example, the performance of LEFS and the loan terms and conditions are regularly reviewed by the LEFS Credit Committee, which comprises public and private sector members. Adjustments are made to the scheme, in the light of changing conditions, to meet the needs of SMEs. For example, the conditions were relaxed and the interest rates lowered during the Asian financial crisis at the last recession. The Micro-loan scheme was also started as a result of a review to better serve small enterprises. This explains why LEFS has been very popular with the number of successful applications doubling from 1,586 in 2001 to 3,632 last year. We have also developed new schemes to groom our growing enterprises. For example, the Growing Enterprises with Technology Upgrading Initiative (GET-Up) was launched last month. This scheme pools together resources and expertise from A*STAR, EDB, IE and SPRING to provide comprehensive assistance to enterpreneurs - covering innovations, technology development, capability upgrading and venturing overseas. GET-Up takes a proactive approach. Senior officers from the agencies visit the growing enterprises to understand their needs and offer customised assistance. They have visited about 100 companies in the first two months of the scheme. Another new programme that will be implemented in April is a $10 million Locally-based Enterprise Advancement Programme (LEAP). We have, in the past, provided assistance to MNCs and GLCs who have helped upgrade SMEs. LEAP will be used to encourage multipliers, such as industry associations and incubators to undertake worthwhile projects with clusters of companies.”
“(2) Private equity exchange. The Second Minister for Finance, Mr Lim Hng Kiang, said during the MOF's Committee of Supply that parties who find it viable will be allowed to operate one, if they meet MAS' regulatory requirements. I understand that some interested Singapore parties are looking into this. EDB and MAS will facilitate, where necessary. (3) Credit rating bureau. The Association of Banks in Singapore is currently looking into how best to do this. (4) Angel matching network. SPRING is actively exploring this with a few private entities to see how best to match the SMEs with angel investors. 5.15 pm (5) Modification to existing schemes. Mr Inderjit Singh has mentioned some of these, eg, Local Enterprise Financing Scheme (LEFS) and the Start-up Enterprise Development Scheme (SEEDS). SPRING is working with several venture capital companies to see how LEFS can be used for hybrid financing like convertible loans. SEEDS, which was started to help innovative start-ups with equity funding, will now be extended to non-technopreneurial companies. I turn now to the other issues raised by Members. Mr Leong Horn Kee has asked for details on the $500 million that the Government is putting into growing Singapore companies and helping them to venture abroad. The bulk or $399 million will go towards LEFS, the Micro-loan scheme and the Loan Insurance Scheme. 2,400 SMEs are expected to benefit from these schemes in FY 2003. $42 million will be allocated to the Local Enterprise Technical Assistance Scheme (LETAS) which will help some 3,000 SMEs upgrade their business capabilities and restructure their operations. The rest is for SEEDS and IE Singapore's activities to help Singapore-based companies internationalise.”
“The good news is, as Deputy Prime Minister Lee said, our civil service is moving in this direction, and more would be done. On finance, several Members, such as Mr Ng Ser Miang, Mr Inderjit Singh and Ms Penny Low, have highlighted that financing gaps in the market may hinder entrepreneurship. I agree. The Government has thus sought to improve access to funding for enterprises through facilitating or capitalising new financing avenues, and by sharing in the financing risks. Last September, for instance, the Government introduced the Loan Insurance Scheme, where it defrays part of the cost of the insurance premium. This is to help companies that would otherwise have difficulty in securing funding from VCs and commercial banks. Since its launch, more than $9 million worth of loans have been approved. But more will be done. MTI has accepted, in principle, the recommendations of the panel headed by Mr Inderjit Singh to improve the access to finance for entrepreneurs. We thank him for his work. Mr Inderjit Singh has highlighted some of the recommendations from that panel. Our underlying philosophy must be to work with private players to plug these gaps. What are some of these key recommendations? As I said, he has highlighted some, but let me take you through them. (1) SME Bank. Banks in Singapore are paying more attention to SME financing. This has been helped by MAS granting Hong Leong Finance an exemption from section 23 of the Finance Companies Act, enabling it to provide unsecured loans of up to 0.5% of its capital to customers. This exemption is important as it facilitates their lending to start-ups that are unable to provide collateral. More recently, OCBC has also adopted the lending methodology of Hong Kong's SME Loan that specialises in cash-flow financing.”
“They have been asked to consult private stakeholders as part of their review process. Mr Inderjit Singh and Mr Leong have suggested that there be sunset clauses in rules and regulations. The Government has accepted in spirit this recommendation, with a mandatory review of all rules and regulations by all Ministries every five years. However, we will look into how stronger discipline can be instilled in the process in a way that does not lead to excessive administrative burden. Mr Inderjit Singh has also proposed that every rule and regulation change be accompanied by a study of the cost impact on businesses. This is a worthwhile suggestion, as it will raise the awareness of civil servants on regulatory costs. We will see how best it can be implemented. As for what Dr John Chen said, I believe that he has hit the nail on its head. It is not just about excessive rules, but how they are administered by public servants. After all, there will always be rules. Even in a society of angels, there will be, say, a rule to decide on which side of the road to drive on. The issue is whether the angel will be hauled up if he makes a U-turn on a new road where the traffic signs are not yet up. I have suggested that to shift the mindset, the Government should set the default key at "Yes" rather than "No" in dealing with business. We will see how best this can be done in practice. We also need to move away from our top-down attitude towards the public to one that emphasises teamwork and participation. We are moving in that direction, with the ERC as the clearest example of partnership in setting the economic agenda. As always, more can be done, as bureaucracies tend to be hierarchical and more focused on process rather than the customer.”
“But this culture has to spread beyond our students to our adult population. The Phoenix Award was launched in 2000 to recognise entrepreneurs who had persevered and succeeded in spite of past failures, and to inspire others to emulate their fine example. It is encouraging that many past Phoenix Award nominees and winners, as well as other entrepreneurs, are now volunteering as mentors under the Phoenix Mentorship Programme. Along with activities run by other organisations, such as the Young Entrepreneurs Organisation, the Association for Small and Medium Enterprises, and the Entrepreneur's Resource Centre, such programmes provide a support network for entrepreneurs. To change a nation's culture will take time, as these are societal behaviours that are embedded in the psyche of the people. But a certain momentum has set in. There is clearly today a heightened awareness in the country on the need for entrepreneurship. The debate in this House bears testimony to this. What is important is that we actually walk the talk. By "we", I mean not just the Government and civil servants but every one, including parents, teachers, community leaders, business, workers and the media. On regulatory environment, I share the concerns of Members about excessive red tape. They have added to my store of horror stories that was already quite full after a year chairing the EISC. What is encouraging is that the Minister for Finance has made clear that the Government is very much seized with this issue. Besides the Pro-enterprise Panel, there is the Rules Review Panel. The latter is doing what Mr Inderjit Singh suggested, that is, reviewing rules and regulations. This is a comprehensive internal exercise where all public agencies are required to review their rules by the end of FY 2004.”
“I will address them in turn. As Mr Inderjit Singh, Dr John Chen and Mr Leong Horn Kee have emphasised, the critical factor is a culture where Singaporeans are quick to seize opportunities, take risks and make a difference. Education is vital here. Mr Leong asked for an update. NUS and NTU have both introduced entrepreneurship courses and exchange programmes to their curricula in collaboration with Stanford University and the University of Washington, respectively. About half of the 49 graduates from the inaugural batch of NTU's programme are now embarking on new start-ups. Entrepreneurship programmes are also taking off in the schools. Since March last year, some 4,000 students from over 70 schools have been trained under the BizWorld programme by more than 500 volunteers, including business people, public servants and teachers. We hope to increase the number of students trained under BizWorld to 10,000 by the end of this year. I recently heard about Mr Lin Xiang Qian, a former VJC student, who is now serving National Service. As Vice President of Esco Micro Pte Ltd, a company owned by his parents, Xiang Qian spearheaded the product development and exports of its bio-safety cabinets division. Last June, he became the world's youngest person to be granted full accreditation under the NSF International Biohazard Cabinets Field Certifier Accreditation Programme. I know it is a mouthful, but it is an important thing. He also brought in sales of $3.5 million for the company last year - all this in the same year that he sat for his A-Level examinations. I do not want to embarrass him by divulging his results, but he did very well in his A-Levels. It is stories like these that give us reasons to be optimistic.”
“In particular, the Korean IT promotion agency set up its first Southeast Asian centre in Singapore, while Japan's Mie prefecture set up its first overseas Mie Business and Innovation Centre here. The 13 new incubators that came to Singapore in 2002 are expected to create about 500 jobs and generate $55 million in value-added per year. These foreign start-ups that come to Singapore include companies such as SL Interactive, a Korean multi-player online game company. This company is planning to launch a 3-D online game this year. It is also developing games for mobile phones. Besides the high-tech incubators and start-ups, we are also attracting SME centres from around the world. In addition to the South Sumatra Information House opened earlier this month, we also expect to welcome new SME centres from India, China, Chile and Korea. In particular, the Zhejiang Centre will be the first-ever centre of its kind by China in Southeast Asia to help Chinese companies venture overseas. In September this year, Singapore will host the International Small Business Congress, which is internationally known as the SME event of the year. CEOs, entrepreneurs, bankers, venture capitalists and policymakers from all over the world will come here for the Congress. Japan alone will be sending 100 SME CEOs to attend. Such events help to underscore our status as an international enterprise hub. This, then, is the business environment that we are creating. All companies, big or small, must be assumed to have the potential to grow and globalise, and we will ensure that there is a level playing field for all to succeed. Members have brought up three important conditions that we have to get right to create such an entrepreneurial economy: (a) culture; (b) regulatory environment; and (c) finance.”
“It is one where large and small companies, local or foreign, co-exist, compete, interact and leverage on one another's strengths to scale greater heights. There will be feedback between industry and academia, and a wide spectrum of capital ready to commercialise ideas. However, we must be agnostic on nationality and size of firms, because they all contribute to economic growth and create jobs for Singaporeans. So, in answer to Dr Gan, as to whether we have a quota in which we fix in our minds a certain percentage should be for SMEs, a certain percentage for GLCs or MNCs, we do not have. We will promote the growth of all enterprises. We would like all of them to succeed, because they add to economic activity and growth, and jobs for Singaporeans. One example of the synergistic benefit of such an environment is Encore Technologies, which brought its Simputer, or Simple Computer, to Singapore to further develop and launch it in global markets as a "made-in-Singapore" hand-held computer. Today, from its Singapore base, Encore works with more than 60 big and small companies in Singapore and the world to develop applications for its Simputer. Besides grooming local companies, we are also attracting foreign SMEs to Singapore to build a vibrant enterprise sector. We want them to use Singapore as their base to innovate, develop products and explore opportunities in the region and beyond. We have already made some headway in this area, and Singapore is fast becoming a cosmopolitan enterprise hub. The number of foreign incubators increased from 38 in 2001 to 51 in 2002, including incubators from India, Japan, Korea and New Zealand.”
“Sir, I thank Members for their useful comments on promoting entrepreneurship and developing the SMEs. I agree with Mr Inderjit Singh that the Government has an important role to play in promoting entrepreneurship, but I think he and many Members of the House would agree with me that, ultimately, whether they succeed or not really depends on themselves. Let us take the example of Dr Diana Young, CEO of Mil-Com Aerospace Group. She had to mortgage her home and persisted even when the going was tough, until she clinched her first deal in India. Starting with six employees in 1994, the Mil-Com group of companies now serves as a one-stop centre for the aerospace industry, offering value-added services ranging from engineering and airport security technologies, to training for engineers and technicians. As a female in a male-dominated industry, her achievements are all the more remarkable. This is the kind of feisty and resilient spirit that marks a true entrepreneur. The Government should not be hand-holding our entrepreneurs, but neither should it stand in the way. Nor should it simply be folding up its arms and do nothing. It should and will help by creating the conditions that will make it possible for those with the drive, determination and gumption to succeed. Mr Inderjit Singh has said in his Budget speech that we must ensure that the business environment is friendly, not just to big firms or foreign SMEs, but also the small local firms. Dr Gan just now highlighted the importance of the SMEs for the economy. I fully agree with both of them. We will help our SMEs upgrade their capabilities, so that they can better compete in the marketplace. Ms Penny Low's vision of a vibrant enterprise hub is one that we share and have been actively nurturing.”
“While the main beneficiaries of the SCP have been ASEAN countries, our geographical outreach has extended to developing countries in Africa, Latin America, Middle East, South Pacific and the Caribbean. She asked what is the figure that we have contributed. Just to give a sense of it, in 2001, Singapore contributed $260 million towards international development assistance. If we use certain benchmark, for instance, the median official development assistance (ODA), for the OECD countries, is 0.31% of gross national income. Singapore's figure comes up to 0.17% of our gross national income. This compares favourably with the United States, which is 0.11%. Her last question: would we provide humanitarian aid to Iraq if there is a war? The answer is yes. Singapore is likely to contribute in the same way as we did for Afghanistan in the form of technical assistance and humanitarian aid. I think what is important here is how, as a community, Government and the people, we respond to sufferings elsewhere. And I think Singapore has shown through our spontaneous help in the case of Afghanistan and Bali that we have a heart. I am sure that if there is a war in Iraq, the same humanitarian hand will be extended.”
“I think we will continue to do what we have always done, and that is, we have always taken the approach where we are guided by principles of international law, by compliance with the United Nations Charter and the United Nations Security Council's resolutions. I think it is perhaps reflecting our consistent and principled approach that Singapore is taken seriously in the international community. It is really out of proportion to our size. And perhaps again reflecting this, Singapore is increasingly being represented in international bodies. In the UN, we have Under Secretary Dilip Nair who heads the UN Internal Audit Office and Miss Noeleen Heyzer, the well-respected Head of the UN Development Fund for Women. We now have a candidate, Mrs Anamah Tan, for the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women, the treaty body that oversees compliance with the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, to which Singapore is a party. This is a prestigious body and seats are hotly contested. If we win, it will boost our standing at the United Nations. Mdm Halimah asked three questions. First, what is our policy on foreign aid? Like her, I share the view that Singapore should play an active part in helping developing countries. She will be pleased to know that we have done so under the Singapore Cooperation Programme (SCP), which Dr Warren Lee mentioned earlier. But unlike traditional donor aid programmes, Singapore believes that it can best contribute by helping developing countries build up its human resource and organisational capacities that are critical to sustain growth. Since its inception in 1992, over 23,000 participants from 150 countries have participated in short-term training courses and study visits under the SCP.”
“Madam, I shall be brief, not because brevity is necessarily the soul of wit, but when you are the tail-end speaker for your Ministry, time tends to be compressed. First, let me take the questions of Mr Sin and Dr Lee. The answer is yes. There is indeed life after the Security Council. The Security Council, arguably, is the most important body in the UN, but many issues that are of interest to member states are actually taken outside the UN Security Council, in the General Assembly and other specialised bodies of the United Nations. Singapore has always actively participated in the UN, even before we were in the Security Council, and we intend to continue to do so. We do not intend to fade away. In the last four years, for instance, even before we entered the UN Security Council, Singapore had participated in a series of UN summits and world conferences on many different issues - issues as diverse as women, children, HIV, AIDS and, more recently, last year, on sustainable development. We will continue to do so. Dr Lee asked about our engagement with other international organisations, like the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO). In the case of ICAO, we have sought to be elected to its governing council. On how do we support the peaceful settlement of disputes, I think the best way to do that is by example. A good example is on the question of Pedra Branca. We have taken the initiative to refer the matter to the International Court of Justice. Mr Zainul asked how do we maintain credibility in the international community.”