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 15 of 15.
“One is that whenever there is a problem, Singaporeans have a tendency to turn to the Government to solve it or arbitrate. The other is that whenever there is a national issue, the debate often polarises itself into the Government versus the people. Instead of the public being "anti" a particular law or policy, it becomes "anti" the Government or the State. Yet, there are other parties interested in the outcome of the debate, but they are slow to speak up. Even if they do not agree with the others, a good number do not speak up as they expect the Government to resolve or manage the problem. We need a more textured, layered civic society rather than a flat sheet with occasional wrinkles that get reflexively straightened out. Sir, the right to speak up is fundamental to an open society. However, this needs practice, or it will get rusty through neglect. Some have argued that this reluctance stems from fear of retribution. But if you look at the Forum pages of the newspapers each day and the columns written by local journalists, some are openly and fearlessly critical of Government policies. Obviously, the fear that there is a chance that they may be hit by a big stick has not stopped them from speaking their minds. I applaud these Singaporeans. Others should learn from them. As Franklin Roosevelt said, "The only thing we have to fear is fear itself." The Government has said that it is serious in wanting Singaporeans to speak up and be counted. We should take them at their word and hold them to it. The Government is ultimately ourselves and not an alien power over us. The choice thus really lies with us and no one else. To seek assurances from the Government that we will only be treated with kid gloves is to be asked to be treated like political adolescents.”
“In February this year, the Government launched the Remaking Singapore Committee. Its task was to relook the political, social and cultural aspect of Singapore. There has been a fair amount of cynicism since its launch. Its critics say that it is nothing more than a 2002 version of the 1990s Singapore 21 consultative process and the 1980s Agenda for Action advisory panels. They argue that the various "Beyond Cs" committees should go beyond talk to action. I agree that some actionable outcomes are desirable. But I feel that civic participation should not be measured by its immediate results. Its value is not just whether there has been useful feedback to the Government or whether suggestions have been acted upon by the Government. These are important. But what is critical is that we recognise that it is only through active citizen involvement that our people learn about the realities and constraints of living in a modern, complex and plural society. Resources are finite, priorities will shift and trade-offs are inevitable. These political skills of negotiation and compromise that are necessary to ensure a healthy democracy can only be learned if we give not just politicians but all Singaporeans the opportunity to be involved in matters that affect our lives and our country. I like to put my money where my mouth is. To my knowledge, Mr Steve Chia has not offered to serve in my subcommittee in the Remaking Singapore Committee. But now that I know he is keen, I am happy to invite him to serve in the focus group headed by Dr Warren Lee. I am doing this not because he is a politician, but because he is a fellow Singaporean. If we do not do this, then two characteristics of civil life in Singapore will continue.”
“It is the first link in the series by which we proceed towards a love to our country, and to mankind." I share this view. I believe that we should encourage self-organised communities. The active participation of Singaporeans in these communities can help our citizens develop a stronger sense of belonging to the larger Singapore community by forming strong bonds with their fellow citizens and participating in community life. One way to facilitate this is for the Government to revamp the Societies Act. It has served us well. But the issue today is whether it is relevant for the sort of society we want in the future. We want to foster a greater spirit of community initiative and responsibility. My suggestion is that we empower our citizens to form societies, clubs and associations by changing the Act to one of self-registration. Somewhat akin to the airport customs regime, which is self-declaratory, there will be a green zone and a red zone. Those societies, which are not religious, race or foreign-linked, will be automatically registered upon declaration. That is the green zone. Those that are religious, race or foreign-linked, need to go through the red zone. This does not necessarily mean that they will be prohibited but that certain checks may be needed to be carried out. If there is a false declaration, then those who are responsible for it will have to answer for it. This must be so. The greater the freedom, the greater the responsibility. Minimum regulation must entail maximum accountability. As George Bernard Shaw said, "Liberty means responsibility. That is why so many men dread it." If these changes were effected in the Act, it would mark a significant step towards greater citizen engagement and empowerment.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I support the Motion of Thanks to the President. I intend to take the former Speaker, Mr Tan Soo Khoon's suggestion to heart and state my individual views, crushed or not. In his Address, the President saw the road ahead as one in which there must be greater civic and political engagement. I fully support that. I am convinced that the only way for us to succeed as a society is that we recognise that we are a community and not just a place with 3.2 million individuals. Our future is bound to one another. However, all too often these days, we have Singaporeans who make demands on the Government as though they were impatient customers waiting for service in a crowded restaurant or rowdy spectators at a soccer game. Yet, I believe that for democratic government to be effective, people need to take their civic duties seriously. This means that we are more than just spectators or customers of the Government but we, as citizens of this country, have responsibilities not just to ourselves but to each other in the public sphere. Sir, this was why I was heartened to hear the President declare that the Government is committed towards a stronger civic society. He said that this was necessary if we want to foster a spirit of enterprise and risk taking among Singaporeans. He is right. But equally as important, if not more, is that a vibrant civic society helps to deepen the emotional attachment that Singaporeans feel towards our country. Some years ago, George Yeo argued that to develop the Singapore soul, we need to have a lively civic society. He quoted Edmund Burke who said that, ". to love that little platoon we belong to in society, is the first principle (the germ as it were) of public affections.”