S. Chandra Das
Singapore
“There is certainly a limit as to what volunteers can do. These organisations can do with additional funding from the Government. With additional funding, I believe the self-help groups can do much more. Sir, I would like to ask the Minister about the various support and assistance given to the self-help groups in Singapore.”
“Sir, ASEAN has come a long way since its founding. No one can deny that ASEAN as a regional grouping has been a great success. Not only is ASEAN strong in terms of regional grouping, it is also expanding. Vietnam has joined ASEAN in 1995. Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar are expected to join ASEAN before the end of the century.”
“The public will be able to know the actual expenditure incurred. The operators on their part must charge realistic fares, and any increase should be reasonable and commensurate with the level of service provided. In this way, the public will be satisfied and will not feel short-changed.”
“Sir, I would like to ask the Parliamentary Secretary what other measures are being considered by his Ministry. Assoc. Prof. Ho Peng Kee: Sir, other possible measures would include confiscating the handphone, increasing the number of demerit points or, if necessary, making phone driving a specific offence.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head V of the Main Estimates be reduced by $10 in respect of Code VD 1500. Sir, there are many reasons for the success of Singapore as it stands today. The contribution of the Singapore civil service is an area which should not be underestimated.”
“Sir, I hope the media does not dub RAdm Teo as also "Mr No" from tomorrow. On that note, I withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The sum of $518,536,590 for Head N ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. The sum of $769,080,900 for Head N ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. Head L -”
The complete record
Every one of 554 lines we hold for S. Chandra Das, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 2 of 12.
“Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head O of the Main Estimates be reduced by $10 in respect of Code OA 1500. Sir, in view of our regionalisation efforts and to build an external economy, I strongly believe that our overseas missions have an added role to play. The Prime Minister in his speeches and travels has identified China, Vietnam, Myanmar and India as four countries that we should concentrate on. Also, the Government will carefully invest a portion of our reserves in these countries. Sir, the business community certainly welcomes the Government's move and will not be found lacking. In connection with the above, I would like to ask the Minister for Foreign Affairs what plans his Ministry has to strengthen and widen our representation in these countries.”
“Let us go to this region to do business to help ourselves, our hosts and, at the same time, be sensitive to their feelings and needs. In this way, we will be more than welcome by our hosts. I hope Singaporeans going abroad will pay some special attention to this. This problem is now at its infancy and we can easily correct our international image, otherwise it is only a matter of time before we are branded as the "Ugly Singaporeans" by our hosts. In conclusion, Sir, let me congratulate the Government for making Singapore what it is today. To continue with the success, every Singaporean has a part to play. If all Singaporeans put their shoulders to the wheel, then as the President said, "we will thrive and prosper." Sir, I support the motion standing in the name of Mr Loh Meng See.”
“We will promote a regional outlook among Singaporeans, and remove obstacles that hinder our entrepreneurs and companies from going offshore." In the last two years, the Government has spared no effort to prod, encourage and assist Singaporeans and Singapore companies to venture abroad. Singaporeans have responded well to the call to develop an external economy. Not a day passes by without a deal being struck either in China, Malaysia, Indonesia, India, Myanmar, Philippines, Cambodia, Vietnam, USSR and so on by Singaporeans and Singapore companies. I am confident that with the extent of strong moral and financial support from the Government, we will succeed in our offshore activities. The business community is extremely grateful for the personal efforts of the Prime Minister, Senior Minister, Deputy Prime Minister and other Cabinet Ministers. Today, it is very common for business delegations to accompany Ministers on their overseas visits. Not many years ago, this would not have been possible. With Singaporeans running all over the region, I would like to sound a word of caution. While travelling abroad, it is extremely easy to identify Singaporeans and we are beginning to leave quite a reputation behind, both good and bad. We have read in the newspapers that Singaporeans speed in Johor Baru, throw things in other countries and complain about everything under the sun in China and India. Surely, Sir, things are not perfect in these countries as they are in Singapore. If they were as good as it were in Singapore, I am afraid we will have little or no place in these countries. So let us learn to work there within their system and complain less. Constant comparison with Singapore may not do us much good. Let others do the comparing and praising of Singapore.”
“This will thus enable the retiree to maintain a higher standard of living. I am glad that the Government has stated, as Dr Arthur Beng has also mentioned, this issue will be thoroughly discussed in the next few months before any decision is taken. Hence, here is an opportunity for all interested parties, be they employers, unions, individuals, professionals, to give their inputs for consideration. I for one would like to see a graduated increase based on age, ie, the maximum to be imposed for those joining the labour market and also possibly workers below the age of 45. There will be no adjustment problems for this group. A graduated increase should be considered for those above 45. By doing this, the older workers who will be retiring early will not find the change a serious burden. Currently, the Minimum Sum can be entirely in the form of a fixed asset, which is a house. In the long run, this may pose a problem as the only way to raise cash would be to sell the house. If the house is sold, this would cause other problems. The Minimum Sum therefore, I believe, should be a combination of both fixed assets and cash. Again, Sir, this ratio of fixed assets and cash should also be graduated, that is, a lesser amount of cash being retained and it must be weighted in favour of people over 45, particularly those likely to retire very early. This graduated approach would certainly soften any hardship likely to be faced by those retiring early. Sir, I hope the Government would give some consideration to the above suggestion. Sir, in his Speech, the President stated, and I quote: "In economics, one major thrust is to venture abroad, to develop trade and investment links with neighbouring countries, and tap the vitality and opportunities in a fast-growing region.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to join my other PAP colleagues in thanking the President for his Address to this House on Monday, 10th January. Sir, very rightly he has stated that the Government's focus is on long term issues, and I quote him, "to position ourselves for the next stage of nation building." Sir, while this is extremely important, I would also urge the Government to pay sufficient attention to short term problems and unhappiness. There is growing concern on the increased cost of living, cost of doing business and income disparity. These current problems need equal attention as well as the longer term problems like those connected with an ageing population. Sir, a couple of my other colleagues have already mentioned that there is widespread unhappiness over the changes in the medical benefits scheme, particularly for the civil servants. I believe there seems to be a gap between the policy and implementation. Circulars have been issued, I am told, and also have been withdrawn. There is utter confusion. I would urge the Government to pay equal attention to some of these current problems which I have mentioned. Sir, specifically, I would like to touch on two areas in the President's Address. First, I would like to refer to the CPF Minimum Sum Scheme. The CPF is to cater for the needs of Singaporeans after they have retired. Hence, we must constantly review and improve the scheme to meet with the original aims of CPF. With retirement age being increased and the longer life expectancy of Singaporeans, I welcome the Government's move to increase the existing Minimum Sum. By increasing the Minimum Sum, it will ensure that the retiree will be able to withdraw higher sums each month, and maybe over a longer period.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I join other Members in this House to support the salary revision announced by the Deputy Prime Minister. I would like to suggest to the Deputy Prime Minister that he discloses what the gross salary would be with this new revision.”
“You were supposed to build the flats. Mr Chiam See Tong: In any event, the general public has never really believed that the HDB flats are subsidised by the Government.”
“One suggestion I would like to offer to the Minister for consideration is that the Ministry try to organise some overseas training programmes for selected grassroots leaders. These would enable our grassroots leaders to have a better understanding of what is happening in our neighbouring countries.”
“Sir, in speaking on this amendment, I would like to touch on the contributions made by grassroots leaders and discuss how we can give greater recognition to this group of hardworking volunteers. Sir, I am told that in 1992, the various grassroots organisations organised over 18,000 projects which benefited about 1.72 million Singaporeans. On a monthly average, each grassroots leader spends about 20 hours on planning, discussing and organising various activities. These activities include cultural programmes, sports and fitness programmes, overseas and local tours, social gatherings, block visits, tuition programmes, fund-raising efforts, legal counselling, and others. Sir, these programmes serve to bring Singaporeans from all walks of life together. They provide an avenue for Singaporeans to interact with one another. Indeed, Sir, as I mentioned earlier, more than 1.72 million residents have benefited from the activities organised by grassroots leaders. Sir, our grassroots leaders play an instrumental part in maintaining the social fabric of Singapore. These leaders are all volunteers and do their work out of their desire to do good, often at the expense of time they could have spent for themselves or with their families. Sir, I feel we must ask ourselves as to the kind of recognition that can be given to such dedicated volunteers. I must state very firmly here that they do not expect to be rewarded. But, at the same time, their contributions should not be taken for granted. I would like to suggest to the Minister that he looks at ways and means to give greater recognition to our grassroots leaders. He might wish to consider setting up a committee like RECORD which was done for the reservists, and examine this issue more closely.”
“Sir, the subject of public assistance for the low income families is one that consistently touches our hearts and minds. Whilst this topic has been discussed time and again, I think it is important for us to review the position once too often. Mr Wong Kan Seng, the then Minister for Community Development, said in this House in March 1987, that the single largest provider of help to the poor really is the Government through its public assistance programmes and various counselling and service programmes. Sir, this surely must be the case. The fact that we have such a small number of people receiving public assistance should be a source of pride for all of us. It means that such families go to the Government as the last resort for assistance. Many who need assistance are helped by relatives, friends, welfare organisations and well-wishers. It also means our people have not developed a crutch mentality. Nevertheless, Sir, those who really need public assistance should be properly taken care of. What I would like to ask the Minister is whether there have been any improvements in our public assistance programmes. Has our level of assistance kept up with the rising cost of living and rising expectations? Have any new programmes been implemented to further help the lower income in our midst? With the impending introduction of the GST, the impact on the lower income will be even greater. In view of this, I would urge the Minister to re-examine the adequacy of our public assistance programme. Sir, in asking for a review and re-examination of our public assistance scheme, let me make it clear that I am not advocating for more welfare or handouts. All I am asking is whether our current public assistance programmes are adequate and appropriate to present day needs.”
“Sir, I can recount a number of other stories but this one example would suffice. In Ho Chi Minh City, I am reliably told that there are about 100 Singaporeans living there. 75% belongs to this Phnom Penh type which I have just illustrated. The balance 25% would be representatives from MNCs, GLCs and large companies. Mr Speaker, Sir, the point I want to make is that there is a large talent pool of Singaporean entrepreneurs available. The fact that we have neglected or ignored them does not mean we do not have local entrepreneurs. We also have not been able to make the distinction between good managers and entrepreneurs. Our managers, the good ones, have been recognised and rewarded, and rightly so. Some good managers have even passed off as good entrepreneurs. Sir, I would like to appeal to the Government and related Government agencies like EDB and TDB to pay some attention to these young Singaporeans who have ventured on their own even before the call to go regional. These young Singaporeans, and I have met quite a few recently, are very proud Singaporeans who want to succeed. Sir, I believe they need encouragement from the officialdom, advice, information and, if necessary, in cases some form of seed money. More importantly, Sir, they would need recognition that such people do exist. 4.31 pm”
“Mr Speaker, I rise in support of the Budget Statement. I wish to congratulate the Finance Minister for his generosity. Sir, I would like to join in the debate at this point of time and would confine my remarks to one particular topic. Sir, the need to have an external economy to complement the domestic economy need not be over-emphasized. If we do not go regional and global, we will surely remain on the ground floor and miss taking off with the other NIEs. Sir, all the incentives and encouragement currently given are directed at the MNCs, GLCs and the larger Singapore companies. This direction is correct and well-placed. The MNCs, larger corporations and the GLCs have the finance, manpower and connections to embark on such regional and global activities. Every assistance and encouragement must be given to them in order for them to succeed. Sir, I am a little concerned with our approach to the smaller companies and individuals. In my recent travels to Kampuchea, Myanmar and Vietnam, I met with a large number of Singapore businessmen. By Singapore standards, they are very small indeed. They are largely in trading, manufacturing and leisure business. These are people who work for themselves and have ventured overseas because of lack of opportunities in Singapore. A common feature is that the majority of them do not have university degrees and a number of them are not English educated. Furthermore, this group is also a very young group. One person I met in Phnom Penh told me that if he works his guts out in Singapore, he may be able to make about $3,000 to $5,000 per month. But here in Phnom Penh, he makes many times over operating a manufacturing enterprise. He spends nine months of the year in Phnom Penh.”
“Finally, there will also be a good flow of rental income from the property for the Hindu Endowments Board. Currently, I am told, Sir, that the Board collects around $16,000 per annum in rental income. However, with proper redevelopment, I am informed, that this can be easily raised to $2 million per annum. With this income from property development, the Board will be better placed to cater for the religious, educational and cultural needs of the Singaporean Hindus. Sir, whilst encouraging the Board to go into joint ventures with property developers, the Board, I feel, must exercise extreme care and caution in the selection of joint venture partners. Consideration must be purely not on commercial basis as there are various other factors to be taken into account. After all, the Hindu Endowments Board is not a pure commercial organisation. Sir, I support the Bill.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of the Hindu Endowments (Amendment) Bill. Sir, the amendments being made now are extremely timely and will certainly go a long way to help the Hindu Endowments Board to function more effectively. Firstly, Sir, the removal of restriction that members of the management committee of an endowment shall not be appointed for more than two consecutive terms is indeed an improvement. As the Minister rightly pointed out, the Hindu community in Singapore is small, and this restriction will reduce the talent pool available. This new provision will enable more qualified people to continue to serve the various endowments. Sir, having said this, I would like to point out to the Minister that this should not be used as an excuse for not bringing in new people into the various boards. The new provision must also not be used to give life-long membership to existing members. A proper balance ought to be struck. While deserving members should continue to serve longer periods, at the same time new members should be inducted. Sir, the second amendment which gives the Board power to mortgage its property, to raise funds, to redevelop its property in joint ventures is definitely a step in the right direction. This amendment would allow the Board access to external funding and expertise. This provision will enable the Board to make use of its assets which are currently nearly idle. With this amendment, the Board can go ahead with the redevelopment of its property in "Little India" which will really involve the refurbishment of property belonging to the Board according to URA guidelines, allow for a more comprehensive development of shopping units, restaurants and a food court, so that the character of "Little India" could be retained.”
“Sir, apart from the Aedes mosquito and dengue fever, is there also an increase in the number of cases of malaria? If this is so, could the Minister inform the House what preventive steps are being taken to curtail the spread of malaria?”
“Sir, since the Minister of State welcomes my suggestion, I think the Ministry should work harder to get more staff. On that note, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head P be reduced by $10 in respect of Code PE 1500 of the Main Estimates. Sir, I agree with the Government's philosophy that there is need for preventive measures to help one remain healthy. And what better way to do this than to start at the school level. Sir, I would like to point out to this House that there are far too few doctors looking after the School Health Service. I am informed that there are four doctors at the clinics and 11 doctors in the field taking care of 450,000 pupils in our 350 primary, secondary, pre-university and junior colleges. These doctors are ably assisted by 30 staff nurses and 18 assistant nurses. Only primary one and secondary four students are screened by doctors. Screening at primary six is done by nurses. Is this because of shortage of doctors? And what about the quality of screening for these children at primary six? Is the Ministry satisfied with this level of screening? Are other programmes being sacrificed because of lack of doctors? Sir, I would urge the Minister to use his good offices to persuade the Finance Minister not to apply the zero-growth in the case of School Health Service.”
“Sir, I would like to refer to the Public Assistance Scheme administered by the Ministry of Community Development. Sir, I am wondering whether the standards used for the means test are extremely stringent. When cases are referred to MCD, they are usually interviewed by officers for public assistance. Invariably, two out of three cases, after the interview they will come back and say that they do not want public assistance. Some of these cases actually need public assistance. I am wondering whether the Minister is prepared to review the existing administration of the public assistance scheme.”
“For all this, what do they get? Ang Peng Siong now works in a club and advertises for Fab. Sir, I think the best of our sportsmen with talent must be nurtured and looked after. Something is being done for our footballers right now, and I think the FAS should be congratulated, and more will be done in the near future. Government, particularly the Ministry of Defence, together with private sector companies could help to nurture our talent in sports by guaranteeing them a certain amount of livelihood and at the same time allowing them to continue to excel in the sports of their choice. I hope, Sir, the Ministry of Community Development and the real Minister for Sports could look into this aspect!”
“Sir, as for my first cut, I will just direct one question to the Minister, that is, what is the Government doing to enhance sports performance in general? In particular, with the forthcoming Southeast Asian Games to be staged in Singapore in 1993, are there any special programmes to improve our haul of golds during these games? Sir, I move on to my next cut which is Recognition for National Sportsmen. Singapore had in the 50s and 60s produced world-class sportsmen. To name a few, people like Wong Peng Soon in badminton, Ong Poh Lim (badminton), Ismail Marjan (badminton), Tan Howe Liang (weightlifting), Neo Chwee Kok (swimming). In the 80s and 90s one world-class sportsman whom we have produced is possibly Mr Ang Peng Siong. And no other name comes to my mind. Why is this so, especially when we have better and more modern facilities now than in the 50s and 60s? The reason, I believe, may be that talent in sports is not given its due recognition in Singapore. Sportsmen give the best part of their career at the age of, say, from 16, and in the case of swimmers even younger. It goes up from 16 to 24. And then they fade away with no guarantee of a secure livelihood. And of course there are other pressures. Other talent, be it academic or art, I believe, has been looked after reasonably well. But this is not the case for sports. Sir, if we want our standards to improve, then I believe something should be done. Not everything should be done by the Government, but I believe Government can lead the way and this can be strongly followed by the private sector. Sir, when Ang Peng Siong won a gold medal, it brought joy and pride to all Singaporeans, especially when the Majullah Singapura was played. When Fandi scores a goal, 50,000 Singaporeans roared in ecstasy.”
“Sir, I have two cuts. Can I take them together?”
“Sir, the rebate for the December 1992 conservancy charge for 1-, 2- and 3-roomers is most welcome. But, at the same time, it must not send the wrong signals - it must not be the beginning of free "give-aways". Next, Sir, I would like to touch on CPF. The 1/2% point increase is reasonable, especially taken in the context of the total wage bill. On the issue of part-time workers, it may be necessary for the Government to have another look at the CPF contributions, both by employer and employees. Many, especially women, refrain from part-time work, because after CPF deductions, the take-home pay is really not attractive. Maybe one suggestion that is worthwhile considering is to exempt the employee from contributing to CPF. This, in fact, would increase the take-home pay. In any case, Sir, some form of adjustments must be made, either a reduction in the percentage or the total amount. The employer's contribution, I believe, can stay, especially in this tight labour market. Any adjustment of CPF contribution of part-time workers will only improve the situation and encourage part-time workers, especially the women in Singapore, to get into the labour force. Finally, Sir, in my view, the 1% restoration of the hotel cess could have been delayed to a more favourable time. As stated in this House, the economy is expected to grow slowly and the hotel industry is no exception. Frankly, I see no compelling reason to restore the cess back to 4%. It just adds on to business costs and to the surplus of the Singapore Tourist Promotion Board. VISIT OF HE MR YURY F. YAROV, DEPUTY CHAIRMAN OF THE SUPREME SOVIET OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION, AND HIS DELEGATION (Presence in Gallery)”
“This is really cause for concern - the so-called maturing of the Singapore economy is a very dangerous concept. Whilst lower growth may be a reality, we should strive to improve on the growth rate. It should not become an excuse to hide our inability to induce more and better foreign investments. Sir, with a strong Singapore dollar coupled with the opening up of Indochina and China, especially the Pearl River Delta, Shenzhen and the Indian sub-continent, more and more of our manufacturers and businessmen would go overseas. This is sound for the medium term, even painful for the short term. But we should also be careful in this area. Otherwise, we might see a "hollowing" of the Singapore economy. Moreover, Sir, there is no assurance that the weakening in export trade would be offset by strengthening service-earnings over the long run. Profit-earnings from Singapore investment overseas might not be sent back to Singapore for various reasons. Sir, next I would like to turn to our tax treaties. So far, the Government's aim in concluding tax treaties with foreign countries has been to promote foreign investment into Singapore. However, Sir, the situation has now reversed and we see a reverse flow of Singapore investments in overseas markets. A fresh look should be taken at our various tax treaties. Although the present section 13(8) allows for tax-free repatriation of profits earned overseas, it is still, I believe, very restrictive. Exemption requires support from various Government agencies. It may be useful if profits from overseas investment be given a generous treatment when remitted back to Singapore. Would the Finance Minister be prepared to review the present situation and remove the administrative hurdles that are currently present?”
“Nobody complains paying to the Skills Development Fund because they can see that whatever is paid to the Skills Development Fund, the benefits go back directly to the contributors. But in the case of the foreign workers levy, the business sector feels that having paid the money, they cannot see a direct correlation how this can be reverted for the benefit of businesses. Secondly, Sir, reservations were expressed about the proposed consumption tax, and my colleague, Mr Peter Sung, dealt at great length on this subject. What I would like to say is that it was felt that if consumption tax is imposed, Singapore's image as a duty-free shopping paradise would be shattered, apart from imposing additional hardships on the lower income in our midst. Mr Speaker Sir, I now have a few personal observations of my own to make on this year's Budget Statement. Firstly, Sir, the one point percentage reduction in corporate tax is most welcome. However, I believe we should work hard and the Finance Minister should work harder and accelerate towards the planned reduction to the target of 25%, as indicated by the Economic Committee in its Report in 1985. However, Sir, I would urge the Finance Minister also to consider similar measures for personal income tax. The gap now is 3%. If nothing is done to narrow this gap, our tax regime would favour only the business community against the individual. Our tax system, Sir, must not penalise or be biased against hardworking Singaporeans. Government should consider reducing the personal income tax also to the level of the corporate tax. Sir, it must be remembered that the ordinary individual taxpayer has no recourse to tax planning or other devices. Mr Speaker, Sir, my second point concerns the projected lower growth of our economy.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, much has been said on this year's Budget Statement, both in public and in private, and in this House. Sir, the Feedback Unit conducted a closed-door dialogue session on 4th March 1992 with 20 representatives from the various Chambers of Commerce and Industry, business associations, NTUC, institutions of higher learning, basically to obtain their views on the Minister's Budget Statement. Sir, as expected, there were numerous requests. These included reductions in property tax, foreign workers levy, increase in personal tax relief, further reduction in corporate tax, tax incentives for businesses to remit overseas profits to Singapore and assistance for manufacturers to relocate their operations overseas. There were also calls for part-time workers to be exempted from contributing to CPF. This, many felt, would increase their take-home pay and therefore attract more housewives to join the workforce. Mr Speaker, Sir, two noteworthy points surfaced during the dialogue session. Firstly, a number of participants pointed out that the Government had, in recent years, adopted the market mechanism to regulate the demand for scarce commodities, like foreign workers, Certificates of Entitlements (COEs), foreign maids, etc. The unintended benefit to the Government of this policy was that it increased its revenue. In the case of the foreign workers levy, Government should use these funds to help and encourage businesses to automate, to invest in R&D and to globalise their operations. If possible, they would like to see a direct correlation between what they pay to the Government and what they get back from the Government. Sir, the Government's implementation of the Skills Development Fund is a good case in point.”
“I wish to examine three areas where I feel balance is important to achieve greater unity. Sir, my first area of concern is this. I sincerely feel that Singaporeans should be more affirming all round, people towards people, people towards Government, Government towards people. What do I mean by being affirming? Singaporeans should seek to bring out the best in each other. As we share a common destiny, we also have common accountability and responsibility, one to the other. One expression of mutual affirmation is in our approach towards voicing complaints or criticism, whether against national policies, Government departments or indeed against each other. Some may say that Singaporeans complain rather freely, sometimes negatively. How then may one complain positively? I offer three suggestions. First, balance complaints with compliments. Nothing, and no one is totally bad, not our society, not Singaporeans and certainly not our Government. For sure, it is not right all the time, but neither is it wrong all the time. In fact, I am sure Singaporeans will agree when I say that our Government is right most of the time. It must be so. Otherwise we will not be where we are today, a nation standing proud in a community of nations with a standard of living that has indisputably increased over the years, despite what the Member for Potong Pasir may say, where citizens have a sense of self-worth and respect - and I think that is important - and who are involved in the shaping of the nation's destiny. On this point, I know that Mr Chiam's assertion has been decisively rebutted by Members, but let me just add my small contribution. Let us not take an episodic approach. Let us not draw a trend by referring to isolated instances or episodes or professions.”
“Some, like me, find the vision inspiring, others find it bewildering. Some look forward eagerly to the Next Lap. Others are more wary. They fear that they cannot adjust. I hope this will be borne in mind as specific programmes are further firmed up and shared with the public. As we level upwards, we should be mindful that Singaporeans have different levels of capacity to enjoy the good life. Also, in our pursuit of market oriented pragmatic policies, we should be prepared to exercise flexibility and compassion in enforcing the rules against genuine hardship cases, for indeed genuine hardship cases there will always be. On these premises, Sir, I firmly believe that there is a place under the sun in Singapore for everyone. Sir, many speakers have spoken on the substantive matters raised in the President's Address. As the penultimate speaker of the new MPs to speak, I wish to return to the big picture and focus on an important underlying theme - that Singaporeans should stay united and pull together to accomplish the tasks ahead. Indeed, I think pulling together is a very apt description. For indeed building a country is not unlike tugging in a tug-of-war. The attributes are common. You need strength, you need stamina, you need perseverance, you need timing, you need technique. You need to place your people along the rope correctly, in the right positions. I think, in this regard, I am sure all of us will agree with the Member for Hougang, that Singaporeans, as a people, are also important in that they are pulling together with the Government. I do not think any of us wants to downgrade the contribution of Singaporeans in this process. And you need a good anchorman in a tug-of-war, not unlike the goalkeeper in football, and finally you need balance.”
“We should be proud of our cultural heritage. The rich diversity and intricate blend of our culture that we find in Singapore is unique and without parallel. We should all strive to maintain this uniqueness. Mr Ho Peng Kee (Sembawang GRC): Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of the motion standing in the name of the Member for Hong Kah GRC. The Next Lap is a well considered and finely crafted document. I urge every Singaporean to read it. Its 160 pages hold forth a vision for a nation and capture the aspirations of a people. The Member for Hougang asked for the Government's response to the elections. Well, the answer to me is clear. It is to fulfil its promise to level up society by implementing the Next Lap. The vision spans 20-30 years, a time-frame which some Singaporeans cannot grasp. Shorter-term objectives are required and these the Next Lap provides, for threading through the vision are shorter-term objectives and strategies. In addition, the President in his Address has continued the process of unveiling programmes which translate these objectives into reality. Vision, objectives and strategies, and programmes - indeed a laudable approach, and I may add, a serious approach. The programmes are carefully thought out and they are certainly not jokes. They may not be perfect, but they are not jokes. This morning we hear the Member for Bukit Gombak describing many of these programmes as jokes. I think this cannot be so. For if indeed they are jokes, then I am afraid more than 2 million Singaporeans have become the butt of jokes. I say this type-casting by the Member for Bukit Gombak is itself a poor, frivolous, joke cracked in bad taste. Sir, we should be mindful that Singaporeans respond to the Next Lap differently.”
“Whatever the programme Government administers, it must necessarily be race neutral. We cannot have a situation of a government embarking on a solution to help only, say, Indian students to do better in schools. So this is where the community comes in. If the Indian community sees that the Indian students are falling back in their educational performance, then as a responsible community, it should do something about it. What is more is that in many cases, Sir, it is the social factors among the lower income families that affect educational performance of children. Clearly, it is the community that is best placed to act on such social issues. The community cannot stand by idly and point towards the Government. The consequences then could be too far reaching. It is with this in mind, Sir, that the leaders of the Indian community restructured SINDA after the Pillay Report was published. SINDA has since received enthusiastic support from all quarters of the Indian community. I must also say that the Government on its part has been extremely generous with its support for SINDA. If SINDA succeeds, then is it not good for Singapore? The same, I suppose, will apply to the success of MENDAKI as well as the Chinese Development Assistance Council. Frankly, Sir, I see the involvement of community-based organisations to help the less fortunate and needy in our midst as a very positive and timely development. Let me at the same time hasten to add that it is also crucial that in whatever we do, we must realise that ultimately we are all Singaporeans. The line between one's pride in one's culture and chauvinism is indeed very fine. We must continue to inculcate in our young the tolerance, respect and appreciation of what our fellow Singaporeans possess.”
“It was felt that the purchase of hardware like computers should be from the schools' or the Ministry's budget and it should not come out of the child's Edusave fund. The participants also felt that the Government should not have introduced quick changes in the Edusave scheme before it was implemented. On the use of Medifund, the participants feared that the setting up of a committee for the disbursement of the fund would deter those who need help from applying for assistance from the fund. Instead, assistance should be given up-front. This could be done through greater subsidies to hospitals to upgrade the facilities of B2 and C class wards. Some participants noted that our ethnic differences have been accentuated in the past few years. Government should emphasise the need for all races to live harmoniously together. There was also concern over the setting up of the various ethnic-based self-help organisations. It was felt that a single body should be set up to look after the under-class and needy of all races. Sir, having stated these views which were obtained at the Feedback session, I would like to take this opportunity to address one issue which some Members in this House have already raised, ie, the community-based self-help, and this seems to bother some people. Reservations have been expressed, especially among the intelligentsia. They question the wisdom of undertaking community-based programmes in a multi-racial society like ours. Would this result in dividing our society along ethnic lines? And is the Government abdicating its responsibility by leaving each community to solve its own educational and social problems? Mr Speaker, Sir, the under performance of any segment of Singaporeans is a national concern that merits Government's serious attention.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I join my other colleagues in this House to support the motion standing in the name of Dr John Chen to thank the President for his Address. Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to take this opportunity to inform hon. Members in this House what others outside this House feel about the President's Address. These views were gathered at a dialogue session recently organised by the Feedback Unit. The participants felt that too much emphasis was put on bread-and-butter issues and material pursuits. In the President's Address, there was no mention on how our society could be made a more gracious one. It was observed that Singaporeans have become more self-centred and materialistic. They attributed this to the continuous emphasis on meritocracy. They felt that the Government should give greater recognition to people who were less talented, but at the same time had contributed significantly to the society in other ways. We should remind Singaporeans of the need to help and care for other people. Mr Speaker, Sir, in the area of education, the participants agreed on the need to stimulate and assist talented children. However, they would like to remind the Government not to forget the needs of other children. These students should also be assisted. Sir, some of the participants were concerned about the Government's announcement to award scholarships to 25% of the pupils in independent schools based on academic merit. They were worried that this would mean an equal reduction in the allocation to other students. The Government's announcement to allocate part of the Edusave fund to schools for purchase of equipment like computers also has caused some concern.”
“Mr Speaker, I thank the Minister for the answer. I think we can accept the explanation that there was no insider trading as alleged by many people. However, Sir, I would like to ask the Minister: is the public censure of UIC the maximum powers available to the Stock Exchange of Singapore? If this is so, would the Minister be prepared to ask the Securities Industry Council (SIC) to advise the Stock Exchange on sterner measures, other than just public censure, for serious offences of this nature? Sir, following this, I would like to ask the Minister whether he is aware that the Stock Exchange of Singapore, for the moment, does not give reasons for rejecting applications from listed companies for rights, bonuses, splitting of stocks, etc. This is not in keeping with the open and consultative style of Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong. Would the Minister be prepared to ask the Stock Exchange to give reasons for such rejections?”
“The universities could expand on their research and development projects with the private sector. They could also provide consultancy services to the private sector. These are carried out by many reputable overseas universities. Finally, I would like to state that there is no strong objection to the Government's move to reduce subsidies for universities. Many appreciate the Government's commitment to education and agree with the need for reducing subsidies for universities so that funds can be used for other areas. But, however, quite a few believe that this objective could still be achieved in a less painful manner. More information should be given to the public and relevant bodies, like the students' union, and the students' union should have been consulted, and I hope that the Minister will consult them before further fee increases are announced in the future.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, some have noticed that foreign students in our universities are not paying as much for tuition fees as Singapore students in foreign universities. They propose that foreign students studying in Singapore universities be required to pay more for their tuition fees. This, to some extent, will reduce the burden on our own students, as this is the practice in many countries. Sir, all those who gave their views to the Unit felt that there is a need for the two universities to look into ways of generating revenues themselves, as the Minister mentioned in the statement. They share the Minister's confidence that our universities should be able to set up their own endowment funds, just like Princeton, Cornell and Harvard Universities. In this respect, I share the Minister's view that the university alumni will respond favourably to the universities' call for support and, as the Minister has called on Members in this House who are, like myself, former students of the universities, we would definitely support such a call. As beneficiaries of the educational system, I am sure my other colleagues will feel that we have a stake that the universities succeed. Sir, the universities also need to boost their image to facilitate their efforts in seeking financial support from the public. To do this, the universities should carry out more public relations activities to promote public awareness of their schemes. This will definitely help them in soliciting for financial support. The Government could consider some incentives for corporations and individuals to donate generously to the universities. Sir, there were many other suggestions on how the universities could generate additional revenue to meet the increasing costs.”
“However, I would urge the Minister to get his officials to explore ways to help poor students cope with the fee increases. First and foremost, the loan schemes must be easily available and with minimum administrative inconvenience to all applicants. Mr Speaker, Sir, while welcoming the Government's decision to raise the loan ceiling, some felt that the ceiling for tuition loans should be raised even further. In particular, medical and dental students, whose tuition fees are much higher than those of other students, should be given a higher loan ceiling. Some even suggested that the ceiling for tuition loans should be raised to 100% so that the financing of their education would not be a source of worry to our university students and their families. Mr Speaker, Sir, the two universities, some felt, should also look into ways to cut costs. We are only looking at one side of the expenditure. Maybe the universities should look at ways to cut costs. They should, in the opinion of some, be frugal in their spending and should endeavour to trim their expenditure. In this respect, they could perhaps get examples from foreign universities which are able, I am told, to operate at a lower cost. In addition, they should provide more information to the public on their expenditure. The public must be assured that the increases in operating costs are not due to the inefficient management of the universities. To further ensure that their resources are well spent and properly controlled, the two universities should seriously set up audit committees. Public-listed companies are now required to set up audit committees. Maybe the universities should also set up audit committees and review their expenditure policies.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, first of all, I would like to inform the House that many people who gave their views to the Feedback Unit do not dispute the need for the Government to reduce subsidies for universities in the long term. As rightly pointed out by the Minister, out of the total expenditure on education, 20% was spent on university education, which accounts for only 5% of the total student population. There is, therefore, a need for the Government to reduce subsidies for university education to a reasonable ratio. This will enable the Government to allocate more funds for primary, secondary and the VITB. However, Sir, some felt that the quantum of the increase is too high and too drastic. They felt that the quantum should be smaller and more gradual. This round of increases of 35% to 50%, some felt, could have been done over a couple of years. Many also felt that the reduction of subsidies should be over a longer period of time. In fact, why such a great hurry? Sir, it is also a relief that the ceiling for tuition loans has now, as the Minister has announced, been raised to 65% to cushion the impact of the fee increases. Some, however, fear that many poor students may still not want to take advantage of these loans. As earlier pointed out by the Minister, only 20% and 26% of NUS and NTI students respectively applied for tuition loans last year. They felt that the two universities should seriously look into the reasons why poor students are not applying for these loans and when they know the reasons, they should come out with appropriate measures to encourage more students to take up these loans which are designed to help the students. The Government's decision to make it easier for the students to repay their loans is welcomed.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I have three supplementary questions for the Minister. Firstly, I would like to ask the Minister whether the Government has any plans to assist smaller golf clubs if they are unable to pay the market rate of rental for the new leases. Secondly, would the Government allow clubs, like the Singapore Island Country Club (SICC), to make their memberships transferable? As of now, SICC cannot make the membership transferable. Thirdly, Sir, with the introduction of a market rental, membership to golf clubs would be more expensive. I would like to ask the Minister whether the Government has any plans to build public golf courses where Singaporeans who want to play golf can do so without paying fanciful entrance fees.”
“So if community hospitals can provide basic medical care at affordable prices, then I think the Ministry of Health would have done a very great job.”
“Sir, I would like to speak on community hospitals. Sir, first of all, I would like to congratulate the Ministry of Health for embarking on this programme to build community hospitals. I am sure my other Members from the Ang Mo Kio area welcome the setting up of one of the community hospitals in Ang Mo Kio. Sir, I would like to take this opportunity to urge the Minister to have a re-look at the community hospital concept. I would like to suggest that the community hospital should concentrate on providing basic medical health to the residents, that is, without the frills and trimmings that one sees nowadays in restructured hospitals. Sir, the community hospital should en- deavour to keep cost at the lowest possible level so that it is affordable, particularly to the lower income group in our community. In this respect, I would urge that community hospitals do away with various classes of beds - class A, class B, B1, B2. There should be just one class of beds and one class of treatment for the people in the community. If somebody goes there with a headache, prescribe just aspirin, or whatever it is, but do not put him through a brain scan. If people want brain scans, they can go to private hospitals like Mount Elizabeth, or even SGH or NUH. Basically, they should provide care that people can afford. Sir, I sincerely hope that the Minister will consider this suggestion in the implementation of community hospitals. I believe this would give hope to a lot of the lower income group who for some reason are now perceiving even the General Hospital as a very expensive hospital. And if this perception goes on, I do not think it does the Ministry of Health any good.”
“I hope that the Minister can persuade his other colleagues in the Cabinet and come up with some suggestions in the very near future. On that note, Sir, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The sum of $338,944,010 for Head N ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. The sum of $307,446,000 for Head N ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. Head X -”
“Hence, Sir, I believe that the employers, unions and the Government have a role in reducing wastage in our economy. I would like to ask the Minister for Finance - I think he mentioned this in his speech - whether he considers job-hopping to be a serious problem. Is the Government addressing this problem? And if it is addressing the problem, what measure does it think should help to minimise job-hopping?”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head N be reduced by $10 in respect of Code NA 1500 of the Main Estimates. Sir, much has been said in this House over the last few days about the cost of doing business. I would like to take this opportunity to highlight another problem that is facing the economy, that is job-hopping and labour turnover. A survey by the National Productivity Board showed that companies with high labour turnover rates are mainly from the manufacturing sector, commerce sector and establishments employing between 100 and 199 employees. According to this survey, the typical profile of a job-hopper is a person between 15 and 29 years of age, educated at post-primary level and employed in the production, service, sales or clerical job. Many factors, Sir, contribute to such high turnover - salary, physical work environment, supervisor-worker and peer relationships. It has also been the experience that job-hopping is the highest in the first year of service. Sir, there is no dispute that a high rate of job-hopping has a very high cost to the economy. These costs include cost of recruitment, cost of retention, quality cost, productivity cost and, lastly, training cost. A leading electronics firm in Singapore has told me that if it requires 10 production workers, this is what it would take. For Malaysian workers, it has to interview about 25 Malaysian workers, select 20, offer employment to about 16 and after six months, only 10 would be in the employment of the company. For the same number of Singapore workers, it has to interview about 45 Singapore workers, select about 40, offer jobs to 20 and after six months, only 10 would remain in the company. Sir, with our tight labour market, this problem can only get worse.”
“Mr Chairman, Sir, I would like to thank the Minister for his very detailed answers, agreeing to some and rejecting outright some of the suggestions. On that note, Sir, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.”
“Sir, the role of Temasek Holdings in our economic development need not be overstated. It was Government's main vehicle in the promotion of investments in Singapore. Today you can see Temasek's hand in all the major Government-owned companies (SIA, DBS, Sembawang, Keppel, NOL), just to name a few. Sir, with the privatisation programme being the order of the day, Temasek's role in the above companies is very much reduced. In fact, its role is one of a passive investor. What I would like to ask the Minister is what he envisages as the future role of Temasek Holdings. I am sure the Minister will agree that the role for Temasek in the 1990s will be much different from the role it had in the 70s and 80s. If I may take the liberty to suggest to the Minister that for the 1990s Temasek looks at helping Singapore companies going international or global. I would like to ask the Minister whether there are such plans in the pipeline.”
“All right, Sir. I welcome the Prime Minister's decision to establish this Service Quality Improvement Unit. Many will not realise how fortunate we are to have one of the finest civil services in the world. The civil service is efficient and highly competent. It has been one of our strongest pillars for our progress over the last 25 years. Having said that, there is always room for improvement. As a provider of service to the public, I believe more emphasis should be placed on the service aspect. So far, I believe that the civil service has done an excellent job as a regulator. With a better educated population, there is a greater demand for quality service. Sir, one-line rejection letters will not do any more. The setting up of this Unit, I believe, will go a long way to tackle this aspect of the problem. Initially, Sir, I am sure there will be far more complaints than suggestions. So be it. If the complaints can be transformed to concrete suggestions or improvements, then the objective of the setting up of this Unit is achieved. Over the longer term, the aim of our civil service should be to give, not just pure service, but quality service. Sir, during the debate on the Presidential Address, I suggested that the Unit, apart from being staffed by civil servants, must also, at the same time, have a panel of non-civil servants to guide and supervise the work of the Unit. This panel, I believe, will give the Unit greater credibility. I would like to know the Minister's view on this subject.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the total sum to be allocated for Head N of the Main Estimates be reduced by $100. Sir, I have two amendments. I intend to take both of them together, with your permission, Sir.”
“Sir, I would like to thank the Deputy Prime Minister and the Minister of State for their very detailed and positive answers. On that note, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.”
“Again, to overcome the uncertainty of levy changes, employers should be given the option to pay a fixed levy for every two-year period, rather than wait for off-budget announcements of increases in levy. I hope, Sir, the Government can consider the above suggestions. The next question refers to land rental. Land rental has been increasing steadily over the last few years. Land rental constitutes about 8.3% of controllable cost of production. As such, Sir, I believe there is some need to control this increase. Here it may be worthwhile to point out that the industrial land is largely controlled in Singapore by Jurong Town Corporation (JTC). Maybe it is appropriate for Government at this stage to allow the private sector to get involved in the development of industrial land in Singapore. It may be feasible for Government to parcel out industrial land to private sector companies, as it does to JTC. This, apart from providing competition to JTC, could also eliminate the perennial problem of pricing. Sir, now I turn to my third amendment which relates to the Gulf War. Now that the Gulf War has ended, I believe there will be opportunities for new businesses in the region. It is an opportunity, I believe, that we in Singapore should take advantage. I would like to ask the Minister whether there are any plans by the Government, particularly by the Trade Development Board, to assist Singapore companies to take advantage of the situation. Sir, I am raising this because Government support and assistance is vital for Singapore companies to get a piece of the action.”
“These figures were obtained from a survey conducted by the Singapore Manufacturers Association in December 1990. Sir, having listed out the above problems, I would like to touch on two specific items. These are the two controllable elements in the question of cost. Firstly, there is the question of the labour cost; and secondly, there is the question of land rental. Sir, as far as labour is concerned, it is Singapore's key resource, and a scarce one at the same time. To rectify shortage, the Government has allowed employers to hire foreign workers. Here, I have to declare my interest. The company I am involved with employs foreign workers. This policy has enabled the economy to achieve the GDP growth above 6%. I think it is time for the Government now to review the current foreign worker policy. Feedback received indicates that there are certain rigidities in the present system. Firstly, the current dependency ceiling of 40% is somewhat rigid. Companies occasionally need to breach this limit to cater for surges in business conditions, but this they cannot do under the present system, even if they are willing to pay additional fees for this privilege. 2.15 pm Secondly, Sir, the present levy payment over the two-year period of work permit can be made more certain. At present, the levy is subject to regular revisions. Employers would like to see more certainty in payment of this levy. Sir, to overcome these problems, the Government may wish to consider introducing what I call a two-tier system. The levy for the first tier could be as at present, while that for the second tier could be at a premium. Companies which require more foreign workers can then employ them as they are willing to pay the additional premium.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the total sum to be allocated for Head W of the Main Estimates be reduced by $100. Sir, I have three amendments. I intend to take all the three together. The GPC (Finance, Trade and Industry) notes with satisfaction the progress made so far on the subject of the "growth triangle". The concept when it was first mooted by Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong now has the fullest support of the Governments of Malaysia and Indonesia. I would like to ask the Minister the following questions: Firstly, how much money has the Singapore Government directly invested in this project? Secondly, Sir, are operational problems faced by Singapore businessmen being solved quickly as a result of this cooperation in the growth triangle? For example, Sir, congestion at Johor Baru Customs. I am also told by businessmen that there are insufficient lorry bays and also the limited hours of operation of the Johor customs. Can these problem areas be alleviated very quickly as a result of the cooperation through this growth triangle? I also want to ask the Government whether it has plans for allowing the training of workers from Batam and Johor in Singapore to be made much easier. Sir, on my second amendment regarding maintaining the competitive edge, I would like to state that there are four key concerns of business generally in Singapore. Firstly, Sir, is the rising cost of business. Secondly, we have to contend with intense competition. Thirdly, there is the appreciating Singapore dollar vis-a-vis the neighbouring countries. Fourthly, and more importantly, the question of shortage of labour. For the first nine months of 1990, unit business cost rose by 7.6%, unit labour cost rose by 8.5%, service charges rose by 6.5% and Government indirect taxes and fees increased by 11.4%.”