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 Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.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 5 of 12.
“Mr Chairman, I thank the Minister for his very detailed and generous reply. On this note, I withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.”
“Sir, I have one other query for the Hon. Minister. This refers to the British Foreign Office statement today regarding the position of Anthony Lester. I do not know who is telling the truth. The British Foreign Office now says that Mr Anthony Lester did not press them to take up the issue. If I may read the Straits Times: 'Secondly, the statement in the second paragraph that Mr Lester pressed us to do this is simply untrue. He did not.' Sir, if QC Anthony Lester did not press the British government, then why was it necessary for the British Foreign Office even to make a statement on the subject? Another part which the spokesman has indicated and, if I may quote again, he says: 'Obviously, I can't say what will happen in the future....' This smacks of a mild threat and I do not know whether the Foreign Office still believes that we are part of the British Empire. Maybe the Foreign Minister can comment on this.”
“How does the Minister view the state of Singapore/US relations under the Bush Administration? Will the debate on the so-called human rights issue mar this relationship? Sir, I would also like to ask the Minister what are the prospects of the ASEAN-US initiative in contributing to the evolution of a free trade agreement at the regional and bilateral level? Finally, I have one other question for the Minister, ie, is the intended half-tank petroleum exercise for Singapore cars crossing the Causeway likely to discourage Singaporeans going to Malaysia?”
“Sir, with the emergence of trading blocs in the American continent and Europe, what steps can Singapore take to ensure in concert with like-minded countries that the free trade system will survive? If this system is doomed, then will Singapore consider joining an East Asian bloc? As the solution to the Cambodian conflict is becoming imminent, many countries are already gearing themselves to exploiting the opportunities that will follow. Several ASEAN countries are themselves setting the pace by rapidly establishing very strong footholds. Thailand is a case in point. Singapore, however, appears to be lagging quite far behind. What advice would the Minister have for our entrepreneurs who also want to venture into the Indo-Chinese markets. Sir, next, the trends in the Asia-Pacific region suggest that Singapore is increasingly likely to have a larger measure of understanding with Japan and other East Asian NICs on economic issues rather than with its ASEAN partners. Was Singapore's attendance at the OECD-NIE seminar in late January a hint of things to come? What are the prospects for the establishment of a permanent mechanism to govern Singapore's relations between the NIEs and the OECD? Sir, the Australian Prime Minister has recently suggested a new vehicle for economic cooperation in the Asia-Pacific region. I am sure that in the post-Ministerial meeting in July this year in Brunei, this issue is likely to be raised and we would like to know what the Minister's view would be in general. At the level of bilateral relations, the past two years were not particularly happy ones in our dealings with the United States. While we cannot forget what was done over the GSP affair, we must, in the larger interest of both countries, move on to other things.”
“The Uruguay Round in December ended in near disaster. The US and the Economic Community are engaged in trade disputes. And people are beginning to wonder how long the GATT system will last. Some are also having visions of a world divided into three trading blocs: North America, Europe and Asia. The forecast is that these trading blocs would wage battle with trading and economic weapons. Sir, the global and regional scenarios that I have just described are taking place. The GPC on Defence and Foreign Affairs feels that it is important that Singapore monitors these changes carefully and responds to them astutely. We are confident that the architects of our foreign policy are already mapping out Singapore's response to some of these pro- blems. Indeed, in the Addendum to the President's Address, the Ministry has focussed on some of the issues which I have touched upon. Unfortunately, as is the fate of addendums, they do not attract the necessary attention they deserve. In moving this amendment, the purpose of my GPC is really to ask the Minister for Foreign Affairs to share his thoughts with us on some of the notable developments in the past year and indicate the specific response of the Singapore Government. In particular, I refer to the following: Firstly, the prospects of Singapore having a more positive relationship with the Soviet Union in view of changes in the Soviet Union as a result of glasnost, perestroika and also, particularly, with the Soviet Union's withdrawal from Afghanistan. Secondly, the possibility of increased economic and trade contacts with the Soviet Union and the Comecon as a whole.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the total sum to be allocated for Head O of the Main Estimates be reduced by $100. Sir, during the debate on the President's Address, the First Deputy Prime Minister lamented that Backbenchers had not focussed on international issues. Sir, the Government Parliamentary Committee on Defence and Foreign Affairs is mindful of the world outside and notes the rapid changes that are currently taking place in international and regional environments. However, Sir, we feel that the appropriate forum for the debate on international issues is in the Committee of Supply rather than the debate on the President's Address. Sir, the past year was particularly dramatic because of the various rapid changes that took place. There has been relaxation of tensions between the superpowers and various issues such as disarmament and human rights have been touched upon. Sir, the growing rapprochement between the Soviet Union and China, and specially with the forthcoming Gorbachev-Deng Summit this year, also has contributed to international peace and stability. Among other new developments, one that is welcomed is the ending of the seven year old Iran-Iraq conflict. Sir, closer home, prospects for regional peace and stability have been enhanced by recent developments in the Indo-Chinese Peninsula. Reports of Sino-Soviet normalization of ties could also enhance regional stability. Sir, the US and the Philippines have also reached accord on the question of bases in the later part of last year. However, Sir, countries in the region had begun to psychologically accept that bases would have to go one day, if not in the very near future. Sir, while trends in the global political situation are indeed promising, the same cannot be said in the international economic situation.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, on behalf of the many Members who spoke, I would like to thank the Minister for his very candid answers, particularly the fact that talent in the SAF is very well looked after. However, I would disagree with him that talent is the prerogative of the Government. The private sector should also have a fair share. If not, how do we develop rapport between the private sector and the Government? Sir, on this note, I withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The sum of $2,682,720,820 for Head K ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. The sum of $233,000,000 for Head K ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. The Chairman: Order. Thereupon Mr Speaker left the Chair of the Committee and took the Chair of the House.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head K be reduced by $10 in respect of Code KA 1500 of the Main Estimates. Sir, the SAF Scholarship Scheme was introduced in 1970 to attract top 'A' level students to pursue a career in the Singapore Armed Forces. Sir, in moving this amendment, we would like to pose the following questions to the Minister. Firstly, we would like to know how many awards have been made since its inception and also the total accumulated cost to administer the Scheme? More importantly, Sir, we would also like to know how these scholars are deployed and whether there are options if the scholar is not found to be suitable for a career in the SAF. Sir, my GPC is fully aware that the first batch of scholars from this Scheme have now reached mid-30's and we would like to know what are the career prospects for them and subsequent batches within the SAF? Sir, we also know that some of these scholars have left the service. Maybe the Minister can enlighten this House what were the reasons and what actions or schemes his Ministry has to avoid wastage of this talent.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I would take amendments (2) and (3) at the same time, with your permission, Sir.”
“Mr Chairman, I thank the Minister for his detailed and wide ranging answers, particularly in disclosing his new initiatives with Malaysia and Indonesia. On that note, I withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the total sum to be allocated for Head K of the Main Estimates be reduced by $100. Sir, in moving this amendment, I would like to seek from the Minister the status and level of our bilateral and multilateral defence relations. The Government Parliamentary Committee on Defence and Foreign Affairs views defence and military diplomacy as a high priority item in the work of the Ministry of Defence. We also feel that it is extremely important to promote bilateral and multilateral relations with our friends, especially our Asean neighbours. In this connection, we would like to know whether there has been any further positive development in this area since we last discussed this subject in this House. Apart from the status of our relations, the Committee is also interested to know about the nature of cooperation between our SAF and the foreign armed forces. inally, Sir, we would like to know from the Minister the various joint exercises our SAF will be conducting with the armed forces of other countries in the coming financial year.”
“Mr Chairman, Sir, thank you for allowing me to participate in this debate. Sir, since we are discussing QCs, particularly QC Lester, I was rather surprised to see in the Straits Times this morning that the British government had protested to the Singapore Government on this case. If I may quote: 'We regret this action by the Singapore Government. Mr Lester enjoys the highest professional and public standing in courts throughout the Commonwealth, the European Community and elsewhere.' Sir, I am rather surprised that the British government has decided to get involved in this matter. This is purely a matter between the Singapore Government and QC Anthony Lester. He was given a professional visit pass to come and defend the case in Singapore, and he transgressed the rules that went with the professional visit pass. And I think the Government had every right to withdraw. For the British government to get worked up on this matter, I find it very difficult to follow. We did not protest over the Tan Wah Piow issue. He entered the United Kingdom, I believe, without a passport. So why these double standards?”
“What is wrong with surplus? We always have a surplus and you are complaining?”
“What did you say about the Budget just now?”
“You see Ministers driving around in their own cars. I wonder what will happen if they get into an accident. Maybe some trappings of office, like a car, chauffeur, and maybe even an official residence in keeping with their status, rather than just upping salaries. In the private sector, Sir, salary means a total package. So if you want to compete with the private sector, why not compete on the basis of a package rather than just upping salaries. Mr Speaker, Sir, in conclusion, I would urge the Finance Minister to seriously consider delinking the salaries of civil servants from those of politicians.”
“Sir, overall, as far as consumption tax is concerned, I am satisfied that the Government has adopted a very cautious approach and I hope that it will continue on this cautious course. Sir, next I turn to the subject of pay increases for civil servants and, possibly, Ministers. I would say from the outset that there is no way that the public sector can match the remuneration in the private sector. If I may plagiarize Kipling, let me say, Private sector is private sector, public sector is public sector, and never the twain shall meet. Sir, I do not oppose salary increases for civil servants and Ministers. I think they deserve it. But when comparisons are made with the private sector, it must be made between apples and apples. Comparisons must be made at a number of levels, not only at the top in each profession. Sir, I would like to make the following comments as far as civil servants' salaries are concerned. The responsibilities of civil servants are enormous. However, it must be pointed out that, unlike politicians, civil servants are relatively secure in employment and this must be taken into account in any wage comparison. There is less security of tenure in the private sector, as far as I know, when compared with public sector. Sir, as a result of this, I think it is absolutely necessary for the Government to delink the salaries of civil servants with those of Ministers and other political appointees. At this point of time they appear to run on parallel tracks. In fact, grade for grade, you can identify a civil servant with a politician. As for Ministers, Sir, I support some increases in salaries for them and, more importantly, apart from salary increases, I frankly think it is necessary to give them some of the trappings of office, possibly cars.”
“The impact of this will be even greater if the annual value of property is to be stepped up with the buoyant property market. Sir, the 4% concessionary rate on non-HDB owner-occupied residential properties has also the same effect of increasing property tax on such properties. Additionally, under the current situation, Sir, revision of annual value does not impact on the property tax payable. But with the 4% rated property tax, this I believe will be pegged to the annual value, thus increasing the burden on the property owner with a possible upward revision of annual value. Sir, on the CPF I fully agree with the Minister that we should prevent the scheme from being used as a tax shelter. My colleagues, Dr John Chen, Mr Leong Horn Kee and Mr Loh Meng See have spoken very strongly on this subject. I would urge the Minister that in preventing abuse, innocent people should not be unduly penalized. Maybe the Minister can consider amending the CPF Act to peg the CPF contributions on additional wages to a ceiling, a fixed percentage or a fixed sum, say, $40,000 per annum. Sir, this I feel will go a long way not to upset the present system and at the same time not defeat Government's move to encourage flexi-wage. Sir, on consumption tax, much has been said. The re-instatement of the tax on PUB and TAS bills signals the shift of Government policy from direct taxes to indirect taxes as a source of revenue. However, Sir, while corporations enjoy a 1% corporate tax reduction, they are exempted from the consumption tax. On the other hand, the ordinary employee has to bear the burden of such taxes, without the direct burden of taxation being reduced. My question is, is this consistent?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to join my other colleagues in this House to congratulate the Finance Minister for his practically painless budget. Sir, since I came into this House in 1980 this is the first time that the Budget Statement has been so thoroughly discussed after it was delivered on 3rd March 1989. Sir, the Finance Minister even went on television last week to discuss this subject with a panel. Maybe the Finance Minister has good reasons for debating it in public before the debate in this House. Sir, like other Members in this House, I welcome the various measures and concessions made by the Minister. Nevertheless, I would like to comment on a few of them. First, let me take corporate tax. This reduction with effect from Year of Assessment 1990 from 33% to 32% is a welcome one. It would appear, Sir, that this modest reduction signals that the corporate tax will gradually be reduced in the longer term if economic conditions allow. Sir, if I may be permitted to say, the Financial Secretary in Hong Kong is popularly known as Mr Half Per Cent and I sincerely hope that the One Per Cent label will not be stuck on to our very generous Finance Minister. Next I turn to property tax. The decision to extend the rebate to 30th June 1990 and, with effect from 1st July 1990, property tax rate to be reduced from 23% to 16% and the 4% flat rate - all appear to be on paper concessions but, in reality, are they concessions? The property tax at the rate of 16% is still higher than the 23% with a 50% rebate. Effectively, Sir, the property tax burden will increase by 4.5% of the annual value of the property. This, I believe, Sir, will push up operating costs and to some extent erode competitiveness.”
“Have you been arrested? Mr Chiam See Tong: Well, I am speaking from experience. Unfortunately you were not at the receiving end. So, like the previous Bill, I would say that there should be a schedule to exempt certain types of so-called assemblies from this Act. For example, at a dinner or a social function, where the main guest is received 20 yards away from the main function, it should not be necessary for them to get a permit for that. Sir, again, I think the penalties are really too harsh. The Government knows that and so they quietly change the name from the Minor Offences Act to a different name. Because once you slap a fine of $2,000 and above, it is no longer a minor offence. Sir, I am all for order, especially we in Singapore are living in a crowded place. In fact, in Japan one of the objects of the education system is to teach their citizens to live in crowded places. They always have to think of their neighbours. I have had two Japanese families who were my neighbours, and I can verify that. They were most considerate. I do not know whether it was out of thrift or out of consideration for their neighbours but I notice that their air-conditioning unit which was close to our premises was always switched off at an early hour. It could be in consideration of their neighbours. An hon. Member: Too Cold.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I would just like to ask the Minister how do the measures he announced in his Ministerial statement reconcile with the Government's policy in promoting Geylang Serai, Little India and Chinatown.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to seek one clarification with the Minister. But before I ask for this clarification I have to declare my interest. I am a director of a shipping company, the national shipping line, and this company has issued preferential shares. Sir, section 13(A) is to be amended whereby dividends paid will not be exempt from income tax. Sir, I would like to ask the Minister whether this will be applied retroactively or is it only for new issues?”
“National security interest must be a matter to be decided by the Government which is democratically elected by the people. It is a responsibility that cannot be abdicated to a foreign court which has no stake in our well-being. As the Singapore Court of Appeal has said that it agreed with judicial opinion expressed in other jurisdictions, it is also necessary to amend the law to restore the subjective test principle so that the Executive alone could decide on matters of national security. Sir, in all the previous General Elections, the Internal Security Act was canvassed, yet the people have rejected the views of the Opposition. The people have given the Government the mandate to govern and look after their security interest. We cannot abdicate this responsibility to any court.”
“Despite being the hub of communication in South-East Asia and being so close to the Golden Triangle, we have been relatively free of the drug problem. The reason why this is so, Sir, is that we have the Misuse of Drugs Act which punishes with death a person who is convicted of drug trafficking. We also have a law called the Criminal Law (Temporary Provisions) which empowers the detention of gangsters and drug traffickers. There are close to 1,500 such persons under detention and yet no one has challenged that it is wrong to detain them. Therefore, it is not preventive detention per se that is undesirable but the implementation that is being questioned. Sir, I submit that the records show that so far we have not taken this responsibility lightly. The judicious use of such powers has enabled us to have a relatively drug-free and crime-free environment. Sir, western human rights campaigners would call these laws draconian. But we know that these laws have been effective in protecting the interests and safety of our people. Similarly, the Internal Security Act has enabled the Government to detain people who threaten the security of the State. Sir, the ISA has never been used by the Government to detain people who are against Government policies or who speak up against the Government. It has never acted like a bully. If the PAP Government has done so, it would have been voted out of office a long time ago. Some people think that stopping appeals to the Privy Council is like the end of the world. Nothing is further from the truth. Singaporeans should have no reason to doubt that they will continue to survive even without access to the Privy Council. We must decide our fate ourselves.”
“After World War II the countries in the region were largely still colonies struggling for independence. The birth of new countries of South-East Asia was accompanied by a certain amount of travail which included regional hostilities and communist guerilla movements. The communist movements in Singapore and Malaysia were not nationalist ones but were based on ideological lines. Unlike European communists, the CPM attempted to gain power through guerilla warfare and violence. The threats by the CPM to the existence of order in Singapore required unique solutions. The CPM has also changed its tactics in response to political and social changes in Singapore. The arrests and subsequent statements by the Marxist conspirators in 1987 have shown that the CPM has not discarded its intentions to undermine and overthrow the Government. Despite what the Member for Potong Pasir said, Sir, between 1973 and 1985, 45 civilian police officers and other officials were killed by the communists in Malaysia. Sir, the multi-racial nature of our society also makes it necessary to have preventive detention laws to preserve racial harmony. The Government is in the best position to assess and to determine the appropriate measures and responses to make in order to safeguard national security. Sir, preventive detention laws are never palatable. They place a heavy burden on those who have to use them. The Government has never abused this power even at the time between 1966 and 1981 when Parliament consisted of only the PAP members. It has always judiciously used the ISA to maintain peace and security for the good of the people. The Government, Sir, has never shied away from difficult problems. It has always confronted tough issues head on. Take, for instance, our drug and crime situation.”
“Hence it was important to retain an external reference to avoid developing a parochial, closed legal system, and to give our foreign investors some confidence. Today, Sir, many Asia-Pacific countries in the Commonwealth, for example, India, Sri Lanka, Australia and Malaysia, have long ceased to have their cases adjudicated by the Privy Council. We should have done the same. It is an anachronism that should have been abandoned. Why do I say so? Sir, in the 23 years since Independence a number of changes in Europe and in Singapore have taken place. Britain has joined the European Community and has adopted a more European-oriented approach. Development of concepts of human rights in Britain has followed the European and liberal western models, such as the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. Europe emerged from World War II with its tradition of established political, legal and administrative systems still largely intact. European societies are much larger and more stable and therefore a greater leeway in the interpretation of human rights and liberties could be tolerated. For example, Sir, although Europe faced its own peculiar brand of communism, Euro-communism did not attempt to wrench power through guerilla and revolutionary tactics. Instead they accepted the course of obtaining power through the ballot box. In addition, Sir, as time goes by, the empathy and the understanding that the Law Lords have for local conditions have diminished. The situation in South-East Asia evolved in a markedly different manner from that in Europe. In the South-East Asia region the nexus between human rights and the companion concept of responsibility is a more critical one.”
“Sir, abolishing appeals to the Privy Council is one thing, but I believe we also must be geared to take on this additional role. In conclusion, Sir, I can only repeat that whilst the Privy Council has served us well so far and we should be grateful for this. Nevertheless, Sir, it is time for us to be master of our own destiny and, to misquote the Straits Times' Viewpoint article, "Until then, Sir, I submit that the Privy Council is dispensable." The Minister for Foreign Affairs and Minister for Community Development (Mr Wong Kan Seng): Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of this amendment. Sir, when Singapore became independent in 1965 the Government decided to retain the final court of adjudication with the Privy Council. There were many reasons for this. One was that Singapore inherited its legal traditions and common law from the United Kingdom. Many of the Law Lords too had served in the colonies in Asia and so would have an intimate experience and subtlety in dealing with cases from Singapore. Their knowledge of local conditions and history resulted in decisions that served to strengthen stability here. It was this knowledge of local conditions that allowed the implementation of the ISA, which was a device used by the British colonial government to maintain security. The Singapore Government inherited the ISA from them. Indeed, Sir, if you look at Articles 149, 150 and 151 of the Constitution of Singapore, you would note that they have their origins in the Constitution of Malaysia, which probably derived this also from the British ISA. Sir, Singapore also retained the right of appeal to the Privy Council because in its initial years of independence, there was a lack of experienced Singapore judges.”
“Thirdly, conditions and development in Singapore are different from those in Europe and Britain. Britain itself is finding it difficult to adjust to a European climate. What more for Singapore. Hence, I am convinced that it is not appropriate for us as a sovereign nation to submit to an external authority like the Privy Council. Lastly, if the Singapore courts make any mistake, we as a nation will pay for it. If the Privy Council were to make a mistake, will we be bailed out by the British Government? Certainly not. Sir, some quarters believe that the current changes are being proposed because of recent rulings of the Privy Council. I think it will be very difficult for Government or anyone to convince such people. I personally feel it has helped us to focus on the problem and the potential areas of conflict. These cases have merely shown us why it is necessary for us to make the changes now. It is only a matter of time. As for me, I think the time is right for us to change course. Appeals to Privy Council have provided us a breathing space. Our Judiciary should be the highest court of our land. We cannot allow Law Lords, who sometimes do not play cricket, to decide for us. Sir, while I commend the Minister the total withdrawal from Privy Council, I would also like to draw his attention to two areas. Firstly, if appeals are withdrawn from the Privy Council, will this not put an extra load on our already over-burdened judiciary? My question is, are we geared to take on this extra responsibility? Sir, as the Member for Fengshan said, I would also like to ask whether we need a separate Court of Appeal? Right now, with a limited number of judges, is this also feasible?”
“' I would like to ask the Minister whether this assertion is true. Because reading other parts of the article there seems to be some contradiction. Maybe the Minister can clarify. Sir, if I were asked whether all appeals to the Privy Council should be maintained, my answer is no and maybe a partial yes at the same time. As a sovereign state, all cases, whatever the extent and seriousness, be it related to ISA or other criminal or civil matters, I believe the final decision must be made in Singapore. However, Sir, I am prepared to concede in some cases, particularly in the commercial areas, maybe shipping and banking as an example, for appeals to be allowed to go to the Privy Council. But I would like to go on to suggest that such appeals go to Privy Council provided both parties put it as a pre-condition in their contracts, ie, it is mutually agreed by both parties. If this is adopted, then it will go to some extent to reinforce the point made in the same article yesterday about foreign investors needing to have some confidence in the system. In banking parlance, this may amount to what one might say a "comfort letter". Barring this exception, Sir, I would strongly recommend to the Minister and this Government that it is time seriously to consider ceasing all appeals to the Privy Council. I think the Minister made various points. I would like to repeat some of them. The ground rules, firstly, have changed over time. Britain itself, as indicated by the Minister, changed course because of its entry into the European Community. It is being influenced by European law, particularly in the field of administrative law. Secondly, there is very little or no Commonwealth input in the Privy Council, as it was previously the case.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I would just like to confine my remarks to the question of appeals to the Privy Council. Of late on this subject, there has been much attention and discussion. So I thought I will spend sometime on this area. Sir, as the Minister stated in his opening statement, appeals to the Privy Council have been in existence since colonial days. Today, the Privy Council is the highest Court of Appeal for Singapore. Other Commonwealth countries like Canada, Australia, India and Malaysia have done away with appeals to the Privy Council and established their own courts as the final arbiter. However, smaller countries like Singapore and some states in the Caribbean have found it useful and necessary to retain this recourse to the Privy Council. I think the decision to retain appeals to the Privy Council has been a right one so far. In fact, we have benefitted from this practice. Further, I am also sure that the judges in Singapore do not mind their decisions being tested by the Law Lords. Mr Speaker, Sir, in an article in yesterday's Straits Times, Viewpoint, there is a strong case made for the retention of appeals to the Privy Council. If I may read, Sir: 'Singapore still needs the Privy Council.' I would like to ask the Minister how useful and effective have appeals been to the Privy Council for Singapore. How many cases have gone up to the Privy Council in the last 10 years? The writer of this article also made the assertion and I would like to quote the particular section: 'Like any court here, the Privy Council interprets the law of Singapore. So as long as the ISA is competently drafted and leaves no reasonable room for doubt, the Council will have to give effect to the wishes of the Singapore Parliament as expressed clearly in the Act.”
“Sir, I am not in total agreement with this conclusion of the sociologist. But, in fact, a milder word than "contempt" may be necessary. In my case I would like to use the word "distrust". However, Sir, in reality, the truth may lie somewhere between "mistrust" and "contempt". Sir, if this is the situation, then I believe it does Singapore no good. It is extremely important for the Civil Service, the political leadership and the business community to work together for the improvement of our people and our country. I would urge if such a situation exists that 1DPM would help to redress and forge a closer relationship based on trust and understanding. All sectors of the population must work in tandem for the benefit of Singapore. I think we can do away with "I am holier than thou attitude". Sir, in conclusion, I can only say that changing times require new perspectives and new solutions to old problems. I would urge and plead with the First Deputy Prime Minister and his Frontbench colleagues to take a fresh and new look at all problems, old and new. Mr Speaker, Sir, before I sit down, I just want to make one other observation, that is, again to request the Frontbenchers not to be unduly disturbed because of criticisms from my colleagues, the Backbench, particularly GPC Chairmen. Sir, Backbenchers and GPC Chairmen are expected to raise issues and concerns in this House. If this exercise is to continue, then I believe there must be a certain amount of give-and-take. However, Sir, in yesterday's debate, I believe the steak was a little overdone. 4.10 pm”
“Quantum of tax can be decided by the Government after some consultation. Again, at the moment, the levy is a flat levy. I believe if both husband and wife are working, then maybe the Government would consider a rebate rather than a flat rate for all. I also believe that the Government can actively promote and assist companies to provide maid services. This can result in maids being employed on time basis. Sir, not everyone needs a stay-in maid for 24 hours. These companies can be given incentives and assistance or HDB could make some flats available to accommodate the maids. The Minister for Labour could give priority for such companies to bring in maids. Sharing of maids among families can also be encouraged. These are some suggestions which the Minister may want to look into. Sir, the points I have made on car policy and foreign maids are suggestions basically to call upon the First Deputy Prime Minister and his Frontbench colleagues to re-examine some of our existing policies. I have discussed these with some of my other GPC Chairman-colleagues. The majority of us feel that some form of re-examination may be in order. Sir, there is one other concern which I would like to bring to the attention of the First Deputy Prime Minister and his Frontbench colleagues. Sometime ago during a lunch with a Chief Executive of a multi-national company, I was rather shocked to hear him say that a sociologist (an American sociologist, I think), in conducting a survey on Singapore which involved a cross section of our population, came to one conclusion among other conclusions - that the civil servant in Singapore generally holds the businessman in "contempt". And this Chief Executive was very concerned with this conclusion.”
“Otherwise, the present policy of trying to restrict ownership will be seen by many as purely a revenue-generating exercise. I for one moment do not believe it is a revenue-generating exercise. Hence, I would strongly suggest that the Government consider making ownership of cars less restrictive but really introduce stringent measures when it comes to use of cars on our roads. Technology is sufficiently advanced to enable Government to charge according to usage. It is not for me here to suggest how this ought to be worked out. This is something for the Minister for Communications to mull over. Sir, I refer to our policy on foreign maids. Many of my colleagues in this House have pointed out the inconsistency in this policy. We are all aware of the problem. The number of foreign maids must be controlled otherwise, as the Minister for Labour said, we will face other social problems. So the question is how to determine the level of maids that we want in Singapore at any one point of time, be it 30,000, 40,000, 50,000. Sir, once this level is determined, then I believe the problem is one of allocation. Right now, allocation is affected through the pricing mechanism, that is a higher levy is introduced to reduce demand. Again, I would like to urge the First Deputy Prime Minister, the Minister for Labour and his other colleagues to have another look at this policy. Pricing mechanism alone may not be the only solution. Maybe, Sir, new criteria for allocation of maids may have to be established. I think a policy needs to be established that it is not the right of every Singaporean to have a foreign maid. Some new conditions can be introduced. For example, to qualify employment of a maid, the applicant must at least be a taxpayer.”
“Sir, this problem has been with us for a long time and will continue to be with us. Our current method of tackling this problem has been largely by fiscal means - reduce congestion by making it expensive to own a car. Whether this has served us well as a policy I think is a moot point. I believe the Government has failed to make a distinction between ownership of cars and usage of cars. I believe what we need is to control usage and not ownership. Hence in one breath the same dose of medicine is given to both. It is the declared policy of this Government to move Singapore and Singaporeans towards a middle class society. Whether we like it or not, Sir, one of the indicators of middle-class society must be ownership of a car, apart from house, refrigerator, washing machine, microwave oven, or what-have-you. It is indeed ironical that it is easier in Singapore to own a home than a car, and both as a result of Government policy. Sir, I believe the Government should at least not discourage the ownership of cars. Owning a car is part and parcel of a middle class status. Today, there is tremendous frustration, particularly among younger professionals because they are unable to own a car. Sir, the frustration is even greater when taxi drivers can own their own vehicles. The Member for Bukit Timah a couple of days ago made a very eloquent case for controlling the car population. I am sure even the Minister for Communications could not have made a better case than him. Sir, I would respectfully ask the First Deputy Prime Minister, the Minister for Communications and his other colleagues to seriously reconsider the present policy on car ownership. Government might want to consider the scenario where ownership of cars is differentiated from usage of cars.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise to support the motion standing in the name of the Member for Siglap. Sir, I would also like to join the earlier speakers in congratulating the Government for clearly outlining its policies and programmes for the next five years. Now that the directions and policies are set, I believe it is up to us as Singaporeans to work with the Government to fulfil the goals outlined in the Presidential Address. Sir, in this context, I am extremely gratified that the hon. Member for Potong Pasir is supporting the motion of thanks. Sir, I believe after one term in this House he has finally seen light. Sir, over the past few days, various Members of this House have commented on general and specific aspects mentioned in the Presidential Address. I do not propose to go over the same grounds. What I propose to do is to follow up on what the First Deputy Prime Minister wrote to you in his letter. Sir, he says he is now in charge and to use his corporate analogy, he is the Chief Executive Officer with the Prime Minister serving as the Chairman of the board. I am confident that the new team under the leadership of the First Deputy Prime Minister will do Singapore proud and I would urge all Singaporeans to give maximum support to this new team. Also, as a new team, I would urge the First Deputy Prime Minister and his Frontbench colleagues to bring in changes, preferably refreshing changes in the governance of Singapore. Sir, I would appeal to the First Deputy Prime Minister and his Frontbench colleagues to take a new look at some of our existing problems and policies. In this context, Sir, I would like to refer specifically to two existing policies. The first refers to car ownership policy and the second on foreign maids. I will take the car ownership policy first.”
“Nobody is saying no. Mr Ong Teng Cheong( In Mandarin):Mr Speaker, Sir, I do not differ from him in this. We should accept good value concepts, whether from the West or from the East. Does he agree to this? He does not agree?”
“That is not our fault. Some hon. Members: No.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise to urge this House to reject the amendment proposed by the honourable Dr Lee Siew-Choh. Sir, in his address earlier, Dr Lee very specifically stated that the PAP does not practise democracy. How does one explain the presence of Mr Chiam and Dr Lee Siew-Choh in this House, if the PAP does not practise democracy? Sir, in any democratic country, to be a Member of a Parliament, one must be elected. Here, we even allow non-elected Members to be present in this House. What is democracy then, Sir?”
“Let the people have a say in this proposal. But I propose that the Opposition parties should play their part also by fielding candidates in all the constituencies and make the elected President proposal as an issue to be voted on by the voters. Otherwise, they would have deprived voters of the non-contested constituencies the chance to express their view on this proposal. Those professionals who think that this proposal should go through a referendum, I believe among them are those who are also interested in politics, they should take part in the next general elections as independents and contest against the PAP on this issue in order to let the people to decide. They must practise what they preach. I agree with the Member for Braddell Heights that there is no absolute guarantee or safeguard in any system. The elected President is only one kind of safeguard and not an absolute guarantee. So the ultimate decision rests on the quality and value of the people. If the people cannot insist upon a philosophy of living of self-sufficiency and have lost the spirit of diligence, thrift and progress but bent on touching the $30 billion reserves, then whatever system there is would not be a safeguard preventing our nation from degenerating. On the other hand, if in the course of discussion on this proposal we can reaffirm the importance in nation building of a good government and can arouse the consciousness of the people about their responsibility for the survival of the country, then we will have already achieved the objective of the elected President proposal half-way, namely, by judiciously electing an honest, just, clean and upright government.”
“However, we should not rule out the other possibility in future of having an obstinate and egoistic President who will always go against the Cabinet and will not agree to the key appointments in public service. When there is such a conflict, then the Government will have to call for a referendum asking people to decide even over such appointment as SBC board member, I feel that it is really creating mountains out of molehills. It is not necessary. So the elected President's power in this area should concentrate on certain very key appointments such as (1) the Chief Justice and the other Supreme Court Judges; (2) Chairman and members of the Public Service Commission; and (3) Chairman and members of the proposed Armed Forces Services Commission. This will ensure judiciary independence and fair appointment and promotion in the civil and military services. I feel that other statutory boards such as PSA, PUB, CAAS and even SBC, the appointment of their key personnel and civil servants need not get the concurrence of the elected President. However, for statutory boards which have functions like a Central Bank such as the Monetary Authority of Singapore and the Currency Board and also the CPF Board and Government Investment Company which have direct relationship with the reserves and assets, perhaps the President should have a say in the appointment of their key officers, ie, Chairmen and members of the Boards. As regards the request by the Member for Potong Pasir on the 6th August that the question of an elected President should be put to a vote by the people in the next general elections if there is no referendum and the Bill for these constitutional amendments should not be passed before the general elections, I urge the government to agree to his request.”
“Moreover, from the view point of Eastern concept of values, to the people, since the large sum of assets and reserves were accumulated by the older generation, the older generation will have a right to and a say in the use of these "old assets" ( ) by the next generation. In fact, a good government should always be able to economize expenditure and generate new revenue and avoid deficit budgeting. It should achieve a balanced budget every year, better still a surplus budget, so that it will not be necessary to make use of the "old assets" or to borrow from abroad or to print money to pass the days. There are different opinions to the second function of the elected President's - his right to veto the appointments to certain key public service positions for the sake of preserving its integrity. The intention is good, but the scope of his power may be too wide. The White Paper says that certain key appointments should have the concurrence of the President. Such posts include, under section 45, paragraph (b), the eight categories of appointments ranging from the Chief Justice down to SBC's board members. In future, this may create problems. First, it may cause a conflict between the President and the Prime Minister over the appointees. Next, it may weaken the power of the Prime Minister and his Cabinet. Thirdly, it may cause the diversion of object of loyalty by the civil servant and statutory board employees. It is a difficult task to discover the right person, assess him and appoint him to the right post. And because different people have different opinions and ways, the elected President may have different opinion from the Prime Minister in exercising his power in this area. The proposal is based on the assumption that there may be bad government in future.”
“The Prime Minister and the first generation leadership have maintained three principles of good government, ie, integrity, prudent financial management, and the appointment of public service based on meritocracy. So far, although the Prime Minister and the Cabinet have great and unfettered powers, including powers to use of the reserves and to appoint key persons to the public service, but they have not abused their powers. Because of their just and selfless character and foresightedness, we have accumulated $30 billion reserves and established a clean and efficient public service. But nobody can ensure that future governments will have the same kind of quality. Under our parliamentary system, one or more political parties having majority of one seat in Parliament may form the government. If it is an irresponsible government caring only for short-term political benefits, it will easily squander away accumulated reserves from the past generation, and the practice by the politicians of nepotism or supporters from same political parties in public service appointments. Therefore, the proposed elected President system is to provide added safeguard for safekeeping the reserves and to ensure the integrity of the public service. This is a farsighted proposal. It deserves for the support of all. As regards the President's power in safeguarding the reserves which consist mainly of the savings of the people in the form of CPF. This has much to do with the interests of the people themselves. Our people accept this proposal, because having two keys to the reserves will always be safer and better than having just one key. A cheque signed by two persons will always be more prudent and safer than by only one person. Our people understand this.”
“The President's concurrence on the selection of all key appointment holders listed in the White Paper, in my opinion, is unnecessary. This list, if it is necessary, could be reduced to include maybe the Chief Justice, Supreme Court Judges, the Chairman of the Public Service Commission, the Chairman of the proposed Armed Forces Services Commission. The principle is, therefore, to provide a minimum number of checks on the system while preserving the integrity of the parliamentary system of government. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, the feedback from my constituents as well as from my GPC resource panel members ranges from cautious acceptance to cynical resignation. The case for a device to protect our reserves is water-tight. However, excessive checks and balances in the system would undermine the efficiency and effectiveness of our parliamentary system. Dr Ow Chin Hock (Leng Kee)( In Mandarin): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, in principle, I support the proposal of an elected President. But I would remind everyone that when we discuss this, we should concentrate on discussing the merits and demerits of the system and not on the potential candidate for the post. To put it more clearly, we should not think that because the Prime Minister is the best candidate for this post, therefore, we must accept this system of an elected President. We must judge the matter according to the long-term interest and future of the country. A system is not to be established just for a short time but it is a plan for a very long time. The proposal of an elected President is to further institutionalize our political system, in order to ensure gradually in future a political system will not base on personality. The system should not rise or fall accordingly to the rise and flat of personality ( ).”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, another point I would like to address is the much more controversial but commanding less attention so far and it refers to the issue of key appointments in the civil service. From discussions I have had, many people have expressed their concern about the proposed safeguards to ensure meritocracy and integrity of the civil service. The proposed requirement to obtain the President's concurrence in respect to key appointments would hold civil servants beholden to the President. This could lead to the possibility of split loyalty amongst them. Sir, the White Paper proposes a whole list of key appointments for which the President's concurrence has to be sought. It is generally felt that this list is too extensive. Many of these appointments could be omitted without compromising the effectiveness of the President in preserving the integrity of the civil service. I am of the opinion that the Chairmen and members of the various statutory boards and Government-linked companies should not be included in this list. The present system has already built in the necessary safeguards to prevent the statutory boards and companies from squandering their funds and assets. I can understand why this has been introduced. The specific statutory boards listed out in the White Paper are those statutory boards which have accumulated reasonable amounts of surpluses over the years. But none of the statutory boards has so far spent its money. In any case, the Minister for Finance can direct that these surpluses be easily transferred back to the Consolidated Revenue. Sir, I think the system has sufficient built-in checks and balances on the operation of statutory boards and Government-linked companies.”
“Therefore, this is a potentially contentious point in an event of a confrontation. If the wish of the President is allowed to prevail, then the consideration of the preservation of the Parliamentary system would be called into question.”
“This complication may well impair his ability to effectively perform his custodial functions vested in him as the Vice-President. Moreover, Sir, what will be his standing, as he is wearing two hats - one as a Minister of the Cabinet or an MP and the other as Vice-President? This is one of the difficulties we may have to live with if we accept the proposal in the White Paper. Sir, in order for the proposed Presidential system to be effective, we will need a Vice-President with the quality stipulated in the White Paper, in particular he must be free from any conflict of interest apart from having unquestioned moral authority. What will happen if he is sympathetic to the cause of the Prime Minister? Let me paint you a simple but maybe realistic scenario. Assuming that the President and the Prime Minister cannot see eye to eye, and the President has blocked many Bills put forward to him for assent. The Prime Minister maybe could send the President on overseas tours or on long leave and push through Bills through the Vice-President during his absence. The White Paper, I believe, has not addressed this possibility and thus does not make any provision to guard against this situation. Therefore, Sir, I am of the opinion that the Vice-President should be, like the President, a non-partisan appointment. Both of them should be elected as a team on the same ticket in order to prevent any possible abuse of the system. Sir, the people I have spoken to have expressed their fear that the elected President could turn out to be more powerful than the Prime Minister. The reason is very simple. The President has the mandate of the whole country whereas the Prime Minister is appointed by the majority of the MPs.”
“And the solutions narrow down to two: (i) having an elected President in the manner proposed in the White Paper, or (ii) having a Council for the Protection of Reserves. I suppose, in our truly Singaporean cautious style, we are deciding to have both an elected President as well as a Committee for the Protection of Reserves. Sir, whilst I support the proposal to protect our national reserves, I feel that its enforceability must also be carefully planned for. For example, the President and his Committee must have access to information and have a means of monitoring them. To make the proposed solution effective, the financial assets and reserves of the State must be clearly defined so that there is sufficient leeway for the government to manage while at the same time there are meaningful accounts or reports for the President and his Committee to check on. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, besides amending the role of the President, the White Paper proposes the creation of the office of Vice-President. This proposal warrants close examination. It is proposed that the Vice-President may continue to serve as a Minister or as an MP after election to the office. I have reservations about the validity of this arrangement. From the views which I have gathered from various quarters, it is generally felt that the Vice-President must be the running mate of the President. The White Paper proposes that the Vice-President needs to exercise the functions and duties of the President for any period during which the President is unable to do so owing to illness, absence from Singapore, or any other cause. Sir, therefore, if he continues to serve as a Cabinet Minister or as an MP, then I believe there is a conflict of interest.”
“Having an upper legislative body will not only cause delays but also change our present Parliamentary system. Sir, we may not appear to be suffering from the problems which are outlined in the White Paper now because we are currently enjoying a good government. However, there could potentially be problems should an irresponsible government, by default, assume power. To suggest that such problems may take place presupposes that the electorate could make a mistake of voting in a bad government. If this presupposition is correct, it would appear that there is no guarantee that the same electorate can vote in a better President to check on the government. Perhaps what we are saying is that the chances of them voting in both a bad government and a bad President is less than the chance of just voting in a bad government. Sir, we can reduce the chance of a double tragedy by phasing out the timing of their respective elections by having a different electoral system for the election of the President and Vice-President. Sir, the White Paper has suggested several ways of ensuring that the elected President can effectively check on the government's actions by stipulating various quality control measures on the selection of President, such as stringent background tests and pre-selection by an impartial body. This brings me to the other possible solution which is to have a Council for the Protection of Reserves. We could have that impartial body sitting as a Council and thus obviate the need to create the office an elected President. Sir, given the assumption that the electorate may one day vote in an irresponsible government (with an overwhelming majority), the issue before the House appears to be choosing the most appropriate solution to this potential problem.”
“The White Paper has listed the following key considerations: (a) The Parliamentary system should be preserved; (b) The safeguard mechanism must ensure quick action; (c) The person must have moral authority; (d) The person must have ministerial or high executive or administrative experience; and (e) The Presidential candidates must be assessed and selected by an impartial body, comprising three or five persons. Sir, I agree with the first consideration because we should not tamper with our present Parliamentary system unnecessarily. We should preserve our present Parliamentary system. I also recognize the importance of the second consideration, as any solution which unduly delays the execution of government decisions will not only reduce efficiency but will also lead to an ineffective government. However, Sir, I find the last three considerations are only applicable if we have already decided that an elected President is the only solution. They would not be applicable when we are considering other solutions, for example, having a Council purely for the protection of reserves. Therefore, there are only two real considerations out of the list of five. Unless there are other considerations, these two considerations, that is, the preservation of the Parliamentary system and ensuring quick action, do not appear to rule out, in my opinion, other alternative solutions other than those the Government has considered. Sir, the status quo can be an example. There is no change to the Parliamentary system and neither is there any observable delay in the execution of Government's decisions. The same applies to the solution of having a Council with the power to veto any government's misuse of the reserves. The referendum route will present considerable delays, not to mention costs.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, thank you for allowing me to participate in this debate. Sir, this White Paper is a landmark document which will alter the nature and functions of the office of the President of Singapore. I see this move as a solution to some problems that we have with our existing Constitution, and not due to any unhappiness over the existing role of the President. The problem, as the White Paper puts it, is that, left as it is, there is a danger of misuse of our reserves as well as a drop in the standards and integrity of our public service. This is because presently our Constitution does not contain any checks on the Government in respect of these two crucial matters. I agree and recognize that these are problems that require quick attention. It is indeed commendable that the present Government takes the initiative to reveal an apparent loophole in our Constitution which it could have exploited for its own benefit. Sir, the proposed solution must be viewed in the light of this good intention. Besides the proposed adoption of an elected President and Vice-President, the White Paper points out that the Government has considered various alternative solutions to the problems. To recapitulate, some possible solutions include: (a) Creating of an upper legislative body; (b) Reposing the power of veto in a separate body; (c) Requiring decisions on financial assets to go through a referendum. Sir, whichever solution we choose depends on how we set our fundamental considerations. What are these considerations?”
“My Council conducted a survey and the survey results are contained in the report. As for me, Sir, having been involved for 22 months, I must say it has been a very gratifying experience. Even more gratifying is the change that has brought about upon grassroots leaders. They have become more pragmatic and cost conscious in discharging their responsibilities, balancing expectations against limited resources available at their disposal. Previously, I believe they used to consider things or issues in isolation. Now when considering and examining requests for facilities, they view from a broader view or broader perspective of the Town Council. Sir, in conclusion, may I say that the Town Council concept in our experience has been a good one and it helps to instil on residents a new sense of responsibility. In our opinion, it also allows the development of a distinctive style and character of the estate through fostering a sense of community belonging. We believe, for the Town Council to be successful, there must be three ingredients. Firstly, Sir, it must have the positive support of all residents. This is the major ingredient. Secondly, the quality of both elected and appointed members of the Town Council is important. Here, quality includes ability, commitment, dedication, integrity and also pragmatism, and lastly, but not the least, the competence of the professional staff engaged in the daily running of the estate. We in our Council have been privileged to have an extremely competent staff. Sir, with these remarks, I would urge this House to accept this Bill.”