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 Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.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 9 of 12.
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to thank all Members who participated in this debate this afternoon and I am sure the Minister for National Development will give due consideration to all the valid points made by the PAP Backbenchers. Mr Speaker, Sir, as expected, the two Opposition Members have repeated their usual theme, and I am sure the Minister for National Development will give it his usual treatment. Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to thank the Minister for National Development for his assurance to this House that some measures will be taken to assist the poor in our midst. My request is that any plans the Government has must be implemented soonest. Question put, and agreed to. Resolved, That this House - Recognising the achievements of the Housing and Development Board in the last 25 years; and Commending the valuable contributions made by the Management, Staff and Workers of the HDB in achieving this; and Conscious that HDB's success has enabled the majority of Singaporeans to be proud home owners; Urges the Government to take suitable measures to assist those citizens in the lower income group who do not yet own homes to become proud home owners. USE OF CPF SAVINGS FOR INVESTMENT IN SHARES, LOAN STOCKS, UNIT TRUSTS AND GOLD (Statement by the Acting Minister for Labour) 5.30 pm”
“If this can be achieved, then the lower income group can own their own homes and improve their quality of life. I would strongly urge the Government to work out a scheme quickly which will enable these lower income Singaporeans to join the rank of proud home owners. Mr Speaker, Sir, in conclusion, I would like to offer my heartiest congratulations to the HDB on its 25th Anniversary and would urge the management and staff of HDB to scale even greater heights. Sir, I beg to move. Question proposed. 12.34 pm”
“The $10,000 cash grant is one of the schemes introduced by the Government to assist the people in the lower income group. However, for various reasons, response to this scheme has been poor so far. Whilst I agree with what the First Deputy Prime Minister has stated in this House, and I quote: 'The Government's approach to the problem of the poor is therefore high economic growth, universal education and skill training, small families, home ownership and working wives. It has in large measure succeeded although it has not eliminated poverty altogether. Our experience has confirmed that welfare and generous handouts are not the solution to the problem.' I submit, Sir, that it will take considerable time to solve the problem of the lower income group. As such, I believe special interim measures may be necessary. This has been articulated by many of my PAP colleagues in this House during the debate on the Presidential Address earlier in the year. The Government may want to consider some of the following measures to assist the poor in our society to own their own homes: Firstly, there is this question of reduction in the deposit for the purchase of flats. The current deposit level appears rather high for the lower income group. Another measure which Government could seriously consider to assist the lower income group is to extend the current repayment period of 20 years. And thirdly, as a further incentive, Government could consider offering lower interest rates for the people in the lower income group. Mr Speaker, Sir, the above measures, if implemented, will enable some to become home owners quickly. The long term solu- tion, I believe, will really be to increase the income levels of the people through higher productivity.”
“To further encourage Singaporeans to own their own homes, people living in squattered areas or rent-controlled premises which are affected by public redevelopment are given priority in the allocation of flats. Sir, Singapore has gradually avoided disastrous policies of unlimited subsidies associated with the welfare state which are, in fact, crippling some of the industrial countries today. However, having said this, there does appear to be pockets of our less well-off Singaporeans who do not seem to be able to afford to buy HDB flats. One estimate gives the percentage of such Singaporeans as about 15-20%. According to the HDB, about 26% of its flats are still being rented out to Singaporeans who are either waiting to buy flats or for some reason are not eligible to own flats. However, there are also some Singaporeans who just cannot afford to buy their flats. I think it is our duty to help our fellow Singaporeans to move out of this trap. It is the Government's stated policy, and here I quote: 'Our people can enjoy a better quality of life by 1999. There will be no unsewered households, slums or environmental pollution. Every family will own a home for we shall help the 15-20% lower income group to do so.' Sir, due to various reasons, maybe lack of education, old age, personal circumstances, the 15-20% of our population belong to this lower income group. They have not reaped much of the benefits of our 25 years of economic progress. Most of them are either odd-job workers, casual labourers or self-employed and are thus without the benefit of CPF. If nothing is done to assist them, then this lower income group living in their cramped flats will become more and more detached from the mainstream of our society and it will remain a dark spot in our social fabric.”
“To all the HDB staff, especially the counter staff, we owe them a big Thank You for their patience in dealing with the public. A word of thanks should also go to the sweepers, counter clerks and all the other supporting staff throughout the 32 Area Offices around Singapore. I would submit, however, that the management of HDB continue to explore avenues to improve the HDB-resident interface. I can foresee that the HDB would be subject to increasing pressure for more, better and faster services and amenities in the years ahead. Sir, in my opening remarks I mentioned that we are a nation of proud house owners. Sir, home ownership is the cornerstone of our nation building. It gives every home-owning Singaporean a genuine stake in this land of ours. Singapore is today a property-owning democracy. Instead of the inevitable class struggle between the haves and the have-nots, we have in Singapore a healthy battle among Singaporeans each striving for a bigger slice of the Republic's real estate. Indeed, the lower and middle income groups can look forward to constant improvement of the standard of living and eventually owning their own flats. The provision of large scale public housing in Singapore has contributed in no small measure to the stable, social and political climate. Though the home ownership scheme was introduced in 1964, overwhelming demand to own an HDB flat did not gather momentum until 1968. With the introduction of the Central Provident Fund (Amendment) Act in 1968, purchasers were permitted to use their CPF savings to meet down-payments and monthly payments. In view of the rising general income level, and to enable a greater proportion of the population to own HDB flats, the income ceiling has been periodically reviewed.”
“This prevents the formation of enclaves or closed communities. For this reason, Sir, the HDB discontinued the building of exclusive HUDC estates. At the same time, Sir, tremendous efforts have been made by Residents' Committees, Citizens' Consultative Committees and grassroots organizations to ensure that living in HDB estates is a pleasant and harmonious experience. This is a goal which cannot be achieved by good housing design alone. Sir, in the last few minutes I have tried to sketch the achievements of the HDB over the last 25 years. I would like now to turn to the people who have made this possible. If you consider the achievements of the physical building which you see as the hardware, now let us look at the software behind the scheme. Permit me to propose a general salute to the unsung heroes of the HDB. Here, I am referring to the 13,906 management and staff who have been in the front line of the Republic's battle against homelessness. This House should commend the valuable contributions made by the HDB's dedicated and harkworking workforce as well as qualified management team. Since the inception of HDB in 1960, the staff strength has risen more than ten-fold, from over 1,000 employees to the present strength of nearly 14,000. The HDB management team, Sir, must be congratulated for effectively implementing well thought-out administrative policies, sound planning and designs and an efficient implementation system. These are the silent heroes who strive ceaselessly to make our housing estates clean and the environment habitable. Let us also not forget the maintenance crew who provide 24-hour emergency service to all constituencies to ensure that nobody gets trapped in our lifts.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, income ceilings governing the eligibility criteria of HDB flats have also been revised over the years to enable those with rising income who could not afford private housing to purchase HDB flats. Sir, at the start of the fifth 5-Year Building Programme in 1981, there was an upsurge in the demand for HDB flats, resulting in more applicants on the waiting list. Immediately the building target was revised upwards from 100,000 to 155,000. By 1983, the waiting list had been significantly reduced. It was during this time that the HDB introduced mechanization and prefabricated flats successfully. In May 1983, the first HDB executive flats were completed to meet the housing needs of the middle-class in our population. I am told that the Board is confident that by December 1985, the number of dwelling units completed will be over 180,000, exceeding its revised target of 155,000. Good physical housing is no guarantee for good and harmonious community living. Experience all over the world has shown that it is all too easy for public housing to degenerate into urban slums. This is so whether it be in advanced countries or in developing countries. Fortunately, for us, HDB towns were saved from falling into this trap by the creation of a harmonious and thriving community within each of our existing housing estates and new towns. This is not entirely due to good fortune. It was achieved through a mix of right Government policy on the one hand and hard work and cooperation on the part of the HDB, its residents and our community and grassroots leaders on the other hand. By having a mixed community in each housing estate and new town, this ensures that each represents a cross-section of the population distribution in Singapore.”
“All the time, however, the HDB was also learning from its own experience and thinking of ways and means to improve conditions for future residents. In 1962, Queenstown, the HDB's first new town, took shape. Built on the neighbourhood concept, it became the basis for future generations of new towns. In 1964, Toa Payoh added another landmark in the Singapore scene. Mr Speaker, Sir, the next two 5-Year Building Programmes (1966 to 1975) saw HDB putting greater efforts to improve facilities and amenities for residents. More emphasis was placed on quality. Hawker centres, shopping and recreational facilities were also included. The estates that were completed included Telok Blangah and Marine Parade. By the end of 1975 a total of more than 180,000 units of shops and flats were completed against a target of only 173,000. Sir, with the completion of another 134,000 units in the fourth Building Programme, 65% of our population began living in HDB flats. By this time the lifestyle of Singaporeans had so changed that the "HDB Family" was recognized as a typical Singapore family. In fact, HDB also made several policy changes and decisions aimed to preserve the family unit, especially our Asian extended family lifestyle. In this connection, the Joint Ballot Scheme and the Multi-tier Family Scheme were introduced. To even encourage upward mobility, in 1979 the HDB flat owners were allowed after five years of occupation to sell their flats in the open market and to purchase another bigger HDB flat. Before, however, all HDB flats had to be sold back to the Board at the original selling price. Recent revisions in the resale policy have also given flat owners more flexible options.”
“South Korea, as you probably know, has tremendous economic achievements and better performance records than Singapore. They lamented that only 15% of the population are housed in low-cost public housing, where our record, Sir, is well over 80%. Mr Speaker, Sir, this achievement has been made possible because of Government's strong commitment to its public housing policy and Singaporeans' full support for its implementation. The Government's goal is to provide sufficient flats for all Singaporeans who need them and at prices they can afford. Moreover, out of half a million flats more than 75% are owner-occupied under the Home Ownership Scheme. For the year 2000 we can expect virtually all HDB residents to be home-owners. Mr Speaker, Sir, the HDB in the last 24 years has successfully completed four Five-Year Building Programmes, and it is now at the tail-end of the fifth programme which ends in December 1985. This House should congratulate the HDB for its splendid achievement on its 25th Anniversary, which it is celebrating now. Sir, as at March 31, 1985, the properties under its management consist of over half a million flats, as well as a large number of shops, factories, car parks and a host of other facilities, such as swimming and sports complexes, town and neighbourhood parks, food centres, markets and offices. I have tabled these cumulative achievements of HDB. These Tables (Cols. 653 - 654) I and II have already been circulated to hon. Members. Tables - HOUSING & DEVELOPMENT BOARD (Cols. 653 - 654) Sir, the HDB's achievements underscore the commitment and the determination of the Singapore Government to provide not only a home for every citizen but also to build a viable urban community for people to live, work, shop, rest, relax and educate their children.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That this House - Recognising the achievements of the Housing and Development Board in the last 25 years; and Commending the valuable contributions made by the Management, Staff and Workers of the HDB in achieving this; and Conscious that HDB's success has enabled the majority of Singaporeans to be proud home owners; Urges the Government to take suitable measures to assist those citizens in the lower income group who do not yet own homes to become proud home owners. Sir, we are today a nation of proud home owners. In 1959, when the PAP swept into power, it was confronted with seemingly intractable problems. The immediate tasks were to provide jobs for the jobless and homes for the homeless. Sir, in 1959, it was estimated that a quarter million people were living in generated slums and another 300,000 in squatter areas. The Singapore Improvement Trust (SIT), which was set up in 1927 by the then colonial Government, had managed to build only 23,000 units of public housing over a period of 32 years. The SIT flats accommodated about 9% of our 1.6 million population. Sir, the PAP Government therefore took immediate action to tackle the problem of public housing. The HDB was thus established in February 1960 to undertake the function of providing low-cost public housing. Mr Speaker, Sir, today, after 25 years, the HDB has completed over 500,000 units of flats, accommodating over 80% of the total population of about 2.6 million people. This is indeed no mean task. Today, Singapore's public housing record is the envy of many people and nations. Sir, last week I happened to be in Wushan in South Korea where I had the occasion to meet leading members of the business community.”
“Support the motion or the amendment to the motion. Make up your mind.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, another criticism levelled by the Member for Anson is that all the incentives and assistance are only given to the businessmen and that nothing is given to the workers. This allegation, l am afraid, must be debunked because, Sir, cost reductions through the various fiscal measures would further ensure the viability of our business enterprises, especially the small and medium-sized local companies. Viable companies mean jobs and no retrenchment for our workers. The alternative would be to increase the burden on our businesses until they collapse. The result: joblessness, social misery and political instability, All these are well known to the Member for Anson. A viable and strong corporate and business sector must mean more and more and better paying jobs. Mr Speaker, Sir, finally, let me remind the Member for Anson that the tough times should help to breed tough people. But unfortunately tough times also breed false prophets. History fortunately has shown that false prophets also get flushed out in economic cycles. After all, a circus clown will fail to tickle his audience with the same trick over and over again. Mr Speaker, Sir, I suggest this House rejects the amendment.”
“This great economic solution was reported in the Straits Times of 27th July 1985. Let me first take on the question of customs union. Obviously, when the Member for Anson talks about customs union, I think he does not understand or fails to understand that we will have basically to compromise our free trade philosophy. Does he not realize that under a customs union we will have to raise tariff walls? For the information of the Member for Anson, let me explain the various possible forms of economic groupings starting from free trade area, customs union, common market and economic union. It will be advisable for him to understand the concepts and implications before making bold statements about having a customs union. Greater economic cooperation within ASEAN has been considered, will be considered and is still being considered at all levels. However, the fundamental problem in regional cooperation stems from the difference in the levels of economic development. Addressing an ASEAN Economic Ministers' Meeting in February 1985, the Malaysian Prime Minister said, and I quote: 'Difference in the economic conditions in our countries rules out any common market type arrangements.' We should, nevertheless, work with ASEAN countries to improve on our present ASEAN Preferential Trading Arrangements. Since its inception in 1977,l believe over 12,000 items have been covered under this PTA arrangement. Although the value is still quite small, I still think efforts should be made to extend the coverage of Preferential Trading Arrangements. If sig- nificant headway can be achieved under the PTA scheme, it will be a possible step and pave the way for a more advanced form of ASEAN cooperation.”
“Sir, the question now is to work out solutions, both short-term and long-term. We are all aware of the structural as well as the cyclical factors, both internal and external, which have contributed to the current downturn. Insofar as cyclical factors are concerned, a certain amount of pump-priming by the Government will alleviate the problem. As to the structural problems, the solutions are going to be far more complex and painful, especially to our small and local businessmen. Our basic economic philosophies, I believe, are still sound and very valid. It is clear that the economic strategy embarked by the Government over the last six years to restructure our economy was a step and is a step still in the right direction. The only snag has been in our productivity growth. This has fallen way behind our wage and other costs. This has had a great impact on our international competitiveness and we have lagged behind other industrial countries and some OECD countries. Hence, we must correct this situation quickly so as to increase our competitive position. One way to do this is to quickly remove some of the rigidities within our present system. At this juncture, I would like to commend employers, employees and the NTUC for having recognized the problems and for making the necessary sacrifices to set things right. Mr Speaker, Sir, the Member for Anson, in introducing this amendment, mourns about the delay and inadequacies of measures taken so far by the Government. When asked what he would do to solve Singapore's economic problems, he was reported to have said that Singapore businessmen must be given more scope. There should be a customs union with our neighbours and more transfer of technology.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise to ask this House to reject the amendment moved by the Member for Anson. Sir, the current economic problems are not new or sudden. The Government had anticipated the problems and there has been much public debate and discussion. One recurring feature in the Budget statements in the recent years has warned about this. Just to refresh the memory of some Members in this House, let me quote the Finance Minister when he presented his Budget in 1981. He said: 'We must be prepared for the worst but the worst must hold no fear for us. Recession, unemployment, higher oil prices, protectionism, regional conflict, security threats, international turbulence - all these threaten our livelihood. We cannot avoid getting wet in bad weather, but if we have adequate preparations, we can put our raincoats on, and when we get indoors, change into dry clothes.' This was stated in 1981. The statement in 1983 went on something like this: 'As individuals, our best contribution to Singapore's economic defence is to improve productivity at our workplaces. We have to tighten our belts and lower expectations for wage increases in 1983. We should not fear the storm because we are well prepared. But we must expect the rough going and, if we are unlucky, a drenching before the good times return., Last year, the Finance Minister was very categorical when he stated, and again I quote: 'The outlook for 1985 at this point of time is not as rosy as last year.' Sir, in fact, we in Singapore should be thankful for having enjoyed years of growth when other countries in the world and in the region face severe difficulties. This one aspect has been totally forgotten. Maybe some Members would have been happier if the recession had come on to the people of Singapore in 1981.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, as our President, I am confident that Mr Wee Kim Wee will enhance the office of the Presidency. His integrity and exemplary conduct and life-style is worthy of emulation. A man of humble origins, Mr Wee Kim Wee can walk tall among Kings, Presidents and Prime Ministers, and yet be at home with the common man. This is the real measure of the man. He is, I believe, the epitome of meritocracy in Singapore, having risen through the ranks to reach the highest and the most prestigious office in the land. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, in my opinion, Mr Wee Kim Wee is a small man who has done big things for Singapore and himself. Question put, and agreed to. Resolved, That this Parliament, in accordance with Article 17 of the Constitution, elects Mr Wee Kim Wee as President of the Republic of Singapore. [Applause.] ROAD TRAFFIC (AMENDMENT) BILL Order for Second Reading read. 3.09 pm”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I rise to support the motion moved by the Hon. Prime Minister to elect Mr Wee Kim Wee as the Fourth President of our Republic. Over the last three days much has been said about Mr Wee, Mrs Wee, his family, his work, his achievements and contribuions, and I do not intend to go over the same ground. I have personally known Mr Wee Kim Wee since he assumed his diplomatic duties in Kuala Lumpur and have had occasions to be with him in Kuala Lumpur, Tokyo and Seoul and have seen him in front-line operation. All I can say, Sir, is that his contributions in the field of political, economic and foreign relations are immeasurable. I read somewhere that a good ambassador has three main qualities: (1) a love for his country; (2) political genius; and (3) learned eloquence to present his facts. I do not think we can fault Mr Wee on any one of the above. Mr Wee was and is actively involved in social, charitable and sporting bodies since the 1950's. He has served in various capacities. I am certain that the sporting community in Singapore will find a very welcome patron in Mr Wee. His involvement in sports both as a participant and official would be a model for many of us to follow. One other social body close to Mr Wee, I am told, is the Singapore Anti-Tuberculosis Association. Before his departure from Singapore for his diplomatic postings, Mr Wee served as a Council Member and also Chairman of SATA. He took a very keen interest in the affairs of SATA. Only yesterday the Director of SATA mentioned to me that two months ago Mr Wee invited him for lunch to get an update of the activities of SATA. This shows that his care and concern is a continuing one.”
“Has the Minister any plans to beef up this particular Department?”
“Supplementary question, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir. Sir, Members are aware of the good work done by the Employment Service Department -”
“No, I am just giving you a bit of advice. You can wait. There is no great hurry. No song and dance just about one solitary tree. There are bigger issues than this. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I would like to take this opportunity to quote what Harold MacMillan, a former Prime Minister of Great Britain, said after having spent some time also in the Opposition. This is from the Book "Tides of Fortune", page 48: 'Opposition in Parliament cannot be said to be a very enthralling affair. . . . For myself, I did not much enjoy the work, for my whole life has been directed, whether in business or politics, to trying to create rather than to destroy.' Sir, only a nation bent on self-destruction will encourage the type of opponunist politics that is being purveyed and pursued by the Opposition Members of Parliament. Finally, I would like to suggest to the two Members of the Opposition that being elected to this House does not give them a divine right to share in the government. Government is for the elected Party that forms the Government. So until they form the Government, the ruling of Singapore is left to the People's Action Party. 11.58 am”
“Member decried the integrity and legitimacy of grassroots organizations like the RCs. In fact, he has given them many labels. In the same breath, he has assailed the PAP for "obstructing" his access to such organizations. Sir, such simulated and manufactured anger over bogus issues cannot help the Workers' Party win elections. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, yesterday the Member for Potong Pasir made a big song and dance about planting a tree in the Potong Pasir Constituency. I was also offered this exotic plant from China to be planted in my Constituency. Sir, tree planting is a very serious business of the Government. The Government has a Tree Planting Campaign every year. Tree planting in Singapore, as I know, on special occasions, is a privilege given to visiting dignitaries, such as Heads of State. I do not think the Member for Potong Pasir qualifies under this criteria at this stage. The right time to do is during the Tree Planting Campaign, which is normally in November. The Member for Potong Pasir can participate in the Tree Planting Campaign and plant the particular exotic plant from China in his Constituency, as I did in my Constituency last November. I am told that my colleague, the Member for Teck Ghee, is also waiting for permission from the HDB to plant a similar tree in his Constituency. So please wait. There is plenty of time. The Tree Planting Campaign comes on in November.”
“We are what we are because we put issues of economic development and social mobility above political dogma. At this stage, permit me to paraphrase what one British Parliamentarian had commented. I quote: 'Possibly our greatest need today is for pride in ourselves,our homes, our jobs and our country. So, far from giving us this pride, the Opposition owe their positions and power to their skill in destroying it.' The hon. Member for Anson, and goaded on by the hon. Member for Potong Pasir, wallows in parliamentary halftruths. We can do without this in this House. As my colleague, the Member for Serangoon Gardens has said earlier, what are the acid tests of a successful and effective Opposition in Parliament? To my mind, the key tests are, I would like to repeat here, political leadership, innovation, credibility, loyalty and political organization. To this question, my colleague has already answered where the Opposition political parties stand. What then are the contributions from the Worker's Party and the SDP? "Opposition for opposition's sake," as Ramsay MacDonald says, "is a crime against the state". He further argued that opposition to legislation should not be carried on beyond the Second Reading stage, and that after this, the Opposition should concern itself with seeking to improve details within the broad principles of the legislation. "The Opposition has no right to obstruct in the sense of making Parliament barren or unproductive." I hope the two hon. Members would bear this in mind since they are in this House also at the expense of our taxpayers. Sir, the Member for Anson obviously has taken great joy in casting doubts on all actions and motives of the Government. He seeks to erode and diminish public confidence in our institutions. On the one hand, the hon.”
“You will decide? You stood in the last elections. You know the results. The PAP is in power to govern and to govern fairly and firmly. Let us make no bones about this. No ruling political party, Sir, sets out to nurture an Opposition to unseat itself from power. Such are the rules of the political battle field or real politik. And the sooner the two Opposition Members understand this, the better it is for them. One has to take a look at Britain, which is often quoted in this House by one particular Member of the Opposition. It is the cradle of parliamentary democracy. The Labour Party is openly aligned with the Trades Union Congress, while the Conservative Party is tied up basically with the business community and the Confederation of Business Industry (CBI). Neither the Labour Party nor the Conservative Party is about to throw open its respective sphere of influence to its opponents in order to satisfy the ground rules of equal access. What does the Member for Anson or the Member for Potong Pasir expect the PAP to do? Nurture and build up the Workers' Party or the SDP? Hand over the grassroots organizations to these two political parties? Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, the real issue is, what should, in my mind, be our national priorities as Singaporeans? Should we not try to forge a new national consensus on the direction on which our society should be heading to? Or should we go for divisive politics and talk ourselves into a state of political and social paralysis? Sir, today, Singapore, as everyone knows, enjoys the highest standard of living in Asia, outside Japan. This blissful state of affairs did not arise from any blind adherence to any political dogma, either of the Right or of the Left.”
“I certainly do. Sir, listening to the Member who moved the motion and his supporter, the Member for Potong Pasir, I feel obliged to make a few comments. Sir, the PAP has been, and still is, in politics for political power.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, first of all, thank you for allowing me to participate in this debate.”
“For instance, all the cases reported this year were outside Singapore territorial waters. Let me mention, however, that we have adequate personnel and resources. We have 62 patrol boats in the Marine Police for antipiracy patrols. Last year, 11 new fast patrol craft, equipped with radar and weapons, were included in the marine fleet. The vessels are well-equipped and the crew well-trained. May I now, Sir, deal with the questions raised by the Member for Anson. He raised, I believe, four points. The first point related to junior officers acting in a higher grade. On this point, let me say that, in fact, the Civil Service has abolished acting allowances since 1976. Of course, Police officers do cover duties of a higher grade when vacancies arise until such time when promotion exercises are held to fill them. Those holding unit ranks, for example, corporal or sergeant, and have performed well will naturally stand a better chance for promotion. I think it is understood by all officers.”
“Sir, on a point of clarification. I was not referring to the incident as such, but more to the manner in which the Police attended to it, by not even paying a visit to the funeral of the person who was shot. Prof. Jayakumar: I thank the Member for the clarification. Here again, I take the point made by the Member for Chong Boon - that in this kind of situation the image of the Police and public relations can be enhanced if the Police visited the family concerned. I have asked my officials to check on the facts of this case. I would like to inform the House that the incident occurred on 30th July 1984. On the same evening, the Divisional investigating officer personally went to the victim's home in Ang Mo Kio to convey to the family the unfortunate news. So it is not completely accurate to say that the Police did not at the earliest available opportunity convey the news to the bereaved family. But, more importantly, regardless of this incident, I wish to assure the Members, and the Member for Chong Boon in particular, that his observations on public relations are pertinent and are uppermost in the minds of the Police as well as the officials in the Ministry. 2.45 pm Sir, if I may go on to the other point which the Member raised about piracy. The term "piracy" may be a misnomer in this case because under international law, Sir, piracy occurs on the high seas. Within our territorial waters, it would be classified as robbery at sea. This is an important distinction in international law. The question was whether the problem is under control. I would like to inform him that indeed the problem is under control. Part of the difficulty really is that the vast majority of the cases occur outside our territorial waters.”
“I would like to know from the Minister whether piracy is a serious problem in view of the fact that Singapore is the second largest port in the world.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, first of all, I would like to place on record my personal thanks and the thanks of my constituents to the Minister for setting up the temporary Neighbourhood Police Post in Block 461 in my constituency. My constituents have greatly benefited from this service and we are now looking forward to the establishment of the permanent police post which I am told will come about very shortly. Sir, I have two matters to raise with the Minister. The first one refers to the question of public relations and publicity in the Ministry of Home Affairs, particularly with reference to the Police Force. I am disappointed that for the financial year 1985-86, there is a reduction in the number of personnel in this department. I had occasion to bring to the notice of the Hon. Minister of the case of one of my constituents who was involved in the so-called Shenton Way shoot-out. The Public Relations of the Police Force in this case was most lacking. I believe that PR of the Police Force is extremely important, and if not properly carried out will leave a negative image on the population. Sir, with this in mind, I am just wondering what is the justification for reducing the number of personnel in the department. I know there are schemes for improving productivity and cutting down costs by reducing manpower. But maybe reduction should be looked at in other areas. This is one area which maybe I would urge the Minister to increase the number of personnel, particularly senior personnel. I think this is very important. Sir, next I move on to the question of the Marine Police. The Marine Police is responsible for policing the territorial waters of Singapore. Of late, we have heard of a number of cases of piracy.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, in my Meet-the-People sessions, I receive many requests from residents for hawker stalls to sell cooked food or cold drinks. I am sure this is the experience of many hon. Members in this House. Sir, these applications are duly processed by the Ministry of the Environment, and the following reply comes. Normally, the reply goes like this: 'There are no vacancies for cooked food stalls or stalls to sell cold drinks. However, if the constituent is prepared to widen his choice, then maybe an early allocation can be made to sell market produce.' Sir, obviously, from this answer, it is clear that there is a surplus of stalls in the wet markets and a shortage of stalls in the hawker centres. And with the changing marketing habits of housewives, maybe the Ministry should now consider whether it is appropriate at this time to convert part of the wet market into a hawker centre, or maybe extend the hawker centre which sells cooked food, cold drinks and other edible food and reduce the number of stalls that are reserved for market produce.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to focus the attention of this House on the question of surplus of dentists in our society. I am reliably told, Sir, that this will also extend to doctors in the not too distant future. Sir, I think something has gone wrong in our planning, both at the Ministry level and at the University. Sometime earlier a shortage was envisaged and the then Minister for Health introduced a dental therapist scheme in order to alleviate the problem of shortage of dentists. However, Sir, this scheme was sensibly and fortunately scrapped in 1982. And now we are faced with the problem of excess supply of dentists. The Government itself is releasing many of its bonded dentists, an I am told vacancies in the private sector are extremely limited. I am also reliably informed that five Government dental clinics had been rented out to dental graduates. Each clinic has four dental chairs catering for four dental graduates. There is a contract for two years at a rental of about $500 pe month. I am also told that another five dental clinics are available under the same scheme. Maybe the Minister might want to consider extending the scheme to include community centres. Sir, the question of over-supply of dentists or any profession is indeed a serious problem, especially so in Singapore. It has been repeatedly pointed out that we have a limited talent pool and there is no room for wastage. I would seriously urge the Ministry and the National University of Singapore to review the situation and put things right.”
“My question to the Minister is to enquire as to how soon we can have qualified physical education teachers in our primary and secondary schools as well as junior colleges, and to ask him whether this is an achievable goal in the very near future.”
“It is just no use having teachers in charge of games and sports if they do not understand the game in the first place. Instances of this are many for me to enumerate. Sir, apart from physical education, students also learn basic skills in primary schools for various sports and other activities. It is important that proper skills are imparted at an early age. Sir, the teaching of football skills, as the Member for Changi will tell you, is not merely tossing a few footballs to a class of 40 students. Specialist knowledge is required, and specialist teachers are required. Contact sports and activities develop various character aspects of the individual - the element of competitive spirit, teamwork - and it also helps the individual's physical well-being. Sir, in this respect, I welcome the setting up of the College of Physical Education. I would urge that the intake to this College be increased quickly and also more in-service courses in physical education be conducted to alleviate the problem of lack of PE teachers. Sir, qualified PE personnel in Singapore is rather limited and I believe they should be harnessed to undertake the job more effectively. There are PE specialists, I am told, in the Ministry of Education and at the same time in the ECA Centre. Specialists in the Ministry and specialists in the ECA Centre visit schools, obviously for different tasks. I am wondering, Sir, whether these activities should not be combined so that there is no wastage in the utilization of manpower. Sir, the Ministry might want to consider looking into this aspect.”
“Sir, much has been said in this House in the last two days about the Express stream, Normal stream, Extended stream, and the Monolingual stream. Sir, I come on to a subject which affects all these streams. I would like to offer a few comments on the subject of the teaching of Physical Education in our schools, primary schools, secondary schools and junior colleges. Sir, l believe this subject is not given the proper importance in our schools, largely because it is not an academic subject. However, Sir, I believe that the social cost for neglect of this subject in our schools will be quite high for the nation as a whole. What then, one might ask, are the causes for this neglect? Sir, in the pursuit of academic excellence, most principals and teachers tend to sacrifice physical education lessons for more important examination subjects. There is also a marked lack of trained teachers to take on this subject. I seriously wonder how many trained teachers are there in our schools to take on the teaching of Physical Education. Sir, the main constraint, as I see it, lies in the lopsided ratio of male and female teachers in our schools. Of the total number of teachers in primary, secondary and junior colleges, 64% are female and 36% male. If we look closely into the breakdown for primary schools, it is 70% female teachers, 30% male. In secondary schools, the percentage is 57% females and 43% males. And if we go on to the junior colleges, it is 62% females and 38% males. Sir, with 70% of teachers in primary school being females, I feel it is important that specialist teachers undertake the teaching of physical education and other sporting activities in our schools.”
“Sir, I just would like to add on to what the Member for Serangoon Gardens has said. Sometime last year the then Hon. Minister for Social Affairs informed this House that there were plans to build this indoor stadium. Looking at the Budget estimates for 1985, I see no such provision. I am sure the Finance Minister has agreed but somewhere somebody is delaying it. Maybe the Minister can inform the House.”
“Sir, I have an Amendment No. (3)*, and with your permission, I would like to speak now. Sir, there are two statutory boards under the Ministry of Community Development. One is the Hindu Endowments Board which looks after temples which has been endowed by a number of people. This particular body has performed a very useful function in looking after Hindu temples. The second statutory board under the Ministry of Community Development is the Hindu Advisory Board. Sir, this Advisory Board has worked very closely with the Ministry of Education in the recent introduction of the Study of Hinduism in the secondary school curriculum. The Board was actively involved with the Ministry of Education in the selection of the textbooks, recruitment of experts, and drawing up the syllabus. Sir, since the work done by both the Hindu Endowments Board and the Hindu Advisory Board is fairly similar, I am just wondering whether the Ministry has any plans in amalgamating the functions of both Boards and set up one particular body to look after Hindu affairs in Singapore.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I have two amendments under my name. And I do not intend to move them later. With your permission, I would like to raise three specific queries to the Hon. Minister. Firstly, I would like the Minister to inform this House whether there are any plans to set up new missions during the financial year 1985-86. Secondly, to inform this House what overseas properties were purchased by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs during 1983-84 financial year. Finally, Sir, I also notice that the estimates for FY 1985-86 provide an increase of $5 million ($14 million to $19 million) for purchase of overseas properties. Maybe the Minister could give us some details as to where these properties will be purchased.”
“Sir, in the conduct of our daily business activity or all of our activities, most Singaporeans are required to obtain various form of licences or permits issued by the various Government Ministries, departments or statutory boards. Over the years many statutory boards have been set up and a number of new permits and licences have been introduced. Sir, I would like to ask the Hon. Minister for Finance as to the number of licences and permits that are imposed by Government departments and statutory boards in Singapore and, secondly, to ask him whether any steps have been taken or are being taken to review some of these licences and permits so that unnecessary requirements can be eliminated.”
“Sir, I agree with the Minister that tendering is still the best system, whether it is for shophouses, or for cleaners or grass-cutters. But I believe that while the tender system is the best, HDB should have people to supervise these tenderers. Flats are not cleaned. Each block of flat is supposed to be cleaned twice a month. Generally, when you go on your house visits, the residents complain that the flats are not cleaned. It is normally cleaned just before the MP makes a visit. This is a normal occurrence. I would suggest that HDB should indicate the cleaning dates of the block of flats and this ought to be posted up in the RC notice boards. If the contractor does not clean up, then the residents themselves can ring up HDB and inform them that the contractors have been delinquent. Hence, the residents can actually participate in the management of the estate. Sir, my third point is actually a complaint to the Minister for National Development, particularly to HDB. I have here with me a letter which the Member for Anson has sent to his residents, whereby I feel that some special services have been given to Anson which 77 other PAP Members in this House do not seem to receive. If I may just read a section of the letter. It is an undated letter - "A letter from your MP ... signed J.B. Jeyaretnam": 'If a lift in your block is not serviceable or has broken down, please contact Mr Chua, Maintenance Officer, or the inspector under him, at the Tiong Bahru Area Office.' Sir, I think this is a very special service to residents of Anson, I hope the Hon. Minister will extend such services to other Members in this House.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, may I have your permission to join in this debate at this point of time? I have an amendment under No. (8) on Subhead TF-01 of the Development Estimates. Sir, I would like to join my other colleagues in this House to thank the HDB through the Minister for National Development for the services it provides to all Singaporeans, particularly the constituents in Chong Boon. I think the HDB's achievements have been generally taken for granted. The fact that HDB built 66,000 units last year is indeed a tremendous achievement. We in Singapore think that this is a very ordinary achievement. But this does not mean that the HDB is perfect and I would like to join the others in raising a few points which my constituents feel that the HDB could improve on. Sir, yesterday one Member touched on the question of rusty water. I think this is a problem which is facing not only the constituents in my constituency of Chong Boon but also a number of estates, particularly the newer estates. Sir, rusty water is a serious problem. I have personally taken this up with the Minister and also with the Second Minister for National Development, and I believe something is being done. All I request of the Minister is that something should be done quickly. 11.45 am Apart from getting rusty water at various times in the day, this does not conform with what we have heard in this House about conserving water. Residents have to waste a fair amount of water, a couple of buckets of water each day, before they can start getting clean water. I am assured both by PUB and HDB that the water is safe to drink, but I hope this problem will be resolved very quickly. The second problem in my constituency, Sir, refers to general maintenance of the estate.”
“Sir, I would like to ask the Minister of State what are Mindef's long-term plans in bringing this message of Total Defence to the people at large. BG Lee Hsien Loong: Mr Speaker, Sir, our Total Defence message last year was "Total Defence, because a generation's effort can be wiped out in days." That is the first thing which Singaporeans have to understand. As we go along, we plan to involve people in more and more concrete ways to do things connected with Total Defence. So they know what is their role, what is their contribution, what is expected of them. Housewives have to learn civil defence drills, learn first-aid, learn what happens if the building is damaged, learn how to cope with your neighbours. Employers have to learn, and we better educate them, how they can participate if civil resources are mobilized. As you are aware, Mr Speaker, Sir, there is legislation which is currently before the House. School children must be educated on how to grow up, so that ideas of Total Defence, so that consciousness of national security, is second nature to them, so that they do not grow up having a cold, intellectual debate about whether or not it is worth defending this country. They grow up believing, as an axiom of faith, that this is a country which is worth defending, and which they shall defend. That is our longterm plan for Total Defence education in Singapore.”
“The second suggestion which I would like to make to the Front Bench is that the Presidential Address which effectively sums up our national agenda for the next decade should now be simplified and disseminated to all Singaporeans, together with an action plan for implementation. 12.48 p.m.”
“In fact, Sir, I honestly believe that if more Singaporeans are involved in the decision-making process on policies which impinge upon their daily lives, the quality, relevance and acceptability of such decisions must definitely improve. Sir, the Housing and Development Board has done an excellent job in building homes for our people. Unfortunately the HDB's achievements for some reason or other have been taken for granted. Today HDB, I am afraid, gets more brickbats than bouquets. Most foreign visitors, particularly dignitaries, wished they had an effective organization like the HDB in their own country. By any standards, the achievements of HDB are something all Singaporeans can be very proud of. Having said this, I believe the time has now come for the HDB to concentrate and confine on the building aspects of the housing programme, and gradually detach itself from the Estate Management functions. Right now, Maxwell Road sets the cue and tone for all estate management, and I feel that this sometimes shackled local initiative and creativity. The formation of limited town councils has my full support, and I think it is timely for the Government to undertake a detailed study of this subject. Sir, in conclusion, I would like to offer two suggestions to the Government. Firstly, the Government should set up a multi-disciplinary Task Force, similar to the one on tourism, to look into the plight of the 10-15% of our population who appear to be imprisoned in a poverty trap. This task force should look into all aspects of the problem and make necessary recommendations to the Government, with home-ownership being one of the objectives.”
“When I had a look at the Ministry of Social Affairs Annual Report, I noticed that the assistance given to the financially distressed and the aged is not something we want to be proud of. The $3.2 million paid out in public assistance in 1983 is negligible compared to the billions that make up Government expenditure. Sir, surely we can do better than $3.2 million, and we need to do more. As for the aged, the same Report shows that the number of residents in private and other voluntary homes has increased while the number in Government homes has decreased. Mr Speaker, Sir, I believe that this is one area where privatization will not find strong support and many takers. I fully agree that we should not encourage the crutch mentality. But will the Government take more positive steps to help public assistance recipients and other needy persons so that they can become more self-supporting? Sir, I also note in the 1983 Ministry of Social Affairs Report that only $2,400 in loans were disbursed to two families. Surely such assistance can be increased, maybe a hundred-fold. Mr Speaker, Sir, the First Deputy Prime Minister in his Addendum to the Presidential Address stated among other issues: 'Singaporeans will participate in and actively run their own community services. They will manage their own towns.' This, I believe, is a major step for Singapore. I believe, Sir, Singaporeans are now capable and willing to take on some social responsibilities which impinge on their daily lives. Moreover, the move to experiment with some form of limited government would widen the degree of political and social participation among our fellow citizens.”
“However, I am pleased to note in the Addendum to the Presidential Address by the Minister for Education which says: 'Streaming procedures will be further improved to allow greater flexibility.' Sir, I believe the key to the exercise is flexibility. I am afraid there is over-dependence on computers in the Ministry of Education. Sir, the main thrust of Government policies are all well and in the right direction. But I would urge that more care and consideration be given when implementing these policies. Mr Speaker, Sir, the Presidential Address has highlighted the plight of the 10-15% lower income group who are unable to buy HDB flats. The Government must be congratulated for giving this priority consideration on our national agenda. Next, I turn to the Addendum on the Ministry of Community Development. It is stated that the Government will work with families, community, voluntary and charitable organizations and provide opportunities for the disabled, disadvantaged and the aged. Sir, to-date, the Government's track record on help and assistance to the disadvantaged and the aged is not one of the best. I think there is a fundamental misconception of the proper role of the Government with respect to the less fortunate members of our society. Government appears to take the view that the main assistance should come from voluntary and charitable organizations. Government tends to play a secondary role, and I think this is morally wrong. I am not asking for welfare hand-outs like in Great Britain but for a certain amount of concern and compassion. I feel more should be done to help those who have been left behind in our march towards progress and prosperity. And, Sir, we can afford to be a little bit more magnanimous.”
“Sir, the policy objectives of this Government are laudable and nobody in his right sense, maybe except one or two, can quarrel with them. But what I am concerned with is in the implementation. The question is: has the Government paid enough attention to the sensitivities of the people when implementing certain policies, specially those perceived to be tough policies? I am not convinced that the Government has exhausted all available options when embarking on certain tough policies. For example, Sir, when allocating scarce resources, I am afraid this Government has relied too heavily on the pricing mechanism, or just turning to fiscal measures. There may be other alternatives. One other alternative is to make people queue. But is there no other middle way? Maybe the Government should explain and explore whether there are middle ways. The Government to its credit has embarked upon many imaginative solutions to various problems. Take the transport problem, for example. It is not just building more roads and expressways or increasing the number of taxis or buses, decentralizing the central business district, spreading out the industrial areas to various parts of our Republic, locating certain clean industries amidst our housing estates, and the area licensing scheme. All these have helped to alleviate the traffic congestion, not just having fast lanes. My question is: have we done enough? How about staggering commercial vehicles, trailers and other earth-moving vehicles? Next, Sir, are tough policies really the best policies? Our education policy of streaming at an early age, has it not taken away the hopes of many? I believe streaming is a right policy. But has it been implemented well?”
“In his solution to traffic congestion, he says the problem can be easily solved by introducing fast lanes; again, a German influence, maybe the autobahns. Does he really know how many people are killed on the highways? Does he want Singaporeans to be killed on our expressways? Surely, Sir, this cannot be contributions towards nation building. Mr Speaker, Sir, the President in his Address sets out the broad parameters and goals upon which Singaporeans can work together to design and plan our future. The major parameters are set out and these goals set out the framework within which our people can forge a New Society, a society which will be qualitatively different from what we are today. This new society is often labelled as the post-industrial Information Society in which I believe people and knowledge will be the key resources. The final shape, nature and structure ofthis new society are still emerging and very unclear. Employment and occupational patterns will be different, with tremendous impact on our social relationships, values and attitudes. Sir, the thrust towards this Information Society will impose great strains and stresses arising out of the inevitable uncertainty. It is in this regard, Sir, that there would be a great need for extensive communication and dialogue between the Government and those governed. I am afraid Government Ministers must seek views, get feedback, review them and then explain. There has to be regular, both formal and informal, dialogue sessions among Ministers, MPs, including Opposition MPs, professional and business groups, community leaders and other interested groups. National policies will have to be disseminated properly and should not be left to the rumour mills.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, having heard the two Opposition Members, on Friday and yesterday, I now understand what Oscar Wilde meant when he said that "a politician is someone who approaches every subject with an open mouth." Sir, the Member for Anson on Friday talked about violation of fundamental rights. Sure they have fundamental rights in the United Kingdom. I do not want to go into a serious discourse except to remind the Member for Anson that the coal-miners' strike in the United Kingdom cost the United Kingdom government $5.2 billion. I think this is a luxury that we in Singapore cannot afford. Sir, the Member for Potong Pasir yesterday tried to convince this House that he is a loyal Opposition Member, by which I infer that the Member for Anson is not. He is sincere and responsible. He will be constructive and that he wants to contribute to nation building. Sir, I am afraid his performance yesterday did not match his words. In his 45-minute speech, or spill, whichever way you might take it, he took every opportunity to discredit this Government and its achievements. Is this constructive criticism? Talk about credibility, he distorts a Blue Paper on the aged as Government policy and goes on to insinuate that this Government has no money to pay CPF holders. On the other hand, he went on to offer two solutions to our possible national problems. If a recession or a catastrophe is to hit us, then we can go back to rear chickens and plant vegetables. Mind you, Sir, he is very serious about this. In West Germany, he says people grow corn. Does he know the size of West Germany? Just for his information, Singapore has 600 sq km, West Germany 250,000 sq km. Maybe he should take another drive in Germany.”
“Mr Speaker, before I comment on this Bill, I would like to declare that I am a Director of a shipping company. Sir, generally I support this amendment as it intends to replace certain obsolete provisions in this Act. I would only want to comment on clause 3, Mr Speaker, Sir, which empowers the Minister to make regulations. As the Bill stands, I have no quarrel but comment on the fact that the Minister can make a number of regulations. While making the regulations I would appeal to the Minister that his Ministry discusses it in some detail with the private sector, particularly the shipowners and the unions. Next, the Minister should also take into account our Open Registry policy. Whilst many countries are now seriously looking at reducing restrictions, we should not fall into the trap by adding on additional restrictions. Further, Sir, right now the shipping industry, as you probably know, is in the doldrums. If we put on any additional restrictions, it will impose very severe hardship on the industry. Lastly, as the Minister has already mentioned, on the question of improvements, the state of the art of ship-building should be taken into account. For example, there is a requirement right now that all ships must carry a radio officer. Modern ships are built in such a way that there are telephones and telexes. So really we do not need a radio officer. Sir, I support the Bill. 3.20 pm”
“Sir, I would like to thank the Minister for the good news and I am sure all Singaporeans welcome the move to have an Indoor Stadium. I would just like to ask when this fact will become a reality.”