S Iswaran
Singapore
“The Maritime and Port Authority of Singapore (MPA) has incorporated the requirements of the International Maritime Organization (IMO) 2020 regulation in its Prevention of Pollution of the Sea (Air) Regulations 2022. The Regulations are applicable to Singapore-registered ships and all other ships while they are in Singapore waters.”
“The Maritime and Port Authority of Singapore (MPA) plans to progressively roll out the charging infrastructure for electric harbour craft operations in the Port of Singapore from 2025.”
“Since 2018, the Land Transport Authority (LTA) has imposed minimum bicycle parking provisions covering different types of developments. The requirements are determined by multiple factors, including the developments’ use, location and gross floor area (GFA).”
“I had addressed similar Parliamentary Questions by Mr Gerald Giam on 29 November 2022 and 10 January 2023, as well as in my Ministerial Statement on 8 May 2023. The Member can refer to these past answers and statement as there has been no material change in the allocation of Certificates of Entitlement.”
“To encourage the uptake of electric cars, the Government has rolled out the Electric Vehicle Early Adoption Incentive and enhanced Vehicular Emissions Scheme. When taken together, it provides up to $45,000 off the Additional Registration Fee of an electric car upon registration.”
“The Land Transport Authority studies all potential changes to the Certificate of Entitlement (COE) system carefully, including conducting sensitivity analysis where appropriate.”
The complete record
Every one of 2,300 lines we hold for S Iswaran, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 38 of 46.
“It is not SP Services' job to take care of the welfare, although they do take a very considered approach in dealing with arrears' accounts. They give them several chances, counsel them on the usage of electricity and so on, before they go to more extreme steps. But at the same time, as Mr Sam Tan is aware, there is nothing stopping any one of the individual account holders from approaching their MPs or other agencies for help. The help is available through ComCare and other facilities. So we can take care of them. As far as SP Services' accounting is concerned, it is designed to manage it from a commercial point of view. Mr Alvin Yeo has raised the important issue of energy security. We need policies and strategies on both the demand and supply side to safeguard our energy security. Demand management is key, as using energy more efficiently will help reduce our energy dependence and emissions. We are, therefore, working closely with MEWR and NEA to develop programmes and measures on energy efficiency. On the supply side, Mr Alvin Yeo has highlighted the need to diversify our fuel sources. In that regard, we are planning to develop a terminal to enable the import of liquefied natural gas (LNG) so as to diversify our gas supply sources. To guard against a disruption in fuel supplies, our power generation companies are also required to stockpile fuel reserves. If our natural gas supply is disrupted, our gas turbines can switch to using diesel instead. I agree with Mr Alvin Yeo on the importance of developing alternative energy sources and keeping ourselves open to the different options, including coal. These alternatives can help us diversify away from our dependence on oil and gas, which accounts for nearly 90% of our electricity supply.”
“If the EVS is found to work and it stabilises, then there is a very higher chance that the real benefits will accrue to the consumer in a switch to contestability. Mr Sam Tan asked about the number of household accounts in utilities arrears and whether there has been some masking of the numbers. Let me first deal with the arithmetics. In January 2005, there were 9,859 accounts in arrears. These are consumers whose payments are overdue for at least three months. Subsequently, in May 2005, the Pay-As-You-Use (PAYU) Scheme was implemented. Following this, accounts in arrears are distinguished between those on the PAYU scheme and those who are not. In January 2007, there was a total of 6,200 accounts in arrears, about half on the PAYU scheme and half non-PAYU accounts. This is a decline of about 37% from the 9,000-odd accounts in arrears in January 2005. The more basic question that Mr Sam Tan is asking is whether this, by some magic, has masked the numbers. The answer is simple. There is no magic. This is a simple account management process that SP Services uses to decide who are the accounts in arrears. So, as in any commercial practice, when an account in arrears reschedules its debts and is migrating to pay you, let us say they reschedule their debts, then they are no longer treated as cases in arrears. They are moved to a new category and, thereafter, they only re-enter the arrears account if they default on their payments again above the three-month period. That is the nub of it. Mr Sam Tan has a very legitimate concern, ie, does this somehow deprive those who really need help in order to meet their utilities costs from getting it?”
“So, I would say that, in general, the market structure and the regime favour consumers and there are other schemes to help those who might slip through the cracks. Mr Low also asked the question about retail contestability. We have taken steps to liberalise the electricity retail market. This is to provide more competitive pricing and choice to consumers and businesses. Since 2003, about 10,000 large consumers, accounting for 75% of total electricity demand, have already become contestable. This means that the retailers compete to sell electricity directly to these consumers. The remaining 1.2 million small customers are basically households which account for 25% of total electricity demand as residual, and they are not yet contestable and continue to buy electricity from SP Services Ltd. The reason is simple. It is because the economics of catering to this vast group of small consumers is very different. It is more expensive for electricity retailers to service a large number of small customer accounts, than to serve a single customer with a large amount of electricity demand. For small consumers to enjoy the true benefits of contestability, there is a need to reduce the cost of the supporting infrastructure. EMA is currently studying an Electricity Vending System (EVS) which allows retailers to post their electricity supply schemes and prices at various points-of-sale, such as the Internet and convenience stores. An EVS will help reduce the back-end administration and business costs associated with serving small consumers. As the EVS has not been tried elsewhere, EMA is developing the technology and testing the prototype, and that will take the next two to three years to stabilise and make sure that it works.”
“And this has helped to cushion the impact of high oil prices on our electricity tariffs. For example, although fuel oil prices increased by 80% over the six years from January 2001 to January 2007 from nearly S$42 a barrel to S$75 a barrel, over the same period, our household electricity tariffs have increased by only 8% from 18.46¢ per kilowatt hour to about 20¢ per kilowatt hour. And what is particularly noteworthy is that this is despite the fact that the major cost component of electricity generation is fuel and that accounts for 55%. So, notwithstanding the fact that more than half the cost of generating our electricity comes from the cost of fuel oil and the fact that that has gone up by 80%, the price of electricity tariffs is actually quite steady, at about 8%. That is clear proof that the policy is working and the market structure is working in favour of our consumers. 1.45 pm Therefore, competition in the market has certainly helped to keep electricity prices at about the same level since 2001, despite sharp increases in fuel oil prices. This is the clearest demonstration of how consumers have benefited from the liberalised electricity market. Nevertheless, the Government does recognise that lower-income households may still feel the impact of rising electricity and other utility bills, even if the increases are modest. This is why we have the Utilities Save (U-Save) scheme, which disbursed about $600 million over the past five years. In this Budget, it has again been renewed for a further five-year period. That will provide additional cushion. On top of that, we have the ComCare Fund and other schemes.”
“Sir, I would like to thank Members for their suggestions and views on energy and tourism. Allow me to first touch on the bread and butter energy issues before moving on to the more colourful tourism related questions that have been raised. Energy, like land and manpower, is a critical economic resource. The key objective of our energy policy is to ensure that we have sufficient and secure energy supplies at affordable prices, and to make sure that we accomplish that objective in a manner that is sensitive to our environment. We have established an inter-Ministry Energy Policy Group to formulate and coordinate our energy policies. Led by MTI, and comprising several key agencies, the Energy Policy Group adopts a "whole-of-government" approach in addressing energy issues from the four perspectives of energy security, economic competitiveness, environmental sustainability and also the development of the energy industry itself. These are all points that many Members have touched on in different ways. The establishment of competitive markets is the cornerstone of our energy policy. In the contestable segments of the energy value chain, we want to implement contestable markets. We have, therefore, liberalised the electricity market and, going forward, we will be taking steps to open the natural gas market to further enhance competition, a point that Mr Inderjit Singh raised earlier. Mr Low Thia Khiang has asked how the consumer has benefited from this liberalised electricity regime. That is a fair question. Since 2001, we have liberalised the electricity generation and retail market in stages. Consequently, there is now greater competition in the electricity market, and this has led to downward pressure on price and it forces players to be more cost competitive.”
“I would like to assure Members that MTI agencies are quite seized with the whole notion of evolving business models and ensuring that Singapore continues to maintain its position as an attractive place to do business and to be a business hub for the region. This amendment is part of our ongoing efforts to maintain that pre-eminent position. Question put, and agreed to. Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House. The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. - [Mr Iswaran]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. Column No : 1262 HEALTH PRODUCTS BILL Order for Second Reading read. 3.30 pm”
“When we do this, we need to make sure that it is being allocated through a valid legitimate claim, and for that we need appropriate diligence done by the Government agencies. So, we cannot do away with this. In our desire to streamline and be business-friendly, we need to strike a balance between that and our desire to be also accountable to public resources. Ms Jessica Tan raised a point about the repairs and maintenance industry. I think the point I made earlier would apply here as well, that is, if the activity is anchored primarily in Singapore, and the investment in parts is in order to facilitate that activity in Singapore, then I think it would technically be qualified because there is a provision in the Act that allows for specialised engineering and technical services. However, it still has to meet the test of significant economic contribution and so on, which I have outlined earlier. Just to reiterate the point, it is something we can look at if, in fact, there is sufficient economic justification. Mr Liang made several points. The point about regular review and the sunset clause, I think both of these we agree fully. In fact, this is part of the regular review process and the sunset clause has been built in even for this particular amendment, the logic being that we need to revisit these incentives from time to time, either to enhance or maybe even to remove, if it is no longer necessary. The agencies are regularly involved in monitoring and comparing the regime we have in Singapore, fiscal and other incentives vis-a-vis our competitors.”
“What I would urge the Member is that any companies in this business who are interested in this area should get into a dialogue with our Economic Development Board, and I think they will find that there is a very responsive set of officers there who are prepared to come back with measures that they think will help them and, if necessary, extending the IA for that purpose. On this point about incentives to attract foreign talent, for the MRO industry in particular, as it stands now, there is no specific incentive for this talent flow for the particular industry. But what we do know is that, generally, the companies do not necessarily look for incentives to bring in individuals or a group of talent per se, but they are looking for concessions for their entity as a whole. For example, if we can provide them with HQ incentive or some other tax concessions at the top level, then all this cost that they incur as part of their attracting talent and setting up their operations here will be deducted and thereafter whatever taxable income there is would be entitled to further concessions. So, I think that is a more holistic way of providing these incentives. But, again, I want to assure Mdm Ho that if there is specific change in the system where she feels that with some intervention, we can facilitate greater flow, we would be very happy to engage her in a more detailed dialogue in the matter. She raised the point about long and tedious claim process. I want to assure Members that EDB is now in the process of streamlining its processes once again, and this is an on-going process. But I also want to place one caveat on record. When we dispense such incentives, we have to bear in mind that what we are giving away are public resources, in other words "tax revenue".”
“The test really in applying this incentive, or for that matter other incentives, is really, first, does the industry bring significant economic benefit to Singapore? Secondly, is this incentive necessary to attract and sustain this kind of industry in Singapore? And if the answer to these two is yes, then to proceed to calibrate a package of incentive measures for particular companies in these sectors. In that regard, the investment allowance is not the only incentive available either, and I want to inform Members, because there is a slew of other measures available at EDB's and other economic agencies' disposal. These include HQ incentives, pioneer status, development and expansion incentives, and so on. But I think the key point here really, at the end of the day, is that EDB and MTI agencies are keenly aware - and this is the point that several of the Members have made - business models are evolving and changing, and our incentive structures must adapt flexibly to these needs. That is really what we are trying to do even through this amendment. Just to take up the specific questions. Mdm Ho raised the point about incentives for overseas expansion, ie, using this investment allowance for that purpose. As it is framed now, this investment allowance does not allow it to be applied for investments in capital equipment and other investments overseas. However, if it is, in fact, linked back to Singapore through other activities - I think Mdm Ho mentioned the possibility of a HQ and so on - then we do have HQ incentives and other incentives which can be made available to these companies in order to facilitate this regional expansion that they are contemplating. On the point of fleet technical management, it is a fair point.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, let me thank the Members - Mdm Ho, Ms Jessica Tan and Mr Liang Eng Hwa - for their comments and support for the Bill. In responding to their comments, allow me to, first, reiterate the primary purpose of this Investment Allowance Incentive. It is to encourage high-technology equipment investments in order to promote greater productivity and to update the manufacturing industry in Singapore in particular. So, it is applied quite selectively and only when the economic agencies, and in particular EDB, assess that there is a significant economic benefit or contribution to Singapore. So, if you take the maintenance, repair and overhaul business for the aerospace industry, for example, it is a big contributor to our economy. The aerospace sector has been one of the fastest growing sectors in Singapore. In 2005, it grew by about 15% to 16% and its value-add to the Singapore economy was about S$2.2 billion, and 90% of that comes from the MRO industry. In terms of job creation as well, it is quite significant - more than 15,000 jobs and these are professional jobs, high-wage jobs typically. In the case of the MRO, when we seek this amendment to apply the IA to the MRO industry, it is because we want to promote the investment in the stock of replacement rotables, such as the engines which cost several tens of millions of dollars, to drive the MRO operations in Singapore, in other words, the maintenance, repair and overhaul activities in Singapore. So, whilst the engine is brought in and replaced from the aircraft that is flying around the world, the MRO activity occurs in Singapore, giving direct spin-offs for us.”
“There has been a trend in recent years towards companies in this industry managing and providing spares like aircraft engines, avionics and landing gears for airlines when in the past the airlines themselves would have owned these spares. These spares are known as "aircraft rotables" and would be fitted onto the aircrafts which fly around the world while the actual systems and components are being repaired in Singapore. Airlines are now demanding that aerospace maintenance, repair and overhaul companies provide aircraft rotables while their systems are being repaired, so that they can operate their aircrafts with minimal downtime. As the aerospace maintenance, repair and overhaul industry is a key industry that we want to grow, it is important that our incentives are attractive to encourage such activities here. This Bill amends sections 66 and 67 of the EEI Act to extend the IA incentive to the aircraft rotables used by the aerospace maintenance, repair and overhaul industry in Singapore. Consequential amendments Arising from the insertion of the new sections 43T, 43U, 43V, 43W and 43X and the repeal of section 43L in the Income Tax Act by Income Tax (Amendment) Acts 2005 and 2007, clause 2 of the Bill makes consequential amendments to the definition of "concessionary income" in section 66(1) of the EEI Act. Mr Speaker, Sir, the proposed change to the EEI Act seeks to enhance Singapore’s value proposition for the aerospace maintenance, repair and overhaul industry, and to strengthen our role as an aerospace hub. The proposed amendment reflects the Government’s commitment to constantly monitor the effectiveness of our tax incentives regime, and to keep it relevant and competitive as business models change. Sir, I beg to move. Question proposed.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." This Bill will amend the Economic Expansion Incentives (Relief from Income Tax) Act (EEI Act). It will give legislative effect to allow the Investment Allowance incentive (IA incentive) to also be extended to the aircraft rotables used by the aerospace maintenance, repair and overhaul industry. Investment Allowance Incentive Sir, the IA incentive is a tax incentive to encourage investment in high technology equipment for greater productivity and to upgrade the manufacturing industries in Singapore. The incentive allows a company to deduct an approved percentage of its qualifying fixed capital expenditure from its taxable income. This is on top of the capital allowance enjoyed by the company, if it is already allowed under the Income Tax Act. Currently, the IA incentive can only be applied to the fixed capital expenditure on buildings, the acquisition of know-how or patent rights and productive equipment to be used in Singapore. The rationale is to ensure that Singapore directly benefits from the projects which enjoy the IA. Hitherto, the only exception where the incentive may be given in respect of fixed capital expenditure items that are used outside Singapore, is in the operation of space satellites, where a special concession has been made to encourage companies to launch and operate satellites here. We propose this legislative amendment to allow the IA incentive to be extended to the aircraft rotables used by the aerospace maintenance, repair and overhaul industry here.”
“Globalisation provides us with an excellent opportunity to be connected with other countries. It also creates new opportunities for our people and companies. I would say that globalisation is the reason for talents and investors to continuously come to Singapore. However, globalisation has also created new challenges. We can see that there is an income gap and that is something which all of us know. Many MPs have spoken about it today. Many Singaporeans also worry about their jobs as well as overseas competition. At the same time, the elderly people as well as low-income families have been worrying about their daily problems. I would say that an important work of the Government is to assist these people to overcome their problems and give them the confidence that we will succeed. The elderly worry about ageing problems and in particular about their medical expenses. We should help them to overcome these problems. The Government should also implement various programmes to correct the widening gap in our society. We should also help them to overcome their problems, such as helping the less privileged to cope with their daily expenses and to manage their children's school fees. While we are doing this, we should ensure that these programmes will provide them the encouragement and will not in any way slacken confidence and efforts. Mr Speaker, Sir, Singapore today is in a stronger position. There are many things which are advantageous for us. If we continue to be united and work hard, we can expect a bright future. As a result of the success of our nation, many will benefit. We will be able to help the needy in our society. * Cols. 739-740. 3.45 pm”
“So, the point then is that we need to make sure that our companies, when they go forward and take risks, are supported by shareholders who understand that, yes, we have to take calculated risks from time to time. Sometimes, they may turn, sometimes they work for you but, overall, we look at the outcome and we see whether that is the outcome that we want. I think our shareholders need to wisen up to that and be more mature in the way we go forward. The second reason I bring this up is because at the end of the day, we have been asking for much largesse from the Government, in terms of support, for those who are left behind, and I think these are legitimate requests. But I urge that we also just have a cautionary thought that we calibrate our expectations, bearing in mind that there are the vicissitudes of markets, of operations and economies, and those in turn would constrain the way we operate. Sir, for the next part of my speech, I would like to speak in Tamil. (In Tamil): [For vernacular speech, please refer to Appendix A*. ] Mr Speaker, over the last 40 years, Singapore has progressed well. As a result of economic progress, we have been able to raise the standard of living of Singaporeans. One fundamental reason for this can be attributed to our social cohesion. In Singapore, everybody has a place and opportunity. This is the main thrust of our Government's policy. Though we are a multi-racial and multi-religious society, we as one united people strive for our country's progress. The President's Address talked about globalisation. How will it affect Singapore? I believe that globalisation will provide a big opportunity for us. It will help us to connect with the markets of the world. Singapore is a small country. It has a small market.”
“It is also true in the world of private equity - the world that I am familiar with given my previous vocation. Just to give you a sense, in 2006, US$159 billion was raised by the private equity business. That is a staggering amount because, when you think about it, private equity can use that money and leverage it beyond just equity to really significantly expand their muscle. If you use a simple two-thirds gearing kind of ratio, it means that they have the capacity to undertake up to US$500 billion worth of transactions. These are ruthless companies. They go in for the bottom dollar and they are very focused on what they want out of any transaction. These are the kind of companies that our companies have to deal with. They have to go head to head, because it is no longer the case that when an asset is on offer, it is just an operating company that goes in to buy it. It is also financial companies. In fact, private financial equity houses tend to be the largest most significant competitors against operating companies these days, and they are prepared to pay the dollar because they have the financial smarts to make these assets work harder for them. So, what can our companies do? Well, they still have to go abroad. They have to take the risks. They may need to get in earlier. They may need to find unique ways to generate opportunities for themselves. But the reason I raise all these, Sir, is, essentially, to highlight two points. The first is that our companies, as they go abroad, need a fairly supportive group of shareholders and partners. 20-20 hindsight is in abundant supply and, unfortunately, clairvoyance is scarce.”
“Also, when you look at enterprise creation, new enterprises are coming in and driving, again, you find that, for example, in Singapore, more than 2,000 enterprises from India, more than 1,000 from China that have been created in Singapore in order to use Singapore as a base for the region. Clearly, Sir, the opportunities are immense and inviting. But on the flip side of that coin are the attendant risks that our companies face. For when we say "regionalise" or "globalise", it means venturing into unfamiliar territory or territory you might be familiar with but you still need to take some care in exploring. We call them emerging markets for a reason, because they are emerging, they are getting accustomed to new rules, global standards, business practices and best standards. But, at the same time, they are also in a hurry to grow and investors are keen to go in to participate in their growth. Let me elaborate how intensive the competition can be. It is not just that our companies face competition in the markets from their domestic players such as in India or China. But they also face competition from international companies or Indian and Chinese companies that are internationalising. One example would be the Tata Group from India, who have gone on to acquire the trucking business of Daewo Motors in Korea. Their steel business has come in to buy NatSteel and they have done some larger transactions. And we read about these all the time. In China, we have seen the Lenovo Group acquire IBM. The point is that we can think of China and India as emerging markets, but their corporates do not think themselves as emerging markets. They think of themselves as global players ready to take on the world at large through acquisitions and beyond.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I am much obliged that you allow me to join in the debate at this juncture. Allow me to rise in support of the Motion standing in the name of Member Halimah Yacob. Sir, the President's Address had two key thrusts to it - one was on the competitive economy and the other was on an inclusive society. In my opinion, these are really two sides of a coin. One pertains to the creation of wealth and the other is on how best we distribute it in our economy to maintain our social cohesion. Many speakers, over the last few days, have talked a great deal about how we should and must help those who have not been able to benefit from globalisation. And I add to that chorus because I believe it is an essential part of maintaining the fabric of our society. Having said that, I want to make two quick points in rising to speak today. The first is to highlight the challenges we face by giving specific examples of the kind of competition that faces us in the region and beyond, and I thought the best way to do that is talk in terms of a corporate analogy. Sir, we have exhorted our companies to go into the region. We have told them to go beyond our shores, spread their wings, find new markets for their products and services. But the crux of it really is: what does it mean when you say go abroad? What does it mean to our companies? The opportunities clearly lie in our part of the world, whether you look at macro economic growth where we have got some of the fastest growing economies in the world in Asia. Whether you look at the growth of the middle class and therefore the demand for consumer products, and so on, that too is in a strong growth phase in India, China and other parts of this part of the world - ASEAN, Vietnam.”
“You can imagine how traumatic it was for this young man because his friends kept telling him how enjoyable university life was and all the things they were doing, and he in the meantime was running up and down hills, sweating it out and also being the butt of jokes because he had an accent and he was trying to fit in. His parents wanted him to serve, asked him to fulfil his duty, and they asked me to talk to him. The other example was a young man whose family has actually migrated to Perth. They are all Australian PRs, but they have asked him to come back and serve his National Service. He was actually alone in Singapore serving his NS, although the parents kept coming back to visit him. His point was also, "Why am I doing this?" I tried to explain to him the need to be committed, his duty as a Singaporean and as a beneficiary of the system. But I could see the doubt in his eyes. Sir, I do not know whether these two young men or, for that matter, any of the others are going to go on and become world-class concert pianists or world-beating entrepreneurs. But I do know this: I want to be able to look these men and others in the eyes and say to them, "We know you are making a sacrifice. We apply the rules impartially. We respect your sacrifice in service and we will never forget it." I think our laws and the way we enforce them must evidence that and match our words and commitment.”
“Today, the Minister's speech has clarified several points on how MINDEF will go about seeking redress when there are defaulters. I have met many Singaporeans and Permanent Residents, and I think all Members of this House have as well, who are often wondering what are the rules, what options there are, what are the consequences, and so on. We need to put it up there clearly, unapologetically that this is the rule, this is the expectation and this is what the consequences are, and then people will decide. I say that if someone, who is going to be a great pianist, chooses not to live in Singapore because of wanting to avoid National Service, then it is a sad loss but a loss that Singapore must live with. There have been many calls for flexibility in this House in the way NS is administered. I would like to echo those sentiments to a point which is that, I believe, yes, within the context of individual aspirations for education against the needs in the army, we need to find ways to accommodate more of our young and talented people who want to go overseas to study. But at the same time, I would like to cite two examples of young men whom I had met in the last year. So these are not dated examples, just to illustrate the point. One who is a resident in Singapore all his life and another who is living overseas. The first is a young man whose mother is a Singaporean and father is a PR. He is actually a foreign citizen but a PR. He did his entire education in the foreign education system in Singapore. But when he came to the age of 18, he had to enlist whilst all his foreign friends went to universities overseas.”
“I suppose I would put a reverse question: what message are we sending to the Singaporeans who have faithfully fulfilled their obligations? And I think we need to keep that in mind when we debate this issue and talk about what is the appropriate action that is to be taken. I would like to seek three things, going forward, in dealing with the matter of this importance. The first is that the penalties we legislate and seek to enforce must be of sufficient gravity to reflect the importance we attach to this institution. In my view, the present legislation, with the enhanced fine or otherwise, is adequate. I believe what is needed is clearer and more forceful, vigorous enforcement. If enforcement is there, the message will be clear. Secondly, there must be consistency in the application of the law. The unfortunate consequence of this case, as the Minister has raised, is whether our system is equitable, or are there a privileged few. We must debunk this. In fact, if anything, the logic must be perverse or the opposite. The French have the notion of noblesse oblige where the privileged have the first duty to serve, and indeed if you are one of the beneficiaries of our system then you must step out and serve first, not seek to extend your obligations beyond or serve later, but lead by example. So MINDEF must be vigorous and consistent in the way action is taken against defaulters. I hope this debate and the public sentiment outside and any other debate we have with respect to an amendment of the Enlistment Act will communicate the sentiment to our courts and prosecuting agency as well so that they are mindful of this when deciding on cases of this nature. Thirdly, we have to be transparent in our rules.”
“And that leads me to my third point, which is that I am for vigorous prosecution of those who default or dodge their National Service obligations. Sir, increasing the quantum of fine is perhaps a step in the right direction. But, really, if a $3,000 fine puts a derisory value on the service and sacrifice our National Servicemen have made, together with their families and even their employers, then is a $10,000 fine any different? It is not that the vast majority of NSmen need to know that defaulters will be jailed or fined heavily before they will pick up a rifle. That demeans their commitment and patriotism, and I think that does them a great disservice. What is important, however, is that we must send a profound signal to all Singaporeans as to how seriously we take this institution of National Service which, as the Minister described, serves a critical need of national security and survival. It is a basic duty of every son of Singapore, and all Singaporeans and would-be Singaporeans must be fully aware of it. Many of my parliamentary colleagues here have tried to cast this debate in terms of talent and its retention or attraction. I think that is a red herring. I think this debate is about duty to the country, honour and commitment. We attract talent from all over the world. Many people choose to become Singaporeans. They come from many countries where there is no National Service obligation. They choose to commit, knowing that their sons will have to serve National Service. Why do they do that? And the question is asked: what message do we send to defaulters? In fact, Dr Wang asked the question: are we telling them, don't come back, the door is shut?”
“Sir, the Minister has enunciated MINDEF's stance on the matter and I thank him for it. And I would like to equally state upfront where I stand on this issue. Let me, first, state for the record that I have nothing personal against Mr Melvyn Tan, nor should any Singaporean feel the need to personalise this debate. Indeed, Mr Melvyn Tan has done the right thing. He has subjected himself to due process in Singapore. He has had his day in court and paid his fine. And as the Minister has pointed out, his case was no different to many others at the same time, so he did not get any special treatment. It is unfortunate that his case has become a lightning rod for this debate. But we should move, wish him well, and certainly not vilify him or make him unwelcome in Singapore. Secondly, I am against mandatory custodial sentences. And I agree with the Minister's stance on this score. The court should be allowed to take into account the mitigating and aggravating circumstances of each case in deciding what punishment is to be meted out. At the same time, our courts and prosecuting agencies should be in no doubt as to the importance we in this House and the public at large attach to the institution of National Service and that defaulters, particularly the egregious cases, will be dealt with the full force of the law. If we expect our young men to bear arms, sacrifice two years of their lives and fight, perhaps die, for their country, we must be able to tell them with total and utter conviction that we fully respect and value their sacrifice and, as part of their conviction, we will deal vigorously with those who default or dodge their obligations.”
“Sir, the Ministry agrees that it is a good idea to have special schools and mainstream schools co-located, and I was pleased to hear about the three examples. Can I ask whether these three co-location examples occurred by certain liberty or was it because of planning and intent on the part of the Ministry and the parties involved? It is a very important point to address because it seems to me it is more likely to be the case as it happens perchance and because it is Canossian School, maybe the school initiated the idea. If the Ministry sees about it, then in the planning exercise for new schools and also as part of the PRIME programme, there should be a specific targeting and including it in site planning, and so on. Because we all know that there are site norms, you have to negotiate with URA for schools, and if you are going to co-locate schools, you need to make additional provisions. I would appreciate some clarifications on that.”
“What that allows is for integration for certain aspects of the curriculum, be it, for example, in art or physical education or some of the ECA and social activities, and yet allowing for separation for the pursuit of academic matters and so on. The advantage of such a system is that the interaction amongst the students would occur quite naturally and would not have to be orchestrated in the sense that there is actually a special excursion or event when the two groups of students come together to go wherever it is. So the question I have really is whether the Ministry is pursuing this model and, if so, what is the state of development of that idea. I raised this under the Ministry of Education because it is not clear to me whether this initiative, if undertaken, would fall under the Ministry of Education or under MCYS, or whether it requires a joint response. Compulsory Education for Children with Disabilities”
“Mr Chairman, Sir, this is regarding special education. Today, the way we have special education seems to be in two sort of quite disparate models. The first is the kind of integration model where students with special needs go to mainstream schools where they have the ability to keep up or cope with the curriculum there and, normally, they have to take some kind of test or be assessed before they could be admitted. This is an ideal model, particularly from the special needs students' perspective, but very few could actually benefit because of the high demands of our mainstream system. The other model at the other end of the spectrum is the customised special education schools, which cater to the specific needs of students with special educational requirements. It has the advantage of being able to cater to a far wider ability range among such students. But the disadvantage remains that it is decoupled from the mainstream and from students who are really part and parcel of the society that students with special needs and mainstream students are integrated within. I think it is generally acknowledged that interaction between the two groups is desirable and of mutual benefit to both sides, both in terms of character development, to some extent pedagogic development and, in general, part of our own social and civil consciousness of being part of the society. So the question really is: can we pursue some other model or some other means of promoting this kind of integration? One of the thoughts that has been thrown around in the past is the idea of co-locating special schools and mainstream schools, so that they are physically on adjacent premises.”
“Mr Chairman, I appreciate the Senior Parliamentary Secretary's assurance that the Ministry would implement the recommendations of the review that can be implemented immediately. But I seek a more specific assurance, not something so generic, because past experience has shown that three elements have to be synchronised - curriculum design, national examination standards, school-based teaching and standards of tests or any other assessments in schools. These must work in tandem. If not, what tends to happen is that, whatever we do in terms of curriculum design, the teachers will continue to teach based on examination expectations. My question specifically is whether the Review Committee has been asked to anticipate this need and recommend implementation on that basis.”
“It is essential that this review be completed this year and there should be some immediate benefits to the schools and to the students in the schools from next year onwards. It is scant comfort to know that three years from now, the curriculum will be modified to make it easier for students. Developing Rootedness and Patriotism in our Studies”
“Sir, the announcement of the Tamil Language (TL) Review last year was welcomed by the community. In general, it has also raised expectations. It is done because, notwithstanding the numerous reviews that had been done in the past and MOE's ongoing efforts to improve the teaching and learning of the language, the fact remains that many parents and students feel that the teaching and learning of Tamil Language in schools is not in step with the realities of modern Singapore. I have had the opportunity to first hand look at some of the materials and requirements at the primary level. I find that, even in the early primary levels, there is not that much difference in the expectation between what we want from TL, and I suspect that it might be the case for other languages and English. So the review takes particular importance and significance in this light. There are three aspects that I wish to query the Ministry on. The first is on how the expectation of the Tamil Language standard to be attained be established. Would we be looking not just at the standards that are already in place today in schools, but also the reality on the ground and the environment that our students are in? I think, most importantly, the time that is required for them to achieve a certain level of competence in the language. The second is on completing the loop in the review. In other words, look not just at curriculum review but also at the standards in the examinations of the landmark at national levels, and then what is happening in the schools in the intervening years where examinations are set, and then that percolates down to school assignments and assessments. I think that is an important part of this review. Finally, on timing. The points have been raised in the context of other reviews.”
“The Government, in particular, HDB, is in a unique position of being the largest landlord and is in a position to work closely with the private sector to create the critical mass to kick-start a scheme of this nature, if it is deemed to be worthwhile. And I think it is worth pursuing because economic viability whenconsidered by the private sector is a very narrow calculation. But when you bring inthe HDB or the Government, the calculation becomes broader. And I think we will be able to see itfor what it is really worth and decide whether public sector resources should, in fact, be committed towards such a venture. So these are large and complex issues. I do not mean to suggest that the solutions are straightforward or obvious, but they need to be addressed and the solutions need to be found. I am confident that we have the will and ingenuity within the Government to comeup with creative ideas.And I urge that this committee does its work expeditiously so that we can come up with announcements and policy measures in good time.”
“I would urge this committeeto start with a clean slate and put the older Singaporeans at the centre of the study, not look at it from the angle of what is the existing policy and framework and see how it can be modified, but rather look at it from inside out. If you are an older Singaporean today, what is your situation, what are your challenges and what would be the optimal solution, and then to work inwards from there. If Imay offer a couple of ideas which, I believe, isillustrative of what this committee should be looking at.One of them is fiscal incentives to hire older workers, eg, double tax deductions of their salaries. Is this a big move? Certainly. Is it a risky move? Definitely. It means the Government would be entering the labour market and potentially distorting it. But this Government has never shied away from bold moves when it serves the greater good of Singapore. Already, we have policies that affect relative prices in the job market between foreign and local workers through the foreign worker levy and even between younger and older Singaporean workers through adjustments through the CPF. I believe there is enough justification for the Government to review this and consider this as a serious proposition, and whether there is scope for financial orfiscal incentives to create employment opportunities for older Singaporeans, specifically targeted at particular groups and particular sectors where job creation for this category may be of greatest value or possibility. Another aspect is on housing. I believe the reverse mortgage scheme that the private sector has attempted has not been well received or successful for a variety of reasons, but primarily for lack of critical mass or skills.”
“Sir, in raising these issues, I want to stress that theolder Singaporeans I have talked to are not looking for handouts. In fact, they want to stand on their own two feet, not depend on others and live their lives with dignity. I have had 70-year olds coming to my meet-the-people session, asking me not for money, not to referthem to any financial assistance scheme, but saying, "Can you please get me a job?" And that leaves me profoundly affected because the attitude is so different to some of the younger Singaporeans we see. Sir, the Government has undertaken many steps to address these needs. They have come from different Ministries' perspectives, different departments, whether it is studio apartment type housing from HDB, whether it is modifications and enhancements to Medifund orMediShield schemes, CPF adjustments, etc, and, ultimately, of course, economic growth which would create opportunities for all is the best solution. But even with economic growth, we know that there will be pockets orgroups that will be left behind or unable to fully benefit from these new opportunities. So I feel it requires a comprehensive review and a holistic response to these challenges in meeting the needs of older Singaporeans. Sir, I believe it is an issue of the same scale and importas procreation and it has the same kind of economic and social ramifications. It will affect Singapore for many decades to come.Also, as Mr Ong has pointed out quite eloquently, we have an obligation to ensure that older Singaporeans who have contributed and sacrificed for Singapore's growth continue to feel that they have a home and a part in Singapore. Sir, the Government has appointed a tripartite committee, or is in the process of appointing one, to study all aspects of this.”
“Or do we instead voice concern over the fact thata 49-year old, in good health, obviously experienced and well capable of handling the responsibilities and requirements of the job, is unable to secure a job in a field that she is well-experienced in for 25 years? On the aspect of housing, for older Singaporeans, it seems to me that the conundrum is they are either locked in to housing loans or they are unable to unlock the value in their homes. The only option is really to sell. But ifthey sell, then the question is where dothey stay? Dothey stay in studio apartments that HDB provides? Dothey go for rental accommodation?Or, what would be the ideal solution for the elderly to be able to continue to live where they have always been in the last two orthree decades? Sir, the reverse mortgage scheme that the private sector has undertaken attempts to do that, allows people to continue to live where they have always been but draw down on the asset value, ie, the equity they have built up in their asset, so as to pay for some of their living expenses. But the scheme has not taken off, and I think we must examine why it is so,in deeper terms, and see how we can facilitate that. And, finally, on the issue of medical costs. We all know the story of the older Singaporeans being afraid of falling sick. And the "3Ms" have gone a long way to helping them throughschemes like Medisave, Medifund andMediShield, (with its recent refinements). But ask any senior citizen today, and they would, hand on heart, tell us that they are still very scared of being sick, and especially if it is a chronic illness, they are quite concerned. Why? They do not want to be a burdento their family and children. So what do we do? Or how can we help them help themselves?”
“If these three aspects are taken care of, most of our older Singaporeans would have a much happier life. When addressing the issue of employment, many Singaporeans who are in the 40s and 50s have lamented to me that they feelthe retirement age today is no longer 62, and even if the Government talks about extending retirement age, they feel that the de facto retirement age is actually 42 or 45. Because if you get retrenched or lose your job at that age, it is well near impossible to get meaningful re-employment. They feel that their employment prospects are poor and even if they get jobs, they might be low-paying jobs, as Mr Ong mentioned as well. New jobs that are being created as Singapore restructures and rationalises are in sectors which are, quite frankly, difficult for them to adapt to. For example, if you take the pharmaceutical industry and its sterling growth and the investments that are being put in in Singapore, how do older Singaporeans take advantage of the opportunities in this sector? It is certainly a challenge even if they go for much training. And, certainly, it is no longer anecdotal because there is a pattern that employers prefer younger workers to older workers. I recently spoke to a 49-year old constituent. She has had 25 years of clerical work experience in a large company and then she was retrenched. She says that, today, at 49, she is not able to get a job as a clerk in any organisation. She is now working as a security officer. This exchange left me wondering. Do we celebrateher flexibility and adaptability to the opportunity in the job market and, also, the flexibility of her employer who has taken her on, although she hasno obviousbackground in security services?”
“The reason I say this is because I think it is important that any fund with this kind of allocation of funding must have schemes because that ensures a certain discipline and process. But it is difficult to put everybody in our specific pigeonholes and say, "Well, you fit this category and therefore you get it. If not, you don't." So I hope that that flexibility will be allowed right down the line so that the officer on the front line can exercise his or her discretion in deciding whether exceptions or variations can be made. The third is utilisation. We should not, having allocated this sum of money for this good purpose, be reluctant to fully utilise the funds. Our traditional concern has always been about breeding a crutch mentality with handouts, and I think that is a legitimate concern. But if a need is clearly and unambiguously established, then we should not be shy of giving the necessary support on a regular and timely basis. After all, that is the intent and we would be failing if we did not live up to that objective. Sir, let me finally turn to a topic on which my colleague, Mr Ong Ah Heng, has also spoken quite passionately on, ie, about older workers or, in general, older Singaporeans. It is my view that we need a high level, comprehensive Government response to address the needs and concerns of older Singaporeans and older workers. We call them older workers when we talk about employment issues and job market issues. We talk about them as older Singaporeans when we talk about social issues, but we are talking about the same group of people. What are their concerns? We see them every day or every week at our meet-the-people sessions. And upper most in their minds are three issues - employment and income, housing and medical cost.”
“Singaporeans do not fully comprehend or appreciate how these endowments have been benefiting the average Singaporean in need. I would urge the Government to ensure that adequate information is given on a periodic basis, regularly, so that Singaporeans understand how much of these funds have been used, who are the beneficiaries, giving a profile perhaps by age group or social economic background, and what sort of circumstances they have been helped in. The reason this is important is because otherwise, these endowments remain, in a sense, notional allocations. Nobody really knows how they work in practice, whether they are working in practice and how they help Singaporeans in practice. So I would request that we have further information on this, because I believe it will go a long way in assuring Singaporeans of the usefulness and the value of these endowments to them as individuals. Sir, the third aspect is on the ComCare Fund. The Finance Minister has announced the initiation of a ComCare Fund with $254 million allocatedto it this year. I think this is a very good gesture because it is aimed at helping those affected by retrenchments and families that are disadvantaged and students who are part of those families. My main point on the ComCare Fund would be that it should adopt three important principles in the way it runs and administers the Fund. The first is decentralisation. It must be devolved as close to the ground as possible because that is where the greatest awareness is of the need and the greatest accountability can be accomplished and the greatest speed of response can be achieved. The second is that the Fund must be flexible in its administration.”
“Sir, the measures, aimed at individuals and families, have, in general, been well received although, as with any other budget, there has always been the request and expectation of more, but I believe these measures will go a long way in helping Singaporeans in their daily lives. I wish to highlight three aspects which struck me as noteworthy or worthy of comment. The first pertains to the refinements done to the Baby Bonus Scheme and the $50 reduction of foreign maid levy. To me, this demonstrates that this Government has its ears to the ground, listens to feedback and responds with appropriate policy adjustments and, indeed, the Prime Minister said so during his speech. The Baby Bonus Scheme refinement is a case in point.It is farbetter for the Government to just determine the cap, the total amount of benefit we wish to confer on young couples who have children in response to Government policy pronouncements as well as their own instincts, and leave it to them to decide how they want to accumulate the savings, rather than prescribe a straight line or a six-year time horizon within whichto accumulate. I think these kinds of adjustments are important because it demonstrates that the Government is listening and will continually respond to enhanced policies. Sir, the second aspect is on the transfers to Medifund and the Lifelong Learning Fund. I believe it is $100 million to Medifund and $500 million to the Lifelong Learning Fund. These endowmentshave always been welcome initiatives because they help Singaporeans with their medical needs and also in their adjustments to the economic environment through retraining, etc. But to many Singaporeans, these endowments remain opaque, high-level budget items - "special transfers" as they are called in the parlance of the Budget.”
“This is within what we consider to be the long-term achievable growth rate for Singapore of 4-6%. That would suggest that, at this juncture, there is no need for additional fiscal stimulus to pump the Singapore economy. I leave aside the entire argument about how effective such a fiscal stimulus would in fact be in promoting economic growth in Singapore as opposed to external factors. But, in addition to that, I believe that adopting this cautious stance now leaves us with the room and flexibility to respond if there is a greater challenge, unexpected exogenous or external developments that might arise in the course of this fiscal year or later. And I think that will be the true test of the responsiveness of the Government's fiscal policy. I also note that we have a reliance on the Net Investment Income (NII) in order to make up the operating deficit that the Government incurs. And I think it is worth noting that the expected income from net investments is expected to fall. In fact, it is going down from $2.68 billion in FY 04 to $1.86 billion in FY 05. This underscores the uncertain investment environment and highly competitive investment environment within which investments have to yield returns, and it would be wishful thinking on our part to expect NII to continue to be sustained in absolute levels or even in terms of growth. I think we need to be realistic that there is going to be significant variations year to year in Net Investment Income and the operating budget of the Government must take that into account. So I believe the Finance Minister has correctly adopted a carefully calibrated stance leaving the Government room to respond if and when a need arises.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker, for allowing me to join in the debate. Sir, the Prime Minister and Finance Minister has outlined two broad objectives that underpin Budget 2005 -creating opportunity and building community. Both of these are laudable objectives which are deeply intertwined. It is difficult to create and sustain economic growth and opportunity without the foundation of a strong community and families making up our social fabric. Yet, without economic growth and the opportunity it offers, our social fabric will certainly be tested and may even unravel. Sir, in addressing these twin objectives, the Finance Minister has adopted a cautious if not conservative fiscal stance. I am in support of this prudent fiscal approach and this is where I differ with my colleague, Mr Inderjit Singh. Sir, what marks a good fiscal policy is a subject of learned debate among economists. But as a student of economics and as a lay practitioner, it seems to me that, ultimately, fiscal policy is best judged by its responsiveness to the economic conditions within which it is formulated. Mr Inderjit Singh cited the example of Mr Alan Greenspan and I think that is a very good example. I do not think he is noted for sustained interest rate reductions. He is noted for both interest rate increases and reductions done in a timely and calibrated manner in response to economic conditions, and bearing in mind that Government policiesebb with a lag on the economy. So, today's fiscal stimulus would probably have an impact, at the earliest, six to nine months from now. So I think we need to think ahead. Why do I support a prudent fiscal policy at this juncture? We have had 8.4% growth last year and the forecast for this year is 3-5%.”
“So I hope, Sir, that the Government would be able to marshal this effort in the next stage of our involvement to enable our youths to better realise what Mr Gan Kim Yong described as "the security and stability that we enjoy in Singapore", so that they realise the value of it and, at the same time, for them to have a greater sense of what they need to do as citizens of Singapore and as members of the broader international community, to play their part.”
“If there were a recurrence of this sort of incident, the Government, I would hope, will be able to organise this aspect of the coordination of any disaster relief effort we are undertaking sooner so that the NGOs can participate or benefit from such coordination much earlier in the process. I am also heartened to hear that the youths are going to benefit from this, in the sense that they are going to be given an opportunity to participate in youth expedition projects which would go to the affected areas and undertake meaningful projects. I believe the SIF would be leading this under the YEP programme and the funding would come from the Government. The key requests I have, and I believe the Minister for Community Development, Youth and Sports would be the key driver for this, is, first, this effort should be very well coordinated and targeted because 50 youth expedition projects, unless they are very well focused, would not make a huge impact, given the scale of what we have seen. Second, I do hope that our youths would be well-briefed and trained before they go, to prepare them for what they are going to see and do. And, also, when they return, they would be encouraged to be actively involved in social service in Singapore. It is important that they realise that our sense of social responsibility is not something episodic, triggered by disasters or accidents, but is something that is part and parcel of living in a community, whether it is a local or an international community, and we must constantly do our part to help our neighbours, including those living next door in the HDB blocks.”
“Sir, going forward it is clear that the purpose of immediate relief has more or less been met. And the question now is: where do we go from here? And that is not just a question for Singapore or our agencies but everybody involved in this effort. The transition from relief to reconstruction is obviously going to require a different kind of role and have different requirements from those involved. I am heartened to hear that whilst we might be easing down our position in terms of the forces deployed, we will remain engaged and we will keep some of our key resources and assets still available to the Indonesian authorities for their use. But the question of what we do, going forward, in this crisis and also in any other that might come about and how we organise ourselves as a country is, I think, an important one. In this regard, I would like to urge the Government to consider taking on a greater coordination role in the exercise. If you look at the response of the NGOs as an example, the initial response was spontaneous and it was laudable and indeed I would argue strongly against the Government getting too involved in trying to organise and orchestrate an NGO effort. However, there is a case to be made between controlling and directing on the one hand versus coordination and playing a facilitation role. It can take the form of information exchange. It can take the form of advice on security matters. It can also take the form of matching in order to ensure that well-intentioned efforts find suitable destinations so that maximum efforts and outcomes are achieved.”
“Sir, in the memorial service for tsunami victims, Prime Minister Lee said that all this and more - the work of our soldiers, NGOs and others in this relief effort - has made us proud to be Singaporeans. And I cannot agree with him more. I believe Singapore's response to this tragedy has struck a chord amongst all Singaporeans. They do not expect us to be on the same scale as the United States or some of the other countries, but they have been inspired by our response to a humanitarian need and our ability to make a difference. Many have come forward to share with me their pride at the way our Government and forces have responded to the need for help. It has come from some very unexpected quarters, I might add, the confirmed cynics, the analytical academics and even the upwardly mobile yuppies have offered this view. It has stirred national pride and an appreciation of what a small nation with a big heart can do. As one of them put it to me, our efficiency and organisation are regarded as boring and prosaic but, at times like this, you realise how valuable these attributes are. I think it has also not gone unnoticed amongst our Indonesian friends, with the opportunity I had to talk to them, from the Minister to the General in the army, to the parliamentarians and the Colonel on the ground, each offered their appreciation for the effort we have put towards this. Sir, I think this has been a sterling effort by all involved, the Government, the Ministries and agencies, uniformed bodies and also the NGOs and the people sector of Singapore. I think it is essential that we put on record this Parliament's deep appreciation of their efforts and work, a vast part of which remains still ahead.”
“The Government's response, led by the Prime Minister and his Cabinet, mobilised resources quickly, catalysed an international effort and also offered to be a base for much of that international relief effort. The SAF too went in early to provide immediate emergency relief and assistance, as with the SCDF's DART teams in Phuket, water, food, tents, medical supplies and also providing the access points, which have been described to some degree in the media, landing points in Meulaboh, opening roads for access purposes and even building helicopter landing points. This trip gave us the opportunity to see our men and women in action in the air, on the LSTs, on the ground, and in the medical relief centres. It is not so much what was being done because the capability was evident and inspiring but how they went about the task which I thought was equally significant. They were systematic, organised, efficient, but importantly, understated, striking a close cooperation with the Indonesian authorities and the TNI in particular. Above all, I sensed this underlying humanitarian concern that guided their efforts. And as one of them said, the biggest motivation was for them to see patients, in this case, at the medical relief centre, recovering and getting on with life. Sir, the NGOs' response has been equally impressive. It was a spontaneous humanitarian response. They were not waiting for any Government edict or instruction. They responded to the call for help where it was needed and there was no economic calculation that Singapore is and Singaporeans are known for. It was an instinctive response and many even put themselves at risk in order to help fellow human beings.”
“I think nothing you see on CNA, CNN or any other television programme can prepare you for something like this. The emotional trauma that we witnessed was even more moving and painful to witness. We were at the market where many people have started selling produce but many of them in Bahasa recounted to us tearfully about loss of lives, injury and also survival. At the relief centres, we also saw many people who are in the process of trying to put their lives back together but clearly, it was a challenge for them. But amidst all these, there was also definitely hope. We saw the resilience of the human spirit. One specific example of that for me was a Colonel Geerhan who was the TNI commander in Meulaboh who lost many men as he witnessed the tragedy unfold and he stoically and vividly recounted the impact, first of the earthquake and then, subsequently, of tidal waves and I think he said three, as they came one after the other. He also said that he deeply appreciated the contributions of the SAF who were there first to help him and the people in that area. The market in Meulaboh is now starting to sell vegetables but business is not back to normal. They are still doing it on credit or barter and there are some cars or motorbikes on the road. But what I was most heartened by was that people can now smile, at least once in a while, whether children or adults. Despite what they have experienced, they were able to see a different side of life and take a more positive view. Sir, in this whole episode, our response as a country and, in particular, the response of the Government and the various agencies involved, has been salutary.”
“We are less accustomed to hearing Singapore playing a major role in the context of international humanitarian efforts. It could be argued because there was no need or appropriate opportunity where we could play a significant enough role to merit such mention. But recent events have drawn that into sharp focus, because of the scale of the impact of the tsunami and also the proximity of the disaster areas to Singapore itself. Sir, I want to spend a little bit of time today in this speech focusing on that and Singapore's response because I believe it goes to the heart of what it is to be Singaporean. The Prime Minister described it as a small nation with a big heart and I totally agree with him. Sir, last Thursday, 13th January, there was a parliamentary delegation led by the Minister of State for Defence, Mr Cedric Foo, to witness the relief efforts that were taking place in Banda Aceh and Meulaboh. I was part of that delegation and we were joined by a parliamentary delegation of 13 members from the Indonesian parliament led by Drs Sidharto Danusubroto. We went to both Banda Aceh and Meulaboh to jointly observe the work being done by the humanitarian assistance taskforce. In Meulaboh, it is under the command of Colonel Tan Chuan-Jin and overall Brigadier-General Goh Kee Nguan. Sir, the physical devastation was overwhelming. The terrain was flattened for miles of coast land and several kilometres inland from the coast. The odd structure, such as a mosque, remains standing like a symbolic last bastion of resistance against the forces of nature. The debris was piled metres high and even large boats have been carried several kilometres inland from the coast because of the force of the waves.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker, Sir, for allowing me to join in the debate. Sir, I rise in support of the motion standing in the name of the Member for Holland-Bukit Panjang GRC. The President's Address has painted a stirring vision of Singapore as a land of opportunity for our people and as a place where talent, energy and vitality would congregate. Mr Gan Kim Yong has referred to it broadly as creating value for Singapore. I agree with him because it is not just about dollars and cents, but value in the broader sense of the word, our very sense of being Singaporeans, and the home that we have built here and how we feel about it. In that context, as part of that vision, a key priority that the President's Address has outlined for Singapore is to secure its place in the world and play its part in the international community. In particular, in his Address, the President emphasised that Singapore will fulfil its responsibility as a global citizen and work with the UN international organisations and other member countries to fulfil that role. Sir, an important part is the statement he made, which is, we may be small but our economic and international space is big. That is the crux of the matter, because if we are to prosper and grow the space, it is important that we play an important role in the international arena, so that this space, which is very precious for us as a small country, is preserved and where possible, enhanced. Sir, we are very accustomed to Singapore playing an important role in the international arena in the context of economics, when we talk about the WTO, APEC, ASEAN and so on, in the context of security, and also in the context of other international challenges, such as, for example, the environment when we had the haze problem here.”
“Sir, it is quite well-known that, in some instances in business, they use anti-trust or such competition Acts and the processes and appeal methods available to them through these Acts as a business tactic to appeal so as to stall the business agreements that they feel would be against their best interests or to possibly even frustrate and stump it altogether. The question is: should there not be provisions in this Bill to protect against frivolous or vexatious claims? The provisions could be in the form of a compensation to be paid to the party against whom a complaint is lodged, if it turns out that the complaint was frivolous and vexatious. I know there is a policy concern that we do not want to deter bona fide complaints. But perhaps the way to deal with this is to ensure that such costs are only payable if it is assessed by the Commission that the complaint has, in fact, been frivolous or vexatious. Sir, I hope the Minister would consider these points because this is an important Bill. It is going to change the complexion of the way we do business in Singapore. And I think it will certainly set the standard, in terms of what we are looking to achieve, but at the same time, we must make sure that, at the micro level, businesses are not disadvantaged and the outcomes run contrary to our very intent in passing this Bill.”
“So the question is: why are we having such an all-inclusive retrospective provision in this Bill? And this was not just a conceptual point as it means, first, businesses would incur substantial costs, because the moment the Act comes into force or certain provisions come into force, businesses would have to review all their agreements to see if they are in compliance and, if not, how they need to be readjusted. Similarly, it is going to create uncertainty for the businesses in case they are challenged or wondering whether they are going to be challenged. So the question I have is: why not restrict applicability to agreements that are signed after this Bill has been passed, or when this Bill was first tabled for public consultation which, I believe, was in April this year? At least, the market had first wind of what is happening and any action thereafter could be deemed to have been done with this knowledge. The key point I want to make here is that we must restrict it in some manner and not let this retrospective application be extended without any end point. And I think if the Ministry is concerned that there may be some historical agreements that are blatantly unfair or anti-competitive, then those egregious cases could still be brought up on appeal or when a complaint is raised, the Competition Commission and the Ministry can decide whether it is worthy of attention. But, in principle, it should not be a blanket application. Finally, Sir, one specific comment is on the availability of safeguards to prevent frivolous or vexatious claims.”
“Because the Ministry has said that the Commission will issue guidelines on this matter, and I hope this can be done. And in doing so, may I make three specific requests. First, I would appreciate it if the Commission works on this fast, and not allow it to take 12 months or 18 months, but the sooner the better. Second, the process of formulating such guidelines should meaningfully include the business sector, because definitions of what constitute competition, anti-competitive behaviour, etc, are fundamental to the way many of these businesses are going to be run. And, thirdly, guidelines ultimately are non-binding. In other words, today, if a guideline is enacted, the Commission may choose to abide by it, but it may review it from time to time and that, indeed, is I think the intent. However, certain core principles that will underpin these guidelines should be embedded in the Bill. If we feel that today, we do not have enough experience in case laws to do so, I would urge the Ministry to revisit this over the space of the next two to three years to make sure that we do come back and amend this Act to embed certain key principles so that these are not open to interpretation. Another aspect, Sir, is the retrospective effect that this Bill has on businesses. Clause 34(5) says that prohibition of these activities would apply to agreements entered into before, on or after the appointed day. "Appointed day" means in relation to a particular provision, the date of commencement of that particular provision. So this seems unfair or inequitable, because what it means is that the Bill would apply to agreements entered into in good faith even before this Bill was contemplated by the Government.”
“As Mr Leong Horn Kee mentioned earlier, what constitutes abuse of dominant position? If a key player in the market leads by price reductions, is that abuse? Or is that beneficial practice which will bring benefits to all consumers? And also, there is a question of substantially lessening competition. Again, it begs the question: what is the test of reducing competition? Sir, if I could give an example. If there is an exclusive business arrangement between a Singapore company and a product service provider from overseas covering Singapore's territory, is that an activity that will be prohibited under the Bill? And I think the test is, as the Minister alluded to, this concept of appreciable adverse effect on competition of the Singapore market. And, again, I have to say that the Bill itself does not use the term "appreciable adverse effect" in any part of it. I believe there is a passing reference to it in the Explanatory Statement. But the crux of the matter is, I think, most of us are none the wiser as to what actually would constitute "appreciable adverse effect". The Bill is general. It leaves much to the discretion of the Competition Commission, and I presume that it is intended to be the case. But the converse impact is that businesses are in the dark. The UK Competition Act also does not say much about these terms, to be fair. But in mitigation, first, soon after the Act was passed in 1998, I believe, the UK Office of Fair Trading developed rules, statutory guidance and advice to businesses. So they were better informed as to how this new Act would affect their business decisions. Equally, the UK also could resort to case law from the European Commission and that serves as another point of reference. In our case, we do not have this reference to any case law.”