S. Vasoo
Singapore
“I would like to ask DPM whether the public as well as the Government-linked companies would be looking at some ways in which jobs could be created to absorb some of the older workers. In the longer term, I think job creation will become an issue, especially when many of the industries in the manufacturing sector are going to hollow out.”
“Our recruitment has been excellent over this past period and our attrition has been relatively low. But I am realistic enough to know that it is not just because of the Ministry of Education, the economy has helped a lot. I believe that I have answered most of the questions posed by Members.”
“Can I ask the Minister of State, when he claims that the LRT is of world-class standards, but the Member for Sembawang is complaining that there are so many frequent breakdowns, what world-class standard are we talking about?”
“May I ask the Minister whether the viewpoints of the commuters and the private bus operators will be solicited in his review? Mr Yeo Cheow Tong: Sir, we are in touch with the private bus operators and we would definitely take the views of the public into consideration in the context of the overall framework of the public transport system.”
“It would be the last resort, as the Minister has put it, to institutionalise persons because, by institutionalising them, one breaks them up from the family, and family dynamics are disrupted. Therefore, it is very important to ensure that we have other means of rehabilitating young persons and juveniles within a community setting.”
“All the time, we emphasise on marriage as a partnership. We also accept, as one of our core values, the family as a basic unit. It is, therefore, desirable that the wording, at the beginning of this Bill, should reinforce this value. Under clause 13, the Minister will have powers to exclude certain classes of persons.”
The complete record
Every one of 879 lines we hold for S. Vasoo, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 11 of 18.
“I know that the Minister may think that it is a small issue. We have from time to time brought up this matter in this House and I hope that he will look into it. Sir, the value of our population has increased over the years as the nation gets better educated. We must not get complacent. We must continuously and arduously enhance the quality of our workforce in whatever way possible. Human capital investment becomes an important area for us to review. And it is necessary that we place an important premium in education, particularly in the training of our older workforce. Sir, as you know, knowledge is power. A better educated workforce would help provide for a more productive workforce. Hopefully, further training will serve to improve the productivity of our workforce. The urge to address this problem is magnified by the fact that our economy has been challenged by various economies in the region. It is therefore important for us to ensure that we keep the competitive edge and we are able to meet the challenges ahead. One way would be to allow our workers to upgrade themselves, and be better equipped in terms of their skills. Presently, our tax system allows for a course relief of a maximum of $2,000. As our population gets better educated, upgrading oneself almost invariably means taking up sophisticated courses. Needless to say, sophistication also means costlier courses. For example, some of the part-time evening courses may cost as much as $1,800. Quite a few of these courses are conducted by various institutes and organisations and they cost more than the $2,000 relief that is provided. So there is a need to review whether the course relief could be increased so that more people will be encouraged to enhance their skills and be better educated.”
“Sir, the fact that our people are our most important asset cannot be over-emphasised. We have no natural resources of our own. We even have to rely on others on essential things, eg, water. With hindsight, our political leaders have made the right decision to have concentrated on building our economy in the infant days of this nation. Present-day Singapore is the envy of many people. Our achievements have been stressed many a time and also in this House. A big amount of the credit must go to our workers who have provided tremendous support to build our economy, both in the private and governmental sector. Sir, there is a small group of workers who have given tremendous effort to contribute to our nation-building and these are people who have retired. I am talking particularly of our pensioners and many of these pensioners, both men and women, have contributed to the progress of our nation. But somehow we seem to have forgotten about the contributions of these people. We have not taken an active interest to see how their efforts could to some extent be recognised. While our pensioners have made no insignificant contribution to this country's greatness, to-date there is little recognition given to this group of citizens, if at all. For a long while, another important group of our citizens were not given any recognition. I am talking about our reservists. In this Budget, we have finally been able to give a token of recognition in the form of tax relief to reservists. Sir, I urge the Minister to consider and implement some form of recognition for this group of people, particularly our pensioners, just as a token of good gesture. A recognition of their support would go a long way to provide a signal that their contribution is worthy of our community's recognition.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker, for allowing me to join in the debate. The debate appears to be a bit balanced in the sense that the Minister has presented a more or less balanced Budget. 3.58 pm [Mr Deputy Speaker in the Chair] Sir, Singaporeans are savers, and we have a large proportion of Singaporeans, particularly the older generation Singaporeans, who are frugal and thrifty. We have been able to save in terms of assets and resources. Would this be the case for the coming generation? I hope the younger Singaporeans will be encouraged to save. There is a need to review our incentives to encourage people to save. This is important as consumerism is making a serious inroad in changing the attitudes of the young. Sir, as you are aware, many young people in industrialised countries are more inclined to have a "spend all" attitude. This trend can lead to serious consequences and we must take steps to correct this dangerous attitude where people are engaged in a spending spree. Some of these consequences are: We will have a large pool of spenders who spend more than they can afford. It will lead to individual debts and it can be demoralising. Secondly, their indebtedness can lead to other deviant behaviours such as illegal trade and other criminal activities. Thirdly, the community may not have sufficient resources or surpluses for other investments. Sir, I feel that the policies that we have at this juncture do not provide the incentives for people to save. We have to find ways to inculcate in the young that it is good to save and incentives are made more attractive for people to save. We should consider tax exemption for interest on savings up to $50,000 in banks other than Post Office Savings Bank. This will in a way allow tax exemption for people who save in private banks too.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to thank the Minister for moving the Bill to amend the CPF Act. The amendment will provide a new lease of movement for the Indian community, particularly the Singaporean Indian community, to organise various activities and programmes to enhance the educational aspects of the children of the Indian community. I do not have any queries but to thank the Minister for the support. I hope that the Indian community will be able to get itself organised because, as you all know, there are various Indian groups in the community. And with this amendment, I hope that the various dialect speaking groups and the various Indian organisations, be they social, cultural or educational, will be able to get together to do the best they can to promote education for the children of Singaporean Indians. Sir, I would like to thank the Minister for moving the amendment Bill.”
“Sir, will Tiong Bahru Housing Estate, which is the oldest estate, be considered as a priority under this Upgrading Programme?”
“ADJOURNMENT OF DEBATE With the consent of Mr Deputy Speaker and the general assent of Members present, Question put, and agreed to. Resolved, That the debate be now adjourned. -- [Mr Wong Kan Seng].”
“I would like to point out that a country's security is not built on its financial security alone. Equally important, if not more important, is its people's bonding to the country that also provides the thrust and life of the nation. As I have mentioned earlier, the more assets one owns, the greater the attachment he has to the country. But as we stand on the threshold of the nineties, it seems to me that it is getting more difficult for the man in the street to own assets. The difference in asset ownership has many a time caused social strains and alienation in many societies. There is a deep danger that relations between communities can widen. Histories of various nations have shown these pitfalls. Sir, I support my Parliamentary colleague from Tanjong Pagar GRC who provided an analogy of the horse carriage economy. It is an interesting analogy, Sir. It deserves attention. But it could have been more interesting if he has included the rider because to me, I think, it is important to also have the rider together with the horse and carriage as the rider will provide the direction to which one will aspire to get to. Sir, in Singapore, we cannot afford to suffer the same tragedy, and we have to find ways to give a station in life for every Singaporean, young or old, and to take steps to prevent families from slipping down the socio-economic ladder. I also urge the Government to consider carefully the effects on the people's livelihood when formulating any policy and I know that the Government takes a deep interest in looking at its implications. I hope that further analysis of such policies in the interest of further economic growth can be generated.”
“The gap between cost and desire, however, is widening. In 1986, a 4-room flat in Tampines New Town cost $56,300. A 4-room flat in the same locality now costs $92,200. The cost of a HDB flat is expected to continue to rise. On top of that, under the booking system, for one to get a flat it is very much left to chance. Thus, I applaud the Ministry of National Development's attempt to fine tune this system of allocation of flats. And I hope that MND will continue to do so. Finally, Sir, I am glad that the Government acknowledges that the cost of health care will rise in future as the population is aging. The cost of health care will certainly continue to escalate in the not too distant future. In the area of health care, I would like to raise two issues. Firstly, why can we not have a Government hospital that is as efficient as the Singapore General Hospital, without the pitfalls of escalating cost? Secondly, while it is assuring that no one will be denied basic health care, I think the Government can do more by assuring and ensuring that better treatment will be provided to B2 and C Class patients. It is my contention that just because more people aspire for B1 or B2 wards, it does not indicate that Singaporeans are more affluent. One explanation may be that Singaporeans take health care more seriously, so much so that the treatment provided in Class C may not measure up to their expectation of basic health care. Sir, I would like to put on record that I support the Government's policy of reserves building. I agree that for a small country like Singapore, we need as much financial security as possible. Sir, I am not advocating increasing subsidies either, but rather maintaining them at current levels and to stop reducing them.”
“In short, improvement in health care is achieved without any cutback on the universal provision. Sir, the idea of "save and have" for nation building cannot be discounted. This is especially important for a young country like Singapore. When people accumulate assets such as home ownership, savings for better and higher education, or ownership of small business, their link to the country becomes more strengthened. People begin to have a stake in the well-being of the country and they can begin to take a long-term interest. In fact, Sir, all this provides a bondage between the people and the state. This surely must be the single most important reason for the early immigrants' decision to take root in Singapore. Sir, as we stand on the threshold of both the Eighth Parliament and the Next Lap, I have deliberately touched on the above three areas which are basic foundations, namely, education, housing and health care. While in these areas we saw considerable development in the last three decades, these same three areas, to me, are likely to be the challenging issues in the Next Lap. It is in these areas that I am of the view that we must strive to ensure that they will be accessible to our people. Firstly, not too long ago, education was a means to improve one's livelihood and economic status. However, today, Sir, our parents are concerned about the cost of education for their children. Educational cost has increased in independent schools and tertiary level. The burdens are certainly being felt by the working class families. They are urging for reprieve in further fee increases. In housing, Sir, costs have spiralled. Two decades of rapid growth have fuelled people's desire and taste. The vast number of applications for a 4-room flat is a case in point.”
“About 38% of them have at least secondary education, and university graduates have increased by one fold, from 4% in 1980 to 8% in 1990. Today, our attempts to provide education for people have accelerated to a higher plane with the introduction of independent schools. An Open University and a fourth polytechnic are due to open next year. Sir, we have also made significant achievements in the area of housing. HDB was set up in 1960 to combat the acute housing shortage and problems then. However, not just being content with putting a roof over the head of our people, we aim instead to create a nation of home owners. Savings in the form of CPF were introduced to facilitate this aim. This huge base of savings has helped us to achieve a home ownership of about 87% of our population. Our housing policy is successful and more people would be expected to become home owners. Furthermore, the fact that there is more and more demand for bigger and newer HDB flats is testimony that the policy of "save and have" has worked. Sir, on our health services, as we can assess, it has improved dramatically. We have also moved beyond providing basic health care. Quality health care is also available. As long as people are willing to pay, the best will be available. One only need to check into Class A ward of the Singapore General Hospital to see what I mean. All these improved services are provided with the Ministry of Health's assurance that no one will be denied of basic health care. If one cannot afford the luxury of Class A wards, there are always the subsidised Class C wards of Government hospitals which one can turn to. Moreover, health care is made accessible through savings in the CPF, ie, Medisave.”
“Sir, Singapore's progress in the last two decades has made it possible for the Government to provide a stake for its citizens. Singaporeans have become stakeholders as a result of ownership to housing and accessibility to education and protection against ill health. I believe the concept of "save and have" is one of the most important reasons for Singapore today to claim a success story. Sir, we have created opportunities for Singaporeans to be stakeholders. Can we sustain them as stakeholders? The challenge, as I see, is to ensure that housing, education, health which are primary pillars of our social foundation remain affordable. To do this, we need to save and create wealth. In Singapore, "save and have" has been pursued vigorously on two fronts. Firstly, the Government's prudent policy of investing in our most valuable asset - our people - to enable them to build assets, own property and have a stake in the nation. Concomitantly, the people were encouraged to save so that they may own assets. "Save and have" is responsible for many of our achievements. I beg your indulgence as I briefly recount our humble achievements. During the last three decades, educating the population was correctly identified as the means to lift the country into the road for progress. Hence, providing mass education dominated a pivotal role of Government's attempt to build the nation. Education became universally accessible. Over the years, while the Government saved by accumulating reserves, we were not only able to universally educate our population, but also the level of education of our people was also raised. Today, about 97% of our children of school-going age are attending school. We also have more educated young adult population.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, thank you for allowing me to join in the debate. I rise in support of the motion by the Member for Hong Kah GRC, Dr John Chen. Sir, Singapore's socio-ecological environment has been changing rapidly. In the last 25 years, the demographic patterns have changed due to changing fertility trends and our population policies. The physical environment and skyline have been reshaped; the population has been redistributed to various new towns. In addition, expectations and demands of the younger generation of population for better social services such as housing, education, health, transportation and entertainment have risen sharply. Sir, the demands, if not mediated, would increase the financial burden on Singapore. Other alternative strategies of meeting the demands are being devised. It is not surprising, therefore, to see an increase in governmental emphasis on corporatisation and restructuring of some social provisions such as health, education, housing and other related services. In the Government's pursuit of restructuring and corporatisation of the public sector, it is important that social provisions are priced in a range which is within the reach of the working class population. Sir, there is much concern about the privatisation of various statutory boards. There is concern that there will be runaway price increases. And I feel that there is a need to set up a review board to ensure that unnecessary price increases by these privatised statutory boards will be checked. I think this is very important because they are all monopolistic organisations which provide services which are specific to the enterprise itself. It is crucial to set up the body which would mediate in terms of the expected price increases if they are going to be privatised.”
“Sir, what is the average bill size of Class C patients in SGH as compared to the same class in the other restructured hospitals?”
“" But we are living in a society where all facilities are open to all groups and it is best that we adjust our thinking rather than wonder whether policies must be shifted. Mr Chiam See Tong (Potong Pasir): Sir, can I get a clarification from the Minister? Do the households indicated in the statistics include HUDC flats which are also nowadays situated in HDB estates? BG Lee Hsien Loong: Mr Speaker, Sir, I think the new figures include HUDC flats, but I am not sure whether the earlier figures do. But whether they are HUDC flats or not, the point is that all of them are living in public housing.”
“If you go to a hospital and you want to go into a C class ward, you can do it, whether you are a millionaire or whether you are a pauper. Perhaps it should not be so. But today it is. Secondly, in terms of buses, MRT, cars and taxis, again, the subsidies and the taxes apply equally for all income groups. We do not ask you what your income is when you ride the MRT and then charge you a little bit more if you can afford to pay. It is the same ticket, same price. Thirdly, HDB housing is a big subsidy to the population. The HDB income ceiling now covers about 95% of the population. Nearly everybody who wants to, can buy an HDB flat. Somebody who is at the 96th percentile and cannot afford to buy a HDB flat may feel discriminated against. But I would not consider him to be part of the squeezed middle-income group. He can look after himself. In any case, for the HDB, our strategy should be to have the smaller flats subsidised, and people buy them with restrictions on them, but to have the bigger and better flats non-subsidized and progressively more relaxed constraints, so that it approximates more the private market. This is fair. If you earn $6,000-$7,000, and want to buy a maisonette, why should you not? We are doing a business deal with you, no loss to the Government. We may even make a profit. But we can provide you a flat which is cheaper and better than the private sector can, and so if you want to buy it from the HDB, so be it. If that is our strategy and philosophy, then there should be no reason for any group to feel left out. A middle group may say, "I can't quite afford a car but I feel a little bit too uppity to ride an MRT.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, can I ask two supplementary questions? Can I ask the Minister to what extent has inflation eroded real income in the last five years and whether inflation is under control? The second question is whether the middle income group is feeling a bigger squeeze as a result of reduction in terms of subsidy and a move towards market pricing in social services. BG Lee Hsien Loong: Mr Speaker, Sir, on inflation, I gave a chart just now (Figure 2) which showed that, in fact, overall the figures have been low and, secondly, they have been lower still for the low-income group than for the high income group. In the last five years, nominal incomes have gone up by 9-10% per year, inflation has never exceeded 3% per year. Real incomes are going up rapidly. As for the alleged squeeze of the middle income group, which was reported in the Sunday Times yesterday, you have to look at it from two angles. Firstly, in terms of the level of income. Are incomes going up in step for all income groups? I showed you Figure 1a which said yes. In fact, if you break down Figure 1a further into finer categories, every 10 percentile of the population, you will see that the picture is substantially unchanged. Everybody has gone up 4.1-4.2% per year. The second question is whether in terms of taxation and in terms of Government subsidies, which do not appear in the income figures, these have caused what you might call a "poverty trap", in other words, subsidies are generous with the low-income group but beyond a certain point, all of a sudden, people become no longer eligible for the privileges and therefore expenses become much more expensive. I do not think so. Firstly, we do not have privileges which are directly tied to family income.”
“Second, whether more bursaries will be made available, and the criteria for granting of bursaries be reviewed so that the students who are more deserving and those from the lower income families could in fact apply and make use of such opportunities available in the university.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker, Sir, for allowing me to join in the debate. Sir, I am pleased that the Minister has announced some measures to reduce the financial burdens of families whose children are taking tertiary education. Despite that, many parents are still concerned about the increasing financial burden for tertiary education. Sir, I have several questions in mind. First, will university education continue to be accessible? Will more loans and bursaries be made available in future? Will the criteria for loans and bursaries be less stringent? Will future fees be increased at a reasonable rate? I know that the Minister has answered some of these questions that have been bugging the minds of many parents. Sir, I know that the Minister has been supportive and being a caring person he will probably ensure that university education will be made as accessible as possible to all deserving students and those who can be admitted into the university. Sir, on the students' aspect, I must say that students must appreciate that with the community support, they have had this opportunity for tertiary education. They must, after graduation, contribute to our community which has given them that opportunity for tertiary education. I hope that most of the graduates will support the endowment fund which has been proposed to be established. Sir, I must say that parents are not against the fee increase, but what they are looking forward is a reasonable fee increase which they can cope with. Sir, I hope that in future the fee increases will be reasonable. I would like to ask the Minister two questions. First, I would like to find out whether the percentage of the loan could be further increased from 65% to 75%.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, thank you for allowing me to join in the debate. Sir, the setting up of Nanyang Technological University is in the right direction. We are giving the University the accorded status. In the light that there is growing demand for tertiary education, I would like to ask the Minister whether there are provisions to increase the number of places in NTU. At the same time, I would also like to say that many parents are sending their children overseas for tertiary education. May I know what steps would be taken in future to look at the establishment of a third university.”
“Sir, we should not just embark on the course to promote corrective and institutional health care, that is, just building and restructuring hospitals. Medical care should be de-institutionalised. Medical services should be taking an outreach perspective in terms of reaching out to the community where preventive steps in health care can be undertaken. In this respect, I would like to know what steps are being taken by the Ministry to emphasise more on preventive health care?”
“Sir, what is the Ministry's direction on health care? Is its emphasis on preventive health care or on curative health care? I am not sure what is actually the emphasis. With the restructuring of hospitals and efforts in terms of curative medicine, a lot of resources are spent in this direction. I think the Ministry should internally debate this issue and find a balance in the direction it sets with regard to the whole issue of preventive health care. 1.45 pm Sir, the Minister has in his 1989 debate indicated, and I quote: 'My Ministry places strong emphasis on preventive and primary health care. We are reorganising and further upgrading the primary health service to meet the challenges of the next two decades.' However, the efforts over the last few years do not point to this direction. There is less emphasis on preventive health, that is, primary health care. It appears that primary health care has received less attention in our health policy and planning. There are some reasons to support my claim. In the last decade, financial allocation to this sector has been between 10% and 15% of the total health expenditure. For FY 91/92, only $90 million out of $720 million is set aside for primary health care. This accounts for only 12 1/2% of the total health expenditure. At the same time, the number of polyclinics has not grown in proportion to our population's health needs. There are only 18 polyclinics today and many other polyclinics have been run down because of population changes. The number of polyclinics planned does not actually meet the needs of primary health care of our population. The programmes related to preventive health care, such as health screening and diagnosis, have not been significantly stepped up.”
“I will wait and see who has been deployed to reply.”
“Mr Chairman, Sir, I have two cuts. Can I take one after the other?”
“We have a big base of small taxpayers and, as such, consumption tax may have to be carefully examined before we introduce it because such an introduction may have ramifications for the lower taxpayers. Finally, Sir, may I urge the Minister to carefully follow up on Government departments which are making surplus in revenue to see if there is justification for increasing their charges in future. In this way, Sir, it will help ensure that our basic social services, namely, education, housing and health are more affordable for the people.”
“In view that we are encouraging human resource develop- ment, it would be relevant for Government to grant tax deduction for expenses up to $200 per year per child on educational enrichment programmes organised by the primary and secondary schools. Sir, we have provided Edusave. I see no reason why we are not allowing parents to have deduction in their spending in this area. The costs in terms of supplementary fees and other related fees for primary and secondary schools are likely to increase. Hence, there is justification to look into more details to allow for tax deduction. Sir, the Government encourages families to look after their aged parents by providing tax relief. This is indeed a good policy and we should continue to review such a policy to see how we can enable families to look after and support their aged sick parents. However, the tax relief provided for families looking after their aged sick parents is the same as those caring for aged parents. Sir, it is financially more burdensome for families taking care of aged sick parents and it would therefore be more appropriate to consider a higher tax relief for this group. It is suggested that the amount of relief for each dependent aged sick parent be increased from $2,500 to $3,500. Sir, we have already introduced some form of consumption tax. The water conservation tax is a case in point. The time-based telephone charges to be introduced by Telecom will be coming next. Sir, the budget provision for these areas will have to be reviewed. Sir, the subject of consumption tax must be carefully examined before it is implemented as this is a radical departure from our present taxation system.”
“Sir, Government has to moderate the increase of charges for public services by taking the following measures: Firstly, allocating more grants to meet the operating cost of basic public services. Sir, I am not saying that we should move to the welfare model. I am not advocating that. I am suggesting that in view of the surpluses that we have accumulated and with our overall objective to spend money on more human resource development, the area of health education and housing deserves a deployment of more resources. Secondly, ensuring better coordination of increase of charges amongst different Government departments so that it would not give undue burden to consumers. If you look at runaway increases by different Government departments, all coming together at one time, they have caused tremendous pressure and burden on the ordinary wage earners. Thirdly, making Government departments to justify the need for increases. Unless there is specific justification for Government departments to increase their costs, the Minister for Finance should perhaps relent on this. Otherwise there is a need to review and relook at the requirement for increases by different departments. Fourthly, ensuring that those who are poor and cannot afford are provided the services. In relation to education, I note there is much worry that the cost of education in Singapore is increasing. Many families with primary and secondary school children are concerned about the increase in educational expenses. These expenses are likely to be higher in the near future.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker, for allowing me to join in the debate. Sir, I would like to support the budget statement. I would also like to commend the Minister for Finance for a painless budget which seeks to strengthen Singapore as a financial centre. One may ask why is the budget painless. It is painless because many of the increases were done outside the budget period. There is nothing more to increase and therefore I would think that it is painless in nature. Sir, the increase has been very insignificant for the ordinary wage earner. You may ask what is in store for the ordinary wage earner. I think there is nothing much in store, except for the 5% tax rebate which has been offered. This is not enough to even buy two plates of nasi goreng. Sir, the Minister would have relieved many people if he had announced an increase in personal relief, an area which has not been reviewed for a long time. The question of personal relief is a recurring theme in many people's discussion in each budget. I am sure if the Minister goes round the constituencies, he probably would have an earful on the need to review personal relief itself. This has not been done for the last 20 years or so. People are looking forward to a change in personal relief much more than the small tax rebate given over the last two years. Sir, the cost of living has risen as a result of increased cost in the purchase of some main public services, such as transport, health, education and housing. Our inflation is on the rise and this is around 3.4% this year, and I hope that inflation will be under control. If we have a runaway inflation, real wage earnings are likely to be eroded. All these increases have effects on the working class and they are concerned about the affordability of public services.”
“Unity among people of different ethnic and cultural backgrounds is a key towards building a nation based on a common vision and common interest. This is as envisaged in the first of our Shared Values, Nation before Community and Society above Self, whose message is that, whatever the situation, we must put the nation above everything and together protect its interest, together ensure its progress, together defend it, together live and die for Singapore. It is the thrust of our Shared Values, something everyone must be mindful of, something that must be etched in the heart of every citizen of the country.”
“One important aspect of building a sense of belonging and unity through this diversity of cultural backgrounds is the promotion of ethnic cultures. The cultural and linguistic heritage of each community is a sensitive issue, a point which has been emphasised time and again, and should continue to be emphasised, by the Government. The Malay, Indian and Chinese Cultural Months celebrated on a grand scale in conjunction with our Silver Jubilee Celebrations last year is evidence of the Government's attention to the preservation and promotion of ethnic cultures in the country. But not enough has been done so far. We should have more such multi-cultural presentations, just like the cultural displays representing the various communities in the country, that we had in the previous National Day celebration. Or we can encourage the inclusion of cultural elements of one community in the celebrations of another. The setting up of the Ministry of Information and the Arts is also a sign of the Government's recognition of the importance of the arts - another cultural element that must be promoted in our life. And I am confident that one of the approaches to be taken by the new Ministry is the promotion of traditional arts, the pride of each community, besides giving a new breath of life to artistic expression in our country. Through the arts, too, we can encourage the inclusion of elements of ethnic culture in every presentation. And when we preserve and further promote the cultural features of the various communities, we are really laying the channels for promoting unity and cohesiveness among our people. This will be the realisation of our aim, as reflected in the Shared Values, to build a Singaporean image and identity, a long challenging process though it might be.”
“We have successfully instilled in our workers the spirit of diligence and determination to increase productivity. But will this spirit remain strong in future years? I have my reservations, for our success is not determined by development programmes alone, but is also subject to events in our immediate surroundings, in the region and the world. Just to cite an example, the Gulf War has to some extent affected us, not only economically but socially too, though the impact has so far been minimal. The Gulf War reminds us how we are always a diversity in unity. We cannot avoid diversity of opinions, but at the same time we cannot let differences of opinion erode the unity we have built so far. In this regard, the Government has to be circumspect. The Government need not be hasty in stating its position, as this may to some extent affect our cohesiveness and sense of belonging. So it is when we seek to carry out a public survey, as we could easily create an uproar by being too hasty. People must have the time and opportunity to understand events and their underlying issues. This is indeed a difficult matter, but it is something we cannot ignore. Here lies our diversity. We are a diversity of religions, races and cultures that want at the same time to build a united people, a strong nation that will not be swayed or jeopardised by external forces. This diversity in unity is what we must build upon. Thus far, we have enjoyed prosperity arising from this diversity. We have been able to counter sensitive issues relating to race, language, culture and religion, issues capable of hampering our survival and progress. A strong sense of unity built upon this background of ethnic and cultural diversity will be the guarantee of our success in the next lap.”
“Sir, it is particularly important that the bureaucrats who manage our governmental departments should ensure that they are delivering the governmental services without any biases and on the basis of merits. This is crucial, especially in our multi-racial context, to be seen that decisions made by bureaucrats are above board. When governmental departments conduct themselves with public interest in mind, then can we promote more cohesion amongst our different communities. Finally, Sir, we should carefully examine the various future policies we would be implementing, to see that if these policies help to build a more cohesive community. Sir, social policies should strive to build an identity around a person. It should not be divisive but be more universal. In this process, we will be able to drive home the message that all Singaporeans have a stake in Singapore and Singapore's future is in our hands and not the Government alone. Encik Abdul Nasser bin Kamaruddin (Hong Kah GRC)( In Malay): Mr Speaker, I support the motion standing in the name of the Member for Toa Payoh GRC, Mr Davinder Singh. I welcome the Speech by the President at the opening of Parliament. The Address reflects the spirit of close relationship between the Government and the people. The people's vision is the Government's inspiration to move into the next lap of Singapore's success, while the Government's vision, as manifested in its various policies, is endorsed by the majority of the people. I propose that we thank the President for this. Mr Speaker, the success of a nation does not depend on its economic excellence alone. Any improvement in productivity will not have the full desired results without a good working environment and supporting elements of work culture.”
“Although it is accepted that some increase in cost of services is inevitable, it must be borne in mind that too many increases at any one time can be burdensome. Sir, may I urge that there should be more coordinated efforts and approach among different Government departments to ensure that future increases in costs of public services do not come all together but within reasonable limits. Sir, in the last 25 years, most public services have remained more or less accessible to all families. It is hoped that in the next lap social services will remain accessible if we are continuing to make good economic progress. It is important to ensure that the average working class would not be priced out by steep increase in various services. This will give people, particularly the working class, the feeling of worth being citizens and enable them to feel that Singapore cares for them. Sir, our Government departments have grown in size and operation. There is a danger that the services provided by the various departments may become less personal. This can lead to a communication gap between those who decide for the department and the service users. This can subsequently lead to misunderstanding. In this direction, Sir, I am pleased to note that the Government is setting up the Service Quality Improvement Unit under the Prime Minister's Office. This is a step in the right direction. But I think more should be done towards ensuring that services are delivered efficiently. Sir, there is an urgent need for Government departments to set up their own internal monitoring system on the services they provide.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise to support the motion standing in the name of Mr Davinder Singh. Sir, it is heartening that under the Government's plan, efforts will be made to provide every Singaporean a stake in our society and make every Singaporean more prepared to stand up for Singapore. Sir, this is particularly important in our case, especially with our multi-racial background where primordial needs, whether religious or racial, may surge out from time to time. We cannot allow these primordial needs to surface, at least to try and suppress or reduce it. If it does, it can fracture our society and it will be difficult for us to galvanize and mobilise our community. Sir, in order that our future plans can be realised, there are a number of issues that we need to pay specific attention so that our efforts would not be thwarted. Sir, I am primarily concerned about the views of the average Singaporeans. Sir, in the last few years we have rapidly restructured some of our major public services such as housing, education and health. More public services are also expected to be restructured in the near future. Sir, the principle of restructuring is good. The idea is to provide efficient services. Whether the services are going to be efficient, it is to be assessed, and whether the consumer gets quality services is to be ascertained. However, Sir, this restructuring has also caused increased costs in most of our public services. The general public, particularly the working class and those in the lower middle income group, have become concerned about the effects of these changes and increases. They have associated restructuring to mean increase in cost. There is a dilemma here, and I think we need to clarify.”
“Although one may argue that it is very expensive for the candidates to mount and mobilize funds to carry out a campaign, in many countries presidential candidates have been able to solicit support from various community groups and to draw on such support to conduct their campaigns. So if campaigns are conducted by the candidates themselves, it will make the presidential candidate more detached from future problems or from future affiliations with his past political party. So I hope that the Government will be able to look at this aspect more critically. The other question that I would like to raise is the requirement of a minimum period of not less than three years in high office. The period held in high office is rather short for assessing the past performance of the candidate for Elected President. For a three-year period, one is unable to judge his performance because one is not able to assess his track record. So I feel a minimum five-year period would be perhaps useful. The other concern that I have is that the Elected President would have tremendous powers. In the light of this, we cannot anticipate that there is no likelihood of future problems between the Elected President and the Government. So in the event that there are serious conflicts between the Elected President and the Government of the day, how are such differences going to be mediated and resolved? Ultimately, the country would be affected because of an impasse. I would like to hear from the Prime Minister how such differences would be mediated in the event of a serious conflict between the Government and the Elected President.”
“Should not Singaporeans deserve the best candidate with proven track record? I am sure, Sir, that Singaporeans deserve candidates of high calibre and with good proven track records. And if this is to be the case, then there should be some form of screening and the Presidential Elections Committee, which comprises notable people from the public, would be able to gauge and assess and do the screening that is necessary, and to put forward a slate of candidates of the highest calibre that Singaporeans can choose from. I do not see there is any wrong in selecting candidates of the highest calibre. Sir, I have a few clarifications to seek of the Prime Minister. Under new Article 19 (Qualifications and disabilities of the President), I would like to know how is the Presidential Elections Committee going to be satisfied with the good character and reputation of potential candidates. Is the candidate required to get a certificate of good conduct to present to the Committee? Or are there other means and infallible aspects in the assessments that are going to be conducted to establish the reputation of such persons? Sir, the Elected President's office is to be held with the highest decorum. I see no reason to encourage political parties to campaign for the candidates. To allow political parties to campaign for the candidate would mean that one would encourage partisan politics. When partisan politics are being involved, it could bring about a lot of repercussions and other social political implications. Sir, in the light that the Elected President's post is held with the highest decorum, I should think that we should have a regulation to deny political parties to campaign.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker, Sir, for allowing me to join in the debate. Sir, I had earlier supported this Bill. I now rise to support the Bill in its amended form. Sir, I am sure many Singaporeans would share with me that the amended Bill is more relevant now, as it has captured the interests of many Singaporeans. There are many persuasive and cogent views that have been put forward. These views have been widely supported by many Singaporeans. More Singaporeans are now aware of the long term value of the Bill, after the public hearings and much public discussions. However, there are some sceptics who still feel that there is no necessity for such a significant constitutional change. They argue: why bring about such a change when the current constitutional system is working well? Is there a necessity for change? Why in such a hurry to bring about so many constitutional changes? Sir, these are some sceptics who do not have the long term interest of Singapore at heart. Sir, for these sceptics, time will help them to see the positive aspect of the constitutional changes that we are making. Sir, as I assess it, the Bill does not deny any rights of Singaporeans but provides further safeguards for our social and political institutions. There are a lot of things that we cannot predict in life, and many political changes that may come that we cannot predict. Therefore, it is essential that we implement place some safeguards that will protect the well-being of Singaporeans. Sir, I am pleased that the amended Bill has accepted viewpoints and changes suggested by various representors and groups. This shows that useful ideas and recommendations are accepted by Government. Sir, the Elected President is the highest public office.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I have two supplementary questions. Are the services of specialists accessible to C Class patients, and what steps have been taken to inform patients about hospital charges before their admission?”
“I think we should include various other community institutions and community groups. This would allow for a wider base from which an Elected President can be considered. Sir, I see the merits of this Bill and I fully support it. ADJOURNMENT OF DEBATE Resolved, "That the debate be now adjourned." - [Prof. S. Jayakumar].”
“The third merit that I can see, Sir, is though our present Government set-up is doing fine, that does not mean that subsequent governments cannot go astray. Even under the very best system of the one-man-one-vote political democracy that Dr Lee Siew-Choh talks about, I think many of these democracies have also fallen. These democracies have gone down and under, simply because there is no basis for checks, there is no basis for people having the will to assert and to bring about what they feel would be in the interest of the collective majority. I think that the Elected Presidential system will provide this will of expression of our people as a whole. Sir, fourthly, in terms of merits of this Bill, I see that the Elected President will add further political wisdom to the Government of Singapore and can act as an Ombudsman. We have discussed quite a fair bit in terms of an Ombudsman to a political system. And I see that the Elected President can play the role of an Ombudsman to ensure that our social institutions are efficient and non nepotic. What is worse is that in many of our institutions, if nepotic practices creep in and takes over, then I think that very institution will suffer and will be eroded. We do not want this to happen in the context of Singapore. Finally, the Elected President system will not subvert our present or future political foundation. It is unlikely to create serious conflicts or stall good government plans. It will further strengthen our democratic institutions. The merits outweigh the perceived fears of uncertainty. What I would like to bring up to the First Deputy Prime Minister is that the base from which the President would be elected is rather narrow and is confined to various corporate institutions.”
“If this does not happen, then I do not think we will survive economically and we will not be able to manage and push ahead as a nation. Sir, I personally feel that the Elected President system will strengthen our political foundation for the following reasons. Firstly, the Constitutional change introduces a checkmate in our political processes. You may ask whether this is negative. Some people argue that it is negative. Some people say that this will in a way create more obstacles to future governments. It can slow down government decisions and plans. Sir, looking at the other side of the coin, I see that this is positive itself. What is wrong in having a checkmate in our political system? Our people will be more likely to be alerted by the Elected President when the government of the day acts against the interest of our people and this is important for our survival and crucial to our nation. In fact, the Elected President will oversee that the interests of our people are safeguarded. There are arguments that having the Elected President is going to do us in and it is not going to be any better. But is this going to be the case? And if he is elected by popular mandate and he has got the support of the people, I think that very system endorses the aspirations and the will of our people. Sir, the second merit that I see is that the Elected President system will enable Singaporeans to have more time to review future Government decisions which will have serious social and economic consequences on our survival. In short, the system can insure against any political risk taken rashly by subsequent governments consisting of self-interested individuals.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, thank you for allowing me to join in the debate. Sir, I fully support the Elected President Bill. Sir, in assessing the merits of this Bill, Singaporeans will have to ask themselves a fundamental question. Will the Elected President system strengthen the political foundation of Singapore itself? Sir, good political foundation is a life line to any nation. Sir, if we review political events in various countries over the last 10 years, we witness that in many of these places, men of straw have taken over, political conflicts have arisen, self-interested groups have arisen and many of these places where such self-interested individuals have taken over, these countries have become fractured and the people have become even worse, in terms of their welfare and well-being. Sir, these are some of the crucial issues that we will have to ask ourselves and we cannot predict political events. We are just making guesses and assumptions on the various policies and issues that we plan to implement. But history has shown that these events have come about and in many places where selfish individuals and groups have taken over, these societies have fallen and it takes a very long time to bring about sanity and progress to these countries. In some of these countries, if you have seen around, they have not made any turn at all for the better. They have remained even worse. So we should ask ourselves whether, in the context of Singapore, we would like Singapore to go down as well. Sir, I am sure that every thinking and concerned Singaporean wants to ensure that our political future is well safeguarded. I think this is crucial and fundamental.”
“NATIONAL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY BOARD BILL "to establish the National Science and Technology Board and for matters connected therewith", recommendation of President signified; presented by the Minister for Trade and Industry (BG Lee Hsien Loong); read the First time; to be read a Second time on the next available sitting of Parliament, and to be printed. NATIONAL REGISTRATION (AMENDMENT) BILL Order for Second Reading read. 12.43 pm”
“In the interim, the two hospitals are being upgraded to create a better environment and to improve the overall level of service and comfort for all patients. TPH's upgrading programme completed so far includes the Accident & Emergency Department, administrative and registration offices, some of the wards, the Specialist Outpatient Clinics and patient waiting areas for all classes of patients. New day-surgery and endoscopy facilities have been developed. The remaining upgrading projects are expected to be completed by the end of next year. TTSH has completed planning for its interim programme of upgrading. Work will begin and is scheduled for completion within a year and a half. TTSH will be expanding and improving patient service areas at the wards and the Specialist Outpatient Clinics. There will be new A&E facilities. Some of the under-utilised C class wards will also be converted into B2, B1 and A wards, for which there has been a consistently strong demand. BILLS INTRODUCED TOWN COUNCILS (AMENDMENT) BILL "to amend the Town Councils Act (Chapter 329A of the 1989 Revised Edition)". presented by the Senior Minister of State for National Development (Dr Lee Boon Yang); read the First time; to be read a Second time on the next available sitting of Parliament, and to be printed. INCOME TAX (AMENDMENT NO. 2) BILL "to amend the Income Tax Act (Chapter 134 of the 1985 Revised Edition)", recommendation of President signified; presented by the Minister for Labour (Mr Lee Yock Suan); read the First time; to be read a Second time on the next available sitting of Parliament, and to be printed.”
“Sir, may I ask the Minister of State whether there are any other intended actions that the Government will take. BG George Yong-Boon Yeo: Sir, the number of cars going to Johor Bahru as a result of the widening differential in petrol prices between Singapore and Johor Bahru has increased from an average of about 7,100 cars each day to 9,100 cars each day. The price difference has now widened to something like 64-65 cents. If this continues, I think the Government will have to take action to rectify the situation. But I am not prepared at this stage to speculate on what kind of measures are being considered. TAN TOCK SENG AND TOA PAYOH HOSPITALS (Number of patients admitted into B2 and C class wards) 7. Dr S. Vasoo asked the Acting Minister for Health whether the number of patients admitted into B2 and C Class wards in Tan Tock Seng and Toa Payoh Hospitals had increased in 1988 and 1989; and when will the upgrading of these two hospitals be expected to be completed. The Acting Minister for Health (Mr Yeo Cheow Tong): Mr Speaker, Sir, admissions into C class wards in Toa Payoh Hospital (TPH) declined from 25,600 in 1987 to 22,900 in 1988. They further declined to 21,400 in 1989. There were no B2 beds in Toa Payoh Hospital during this period. In Tan Tock Seng Hospital (TTSH), B2 admissions increased from 4,800 in 1987 to 5,400 in 1989. Admissions into the C class wards, on the other hand, steadily declined from 33,600 in 1987 to 30,500 in 1989. TPH will be replaced by a 780-bedded hospital to be built in the eastern sector of Singapore in 1995. TTSH will be rebuilt as a 1,000-bedded hospital by 1996 at a site adjacent to the present hospital.”
“Is the Minister considering retaining at least one hospital to be under the management of Government?”
“Sir, what I would like to clarify is that there are people who are allowed to occupy the flat but the HDB has in fact said that because they are not the permitted occupiers they would be allowed to stay in the flat when the original registered tenants leave the flat. There are quite a lot of them who are required to give up their flats. I would like to ask whether these cases would be reviewed sympathetically?”
“Sir, is the Minister of State aware that there are permitted occupiers who have given undertakings that with subsequent changes they are not able to take up the flats? I would like to ask whether these occupiers would be allowed to take over the tenancy of flats which are supposed to be rented out?”
“Sir, I trust that the Government will be able to look at how it can peg its social service provisions at an affordable cost. This will in the long run build a stronger bond between the people and the Government and more Singaporeans will find a meningful life in our society.”
“I hope that the Government will be able to look further into the different pricing of services so that it will allow more flexibility for people to make their right choices. Sir, there is a general concern among people about the increasing cost in goods and services of both the private and public sectors. This is compounded by the nagging increase of our consumer price index. Since 1987, our consumer price index has increased from 0.5% to about 2.9% in the first quarter of 1990. This increase, as I see it, is tolerable, but we should keep a close watch on it. Sir, inflation would be our biggest and most persistent threat to our economy in the near future. We should take various cost control measures to check inflation. Sir, aside from just ensuring that our basic social services are affordable, there is an urgency for us to focus our attention on the children of lower income families. There is a need for us to ensure that they do not prematurely leave school or vocational training because of family problems and economic circumstances. In the light that a more trained and educated manpower is essential to our economic development, it is desirable for us to consider extending further fee rebates and financial assistance for secondary education as well as for vocational training. We should consider, if possible, providing free and compulsory education up to secondary level. In doing so, we will be able to develop and harness the human potentials of a larger base of people who, because of various circumstances and problems, may not be able to make it. I hope that this will be looked into and, in doing this, we will in the longer term help more lower income families to improve their living standards.”
“The bond that we have built over the years must be maintained. I hope that it will not be eroded and weakened through time. Sir, we must try to prevent minimum dislocations to their livelihood and provide adequate opportunities to upgrade their skills so that they will be able to move up the economic ladder. In this respect, it is therefore important for various Govern- ment Ministries undergoing restructuring and privatisation of their services to carefully monitor whether the costs of their services are affordable. Government Ministries must therefore be mindful not to behave like private enterprises where profit becomes their primary preoccupation. Government Ministries must be sensitive that there is a sector of our population whose per capita income is less than $400 per month. This sector comprises 20% of our population and a majority of them have dependent children who have potential to be developed. Among them, we have the not so poor, Sir, whom I will call the "sandwich class". They are neither poor nor rich, and they find it increasingly difficult to cope with the increased cost in social services. This group sees that they are being slowly squeezed out. Sir, I cannot but agree more that there is a need to reduce the burden of bringing up their children, particularly in providing more educational support and also a more graded pricing of social services which they can select on the basis of their income level. There is a need to look at different levels of affordability of social services which can be priced so that people can then make the choice on the basis of their income. This I find that under today's provision, a bit too rigid.”