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 9 of 18.
“As you all know, private markets are driven by profits and profits are the basic motives of private markets. I doubt very much that they are likely to intercede. They may not. We, therefore, should not move into a situation, like in some societies, where individuals care for themselves without regard for others. Excessive greed, profiteering and others can create unintended consequences for our society. Therefore, it will be sad if we get to that stage. Our Government would have to act as a referee and intercede, where necessary, to make some basic services such as education, health and housing affordable. Some of these are investments, as I see it, and I do not agree with some of the arguments that these are consumptions. It is investment to enable our people to grapple and to acquire the skills to manage the challenges ahead. Sir, the Cost Review Committee has identified a few areas, namely, health, housing and education, where there are cost increases in the last few years that have raised public concern. These areas are universal services and hence the impact of price increase would naturally be felt very widely. As more people are affected by price increases, the concerns increase, the noise levels also increase and this is understandably so. It is therefore important to ensure that future increases or charges in these sectors are gradual and well coordinated. Sir, in view of the fact that more public services are likely to be restructured and privatised, it would be necessary for Government to set up a board to monitor and check future charges by these various bodies. As you know, the hospitals have been restructured. Telecom has been privatised. Others are on the pipeline.”
“Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker, for allowing me to join in the debate. Sir, the Cost Review Committee's Report has covered extensive grounds to examine public concern about cost increases. The Report is comprehensive but I am not sure it will allay public worries and reduce the debate about rising costs. This is because the accepted basic basket of goods used to measure CPI is differently perceived by different consumers. Some of them want to add on goods to the basket, others want to reduce this basket while others want to change it. So the saga will continue in terms of how people perceive what weighage to give to this basket. But in any case, Sir, we have to stick to international measures for CPI so that we can check consumer price index changes over a period of time. Hence, the debate on cost of living will continue. The CRC Report will not really put an end to this debate because we will always be confronted, whether we like it or not, with pricing and price changes all the time. Sir, the only way to cope with reasonable cost increase of basic services is to ensure that we maintain our economic growth, increase productivity and secure more investments. As more jobs are created, more opportunities are available, and people will generally have better income to be able to purchase the necessary goods and services they desire. By doing so, people will get more dividends and income to live a better life. Sir, we know that in a free market, there are possibilities of market failures and monopolies. Who will intercede in this area? That is the question. Do we allow things to ride? Who would salvage the situation? Who would come and rescue, particularly those who face the failures of the market? Would the private market intercede?”
“Sir, if there are more demands for B2 and C class beds, would the Ministry consider increasing the number of such beds?”
“Sir, would there be plans to buy back older flats and provide people with alternatives to better upgraded flats in the near future?”
“In the light that there are more demands for upgrading of flats by residents in the mature estates, are there other alternatives, besides the upgrading programme that is being proposed? Or would the upgrading programme be hastened in the older mature estates?”
“Sir, I understand there are residents who want to upgrade themselves and want to stay in the neighbourhood. Are there plans for decantation and the provision of opportunities for them to upgrade in the older city areas?”
“I would like to know whether, for this group of pensioners, adjustments and support will be given to them, particularly those who really do not live in HDB flats for which rental and SC&CC rebates would be given. As we know, there is a sizable group of retirees who are living in rent-controlled premises and other small premises of their own. For this group of low-income retirees and pensioners, there are very few recourses available. This group of people will have to be reached out fairly quickly and we need a good administrative system in place to assist and support them. Sir, on that note, I would like to thank you.”
“Sir, I also see that there is a need to support the formation of consumer protection groups at the neighbourhood level. Would the Ministry be providing more grants to CASE although there have been suggestions that the grants to CASE will be increased? Would CASE also be given sufficient muscle for it to act against overcharging those consumers? Sir, the second area which requires attention is the implication of GST on charitable activities. Many charitable organisations are concerned that their fund raising activities and programmes could be affected if donors see that the charities would be getting less from their donations as a result of GST. There are donation draws and various fund raising activities that are undertaken. Would these charities and their activities be affected in the longer term? How would the Ministry propose to deal with this problem? Could rebates or exemption from GST be accorded to charitable organisations? I think this is crucial because we are trying to set up a more caring community and we are trying to encourage various charitable activities and the communities to build up a better support network. I hope that various administrative decisions are taken to encourage people to contribute further and to support various community activities. Sir, the other area of concern is the group of unsupported retirees and pensioners who are getting a very small income. Many of these retirees who have less than $500 income have no other sources of support. There is quite a sizable group of pensioners whose pension has been accorded much earlier and they now would be the ones who are likely to be affected, particularly those who have no other means of support. It is this group that the impact of GST will be most felt.”
“Sir, despite Government's assurance that there will be a small increase in the prices of goods and services when GST is implemented, there are some lingering doubts about this. Residents living in housing estates are now beginning to see price adjustments at various retail shops and food centres. Some of them have taken advantage of it. Some residents have brought to my attention that even before GST is imposed, some hawkers and shopkeepers have jacked up their prices by 10% to 20%. Sir, when GST is instituted, there could be further attempts at overcharging at the neighbourhood level. The blame for the steep rise in prices will be assigned to Government. So how do we overcome this? How do we explain that this is overcharging that is being made at the local level? The overcharges are expected to be further generated when GST is implemented. Sir, it is this mindless overcharging and the impact of GST at the grassroots level that we should address our attention. I would like to ask how the Ministry would go about in assessing the impact of GST at the local level, and the types of monitoring system the Ministry would have in order to help it to assess and be sensitive in terms of taking various remedial actions against overcharging. Sir, I also like to know what preventive measures that the Ministry would be taking against people who overcharge and take advantage of the GST. I know that the Ministry has announced that it will set up a monitoring unit. It will set up a section where people can complain and action will be taken against traders who overcharge. But how quickly would this be effected and how fast action would be taken against people who go on mindless overcharging?”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker, for allowing me to join in the debate. Sir, I support the GST Bill because it will enable Singapore to be competitive and also meet the economic and social challenges ahead. These are macro issues which a lot of people may not really understand. What is most crucial is to look at how we could sell and promote GST to make the people see that it is positive. I think this is the question that we need to address. Sir, I note that the Minister has assessed that the people look at GST on the basis of the 3% tax rate. This is understandable because at the end of the day, people are going to ask whether they are going to pay more, or they are going to pay less. As a result of this, they would then view whether the GST Bill is positive or negative, and what impact this will have on their cost of living. I think these are some of the crucial issues that the Ministry will have to deal with and to reassure the ordinary working people that GST will, in the long term, be better off for them. Unless and until we can convince and ensure that the impact is minimal at the grassroots level, the people are likely to become sceptical about the overall interest and the overall value of GST itself. Sir, the GST Bill is fairly complex. It is very difficult for people to really understand the complexities of this Bill itself. The procedures are complex and, therefore, I share the sentiment that the ordinary average citizen will never be able to understand the mechanics of this Bill. So the ultimate consequence is to see how we can deal with the spillover effects of this GST Bill. The spillover effects of this GST Bill are likely to be felt at the grassroots level, ie, the ordinary households in the various housing estates.”
“Sir, are the residents required to pay for the internal improvements in their flats?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, coming back to my question, would the HDB be prepared to build more budget flats in anticipation of more 3-room families upgrading themselves?”
“Sir, is it not urgent, in the light of the re-building programme in the city area, to consider higher priority for residents living in the area so that the network and support system can be maintained, and people will feel less dislocated?”
“Sir, are there any plans to upgrade, parti- cularly, the 1-room flats so that the environment will be made more palatable?”
“I have done what is right and necessary to maintain the academic integrity of an institution because we do deal with thousands of students, and I think this is crucial. To nurture and to provide the appropriate values to students, we must have academic staff who can stand tall, who have the integrity and the capacity to transfer, transmit and inculcate the right values to these young minds. Sir, no Head of Department can condone such misconduct by a staff member, like Dr Chee. [Applause].”
“That was how I began to assess what the fare was like. I, therefore, reported these excessive transport claims to the University and I left it to the University to take whatever action they consider necessary. I do not know why the University has not raised the abuse of transport claims with Dr Chee. Sir, I have presented the various facts, and I have documented the events that led to this unfortunate circumstance. Sir, I have recounted these facts in some detail so that hon. Members and the public will be left in no doubt as to the misconduct of Dr Chee. As Head of the Department, I had the duty to bring to the University's attention such misconduct of Dr Chee. If I had not done so, I would be covering up an activity which cannot be condoned. I would, in fact, be abetting him. If I had abetted him, action should be taken against me too. The basic question is Dr Chee's improper use of the University research fund. I have nothing personal against Dr Chee. I have treated him well. I have nurtured him and have brought him into the University. But did he behave like a gentleman from the way that I have described and discussed the case? It is up to Members to assess for themselves. Members of my Department, both staff and students, who know me well, will tell you that I am not a vindictive type of person, or even a combative person. In fact, I had refrained from making any press statement until Dr Chee and the SDP sought to turn this into a political issue and attacked my motives. It is the SDP who has made this simple academic matter into a political issue and, today, they are side-tracking the whole thing into an issue to arouse public sympathy for which it should not be the case. I must say that it is Dr Chee who has brought this problem upon himself.”
“As I had doubts, on 17th February 1993, to check on this, I travelled in a taxi of the Singapore Commuter Company, belonging to a taxi driver friend of mine, one Mr Hor Kin Mun, who is also a Radin Mas grassroots leader. He is a reliable person. I get him because you can get a print-out of the fare. I went from NUS to Toa Payoh in the early morning peak hours. I left NUS at 8.45 am. I made arrangements with him to pick me up. I took a taxi with him to Toa Payoh itself and then to Braddell Primary School which is just opposite. Toa Payoh Primary School is in Lorong 1 and Braddell Primary School is in Lorong 8. Mr Ong Teng Cheong can vouch for it. I can verify that it costs no more than $9. I also took a taxi trip on the same day from Toa Payoh to Nee Soon. I took the taxi from Singapore Commuter Company because it could still run with the pricing on. I did not go to Nee Soon Central but I went to Nee Soon itself to look for Nee Soon Community Centre. There are too many community centres in Nee Soon South and Nee Soon North and as such I could not get the bearing right. I really went there to check it out. But, unfortunately, because I could not establish which community centre it was, I decided not to give you the pricing of the fare. Sir, indeed, from my own experience, at non-peak hours, the fare will be less than $8.50. I used to live in Toa Payoh Central some 15 years ago. I know what the fare is as I still take occasional taxi trips from NUS to Toa Payoh for occasional meetings at the Ministry of Community Development. When my car was sent for servicing, I would normally take a taxi. It would go via Toa Payoh Lorong 1 through Philips Singapore Pte Ltd and then to Singapore Labour Foundation (SLF). Toa Payoh Primary School is not too far away.”
“He also concluded that he could not see a direct relation between the research reported in his wife's abstract and the research projects by Dr Chee. Sir, in other words, two senior and experienced psychologists of our Department were of the view that Dr Chee's research and his wife's research were not related. And this debunks the argument that his research and his wife's research are all related and, therefore, he was justified to use the money. So that has been debunked. They are local people, they have done local research, they are very senior people, and they have given their opinions. Sir, the story does not end here. I have also brought to the University's attention that Dr Chee had, in January 1992, made transport claims for taxi trips, amounting to $798. In January, this year, I noticed that besides the three parcels sent by courier service to Pennsylvania State University, his taxi trips included 26 trips between NUS and First Toa Payoh Primary School at $12 per trip; and 24 trips between NUS and Braddell Primary School also at $12 per trip. The rounded sums of $12 for each of the 50 trips made me suspicious. Earlier on, I thought it was a just claim. As you know, many Government servants do make claims and they do submit all sorts of claims, but one has got to read between the claims. Later, when all these issues came up, when you became suspicious, when you were unsure, you went back and have a look at them. This was what I did. Sir, I wonder whether Members know how much is the taxi fare for a trip from NUS to either First Toa Payoh Primary School or Braddell Primary School. I know some of you do not travel by taxi, but some of you do. Let me tell you what it is.”
“Sir, please see Annex F, notes of meeting held on 11th March 1993. It will give you an idea of what had transpired at this meeting. Sir, to my mind, whether his wife's research was related or not to his research was irrelevant. The basic thing is that he had sent his wife's PhD thesis for examination which is already wrong in the first place. Nevertheless, on 13th March 1993, before the University served notice of termination on Dr Chee, I invited Dr John M. Elliott, Senior Lecturer of our Department, who is a respected local psychologist, to comment on the relevance of Dr Chee's University funded research project to his wife's research area. Dr John Elliott is a child developmentalist. He has also worked and researched in the neuropsychology area and he has, in fact, spent more than 15 years working and researching in this direction. Dr John Elliot replied on 15th March (Annex G) and stated without qualification, and I quote, 'I cannot see that it has any direct relevance.' And after explaining the different areas of work, he concluded, and I quote, 'Mrs Chee's research has no particular basis in neuropsychology. It is in a fundamentally different branch of psychology. Moreover, Ms Huang is dealing with children [they are toddlers two to three years old] younger than the range covered by Dr Chee's research, and she does not examine ethnic differences. Her work has no connection to Dr Chee's projects that I can see.' And Dr John Elliot is in the Public Gallery, Sir. Sir, similarly, I also requested Assoc. Prof. Ramadhar Singh to give his opinion. He is well known for his research work in social psychology. He has recently been awarded the Fellow of the American Psychological Association, which is a very prestigious award.”
“Since his explanation in his letter dated 4th March was very different from what he had said, two days later, on 11th March 1993, we had another meeting. Dr Chee Soon Juan, Mr J J Isaac, Director of Personnel, the Dean, Assoc. Prof. Ernest Chew, and myself were present. We went higher. There was a basis for him to present his case. Sir, the Dean, Assoc. Prof. Ernest Chew, the Director of Personnel, Mr J J Isaac and Mrs Janice Chen are present in the officials' gallery to hear what I say, and they will be willing to vouch the facts. Sir, in this meeting on 11 March 1993, Dr Chee for the first time, I repeat, for the first time, confirmed that he had sent his wife's dissertation for PhD examination. He had suppressed the information earlier. He also confirmed the names of the examiners of his wife's PhD dissertation. In this meeting, he abandoned his first position that he had intended to pay and shifted to his written back-dated letter of 4th March that he was justified to send his wife's dissertation using University research fund as her dissertation contained materials relevant to his research. That is his argument now, a new line has developed. This was an untenable excuse. The simple point was that he had sent his wife's dissertation for examination using University funds, and that is the basic thing. We should not be detracted or sidetracked by this. His wife is not a full-time staff member, or our enroled PhD student. She worked part time, and did some research. She was associated six months, for a period of time, and that does not mean that she has got the right to use our University's fund to send the thesis for PhD examination. She is not a staff of the University. Neither is she an enroled PhD student in NUS.”
“30 pm to see Mrs Janice Chen to say that it was all right to have charged the invoices to the research account. He had shifted his position and wanted to find other new arguments. Sir, Dr Chee gave a written explanation in a letter which was delivered to my office on 9th March 1993. But it was dated 4th March 1993. I could not understand the difference of five days. But he backdated it, no doubt. Mr J J Isaac, the NUS Director of Personnel, received a carbon copy on 10th March. In his letter, Dr Chee shifted his position from the meeting of 4th March when he said that he had intended to pay the bills. Instead, he wrote that the two documents he had sent (he did not want to say it was a research PhD dissertation for examination) belonged to his wife's research which carried data on Singaporean children that was relevant to his research. He did not state that the documents were for purposes of his wife's PhD dissertation for examination. He argued that they were completed dissertation. Any completed dissertation can be done five years ago or maybe a few years ago. They were not completed dissertation. They were dissertation sent for examination. That is the main thing. He asserted that, to the best of his judgement, he felt that he was justified in using the funds in his research accounts for mailing the completed dissertation to the University involved so that the results could be quickly validated, and incorporated into his research. You can see, in Annex E, Mr Isaac received a carbon copy of Dr Chee's letter dated 4th March, with receiver's stamp of 10th March; Dr Vasoo's copy (Annex E1), with my note indicating that it was received on 9th March. They are there before you.”
“The Dean then discussed about this and, subsequently, also talked about issues related to the status of the University and why Dr Chee felt necessary to run the University down. During the discussions, the issue came up that Dr Chee thought that he was not as good, but he was taken in by the University, and he (Dr Chee) could not understand why. The Dean then sought for clarification that this view was not good image for the University. The Dean was just expressing an opinion. And he told him, "Why didn't you clarify in the papers, if it was wrongly quoted?" And all the time Dr Chee said that he was misquoted by the papers. So the Dean and myself said, "If it is wrongly quoted, I think it is right that you write in to clarify the situation." So this is what we asked. We talked about other related work. And then we went on to discuss about the use of his research funds. That was also a very important question that we need to establish an answer to our query. After the meeting, I immediately rang up Mrs Janice Chen to say, "Watch out, he is coming. Be careful." Because I knew that he would be running there. Sure enough, he turned up in Mrs Chen's office after the call. He said to her that the invoices should be sent to him and not charged to the research vote. But she told him that they had already been charged to his research account, as instructed by him. Later, on the same day, I think in the late afternoon, probably at 4.30 pm, he went to see Janice Chen again. I see it is in the note. You can read Janice Chen's second note of 8th April 1993. I asked her to recollect this because I wanted to build up a case to show the kind of character that we are dealing with. I do not want to do this but I thought it was necessary. So this time he came at 4.”
“He was admitting that he personally had to pay for this and that it was wrong to charge it to the research vote. Otherwise, why was he expecting to be billed? However, when I later checked with Mrs Janice Chen, she stated in writing that Dr Chee had instructed her that the two courier payments in question (sent on 8th September and 9th November 1992) be charged to his research accounts. I refer you to Annex C for Mrs Janice Chen's statement. It is very clear, and she is very clear-minded, she is very specific, she is very meticulous. Normally, staff direct our research account staff to charge where it should be charged. It is not their business to go and decide to charge where they think best. Where research is concerned, the responsibility is on the researcher. At the end of the meeting on 4th March 1993, Dr Chee was asked to give his explanation in writing. Because of my past experience in dealing with him and knowing him, I thought it was necessary to get him to put it in writing, so that we could then subsequently discuss and take up the matter further. Sir, he had accused in the papers that that meeting was a political interrogation that we had. We are not running a Gestapo service. The Dean, a decent man that I know, honest Christian, and myself, together grilling him? Grilling him on a political arena? We were just there to talk to him about his work. We discussed about his academic orientation, his academic interest, because he had made statements in The Ridge -- you can read them, they are there -- and he felt that political involvement was more important than academic involvement. That was what he said, to that effect. Surely, in an academic institution, he has got to establish what the priorities are.”
“And if I do bring in my colleagues, senior colleagues, from the Department, he will say that I will be conniving with them to deal with the matter. So I thought the best thing was to have Assoc. Prof. Ernest Chew to sit in, being an impartial witness, to deal with the situation. I no longer trusted him and I wanted a witness in Assoc. Prof. Ernest Chew to deal with this situation. Sir, at the meeting held on 4th March 1993 with Dr Chee, Assoc. Prof. Ernest Chew and myself -- I read from the notes of the meeting, if you can refer to Annex B-1 and B-2 -- I quote: "He admitted that he had on both occasions sent his wife's dissertation. It was drawn to his attention that it was a misuse of the University's fund. He did not dispute that but explained that he thought Mrs Janice Chen was supposed to alert him and give him the bills to make payment. [Mrs Janice Chen is a staff in our office in charge of research accounts. She has worked in our Department for the last 15 years. She is a very careful person.] However when confronted that he could send his wife's dissertation by courier service on his own expenses as he had done so for one parcel which was charged to his wife's account, he could not give a satisfactory explanation. He was informed it was wrong to use the University research fund to send his wife's materials, he added that he had intended to make payment. His answer was not satisfactory." The notes of the meeting are there and Assoc. Prof. Chew, the Dean who arbitrates and deals in this matter, can vouch for it. Sir, not once during the meeting on 4th March did he claim that he was justified in using research funds in his research accounts for mailing his wife's dissertation. On the contrary, he indicated that he had already intended to pay. What does this mean?”
“To clear my doubts and my suspicion, I asked her for details of the date of her PhD oral examination, names of her internal examiners, and her external examiner outside the Department of Human Development and Family Studies at Pennsylvania State University in which she was enroled as a PhD student. She informed me that she defended her PhD oral examination at the end of November 1992 and gave me the names of her respective examiners. This information confirmed my suspicions. When you get these things together you get the real picture. The real picture emerged. As she had to appear for oral defence of her PhD examination before the end of November 1992, the parcels had to be sent quickly by courier service on 9th November 1992. She would be going to defend her PhD. Parcels had to be amnt early. So within two weeks the examiners would have read it and conduct the oral examination. Three of her examiners were from the Human Development and Family Studies Department. They knew her. The fourth was an external examiner from the Psychology Department at Pennsylvania State University who did not know her and would not have recognised the parcel if the sender had been Dr Chee and not herself. Sir, I subsequently made arrangements with the Dean, Assoc. Prof. Ernest Chew to meet me and Dr Chee on 4th March 1993 to discuss Dr Chee's work and his use of research funds. I wanted the Dean to be present so that we can have an impartial person, who is also my superior, to meet with Dr Chee together with me. After the incident, when you do not trust the person anymore, and when you want to deal with such delicate matters, it is not easy. Otherwise, it would be between him and me.”
“Sir, all the Annexes "A" show all the invoices and bills that are available. Mr Chiam says that I have covered up one part of it. I covered up one part of it to specifically indicate to Dr Chee what he had sent to make sure that he knows what it is. Knowing him, his arguments could turn out to be quite different. So you have got to show specific things. But there is nothing to hide. They are all there. They can be challenged. I am not afraid of showing all these documents. I can be challenged in the court to verify all these documents. They are authentic bills which have been filed. Sir, the question is: why did he send two parcels on the same day to two different Departments at Pennsylvania State University? One to the Department of Psychology (which was sent in his wife's name) and another sent to the Department of Human Development and Family Studies (sent in his name). I suspected that the parcel sent to the Psychology Department must have been for his wife's external examiner. It had to be in his wife's name, otherwise, the external examiner would not know whose thesis it was. Under the American system, they appoint external examiners outside the Department in which you enrol as a PhD student. So at least I have got the picture. Otherwise, it will be difficult to discern. I then personally reported the matter to the Dean, Assoc. Prof. Ernest Chew and kept the Vice-Chancellor informed. I gave them the invoices and consignment notes. They followed the case very closely. Coincidentally, on 15th January 1993 - this is where the bubble burst - Dr Chee's wife, Madam Huang Chih-Mei came to see me for a job in the Department.”
“50 was sent in his name and charged under his research vote. It was sent to the Department of Human Development and Family Studies at Pennsylvania State University. Who knows what he sends. Although he claims that I know his wife is there, but what materials did he send? Everybody's wife is studying here and there and how do I keep track. But he had no known research connections in the Pennsylvania State University. He mentions Dr Hynd's letter. It is from Georgia. From Pennsylvania, it has now gone to Georgia. We could establish all that. This is a letter dated 12th April. It is much later than what we have been querying for the past few months. I know he has written to George Hynd because George Hynd was his teacher in Georgia. They have worked together in research. He is a graduate of the University of Georgia. So he must have connections there. The parcel was sent in Skypak-sealed envelope and he forwarded it by courier service. He did not come and see me to say, "Dr Vasoo, let me tell you what is in this parcel." No permission was sought from me. I was not informed of the actual contents. He was accountable for what he had sent. All staff mail all sorts of things out of the funds that have been allocated to them. As Head of the Department, we do not police, we do not follow, we do not go and dig out. That is an improper thing to do. When I had earlier authorised payments, I assumed these to be his research work because he had charged to his research vote. He is a professional, he should know best what he had sent. My office staff and I never open parcels mailed by staff. It would be highly improper to do this. You must trust your staff, they are academics who should have high personal integrity.”
“At first, it did not register in my mind that this was unusual as I thought that it was his research materials. Normally, all staff in the Department send all sorts of materials to all over the world. It is not easy to keep track of these things. However, I became suspicious when I discovered that he had subsequently mailed two parcels at the same time on the same day, 9th November 1992. That is where I became more suspicious. Let me tell you why. In reviewing the invoices, my curiosity was further aroused, as one parcel, which was billed and paid under his wife's name, was sent to the Department of Psychology, Pennsylvania State University. Why did she send it? Why did he? He could not charge the cost of $53.50 to his research account because the parcel was sent in his wife's name, as the consignment note shows. But he did not tell the public that he sent his wife's parcel. He said he sent one parcel. Sir, may I ask the Clerk of Parliament to distribute all the Annexes to Members and also to the press? [Copies of documents distributed to hon. Members]. They document all the things. We have nothing to hide. If you look at Annexes A-1 to A-6 you will find the copies of consignment notes and invoices filed with the Department of Social Work and Psychology. These are all filed with my Department. They are carbon copies. Annexes A-7 to A-10 are copies of the original filed at the Bursar's Office. So I produce them because Mr Chiam says that I have doctored them here and doctored them there, that the receipts are not correct and there are some flaws in them. But they are all public documents which can be produced in Court. The Court can verify them. We have nothing to hide. They are all there. Sir, the other parcel costing $151.”
“Does it not show that I have kept my roles very clear? The Party should have taken action against me for not divulging them. But it was a clear professional role that I played. It was only much later after I discovered that he had used funds and was dishonest in the investigations that I reported the taping incident to Professor Ernest Chew, the Dean, and kept the Vice-Chancellor informed. I did not tell them. I was an academic Head. My duty in such an incident was to report, but I said, "Look, let us monitor this young man and see what is he like, what kind of person is he." When I subsequently reviewed my staff's work and their usage of research funds sometime in early January 1993, I paid special attention to Dr Chee's two research projects. They were in two different files. So you never know a picture unless you collate them and put them together. This was because of my doubts about his integrity in the light of his repeated denials of the taping incident. There must be something in this man that is not right. So I began to search, looking for things. Anybody would have done it. Because once you break the trust, and there is some character problem. Your doubts carry further. You look to assess whether this man does in a way stand tall. I discovered by collating information from the funds used from two research projects that he had sent parcels by courier service to Pennsylvania State University. I also discovered that he had made transport claims by taxi under his research vote amounting to $798. I shall say more about this later. Sir, let me first deal with the parcels he sent by courier service. I found that he had on 8th September 1992 sent a parcel in his name using our University research fund amounting to $74.50.”
“Therefore, I did nothing wrong in retaining the tape after Dr Chee had surreptitiously tape recorded not one but two conversations with me and had also lied when he denied he was recording our conversation. I believe Mr Chiam owes me an apology. I saw the tape, I could recognise it. My Department has got vouchers to support the kind of tapes we buy and the tapes he used for recording. So we stand by what we have done and what I have said. Sir, this taping incident was the turning point in my judgment of this young colleague. However, despite this incident, I kept my professional roles clear. If I had played politics, I would have played politics a long time ago. I know that within the academic world and within the academic context, my teaching comes first, my students come first, and I deal with them at my best. I did not play politics with Dr Chee. I did not expose him in the Marine Parade by-election rallies because I had this good stuff with me, this tape, to show what kind of a person he is. I did not even report to Associate Professor Ernest Chew, the Dean, and the University and even my party leaders, even PM Goh and all those people who were involved in the by-elections. I did not even breathe a word. It will be very useful material for them if I had passed it on to them. They could have used it. They could have asked me to go and talk at the Marine Parade by-election. I went there. I participated in the Marine Parade by-election. I spoke there at the rallies in Aljunied. I said let the people judge Dr Chee. I did not even say anything about him. I did not run him down. I had not done this. I have important evidence and information about his character, what kind of person he is, which should be useful for the party, but I refrained from giving them to the Party.”
“We will come to that. I was very hurt and deeply disappointed, because after what I had done to help him, he had tried to trap me by secretly taping a private conversation with me, an academic colleague, who is Head of the Department, who had given him honest, friendly advice in response to his specific request. He asked me about politics. He said that he wanted to go into politics. I said, "There are difficulties. There are challenges. There are issues." Obviously, when you are in politics, you are going to face problems and difficulties. It is quite natural. I was frank. I told him what it was. I felt what he had done was a serious breach of personal trust. Sir, from that moment onwards, I had serious doubts as to his character and integrity. When a man can do this and not be open about it, when he is treated so nicely, when he is treated openly, when he is nurtured, we give him a chance, and he really downs you, you think any sensible person would not take heart to these things? After that event, I had my doubts on the character of Dr Chee. So I decided that this man's actions needed close monitoring and scrutiny. Incidentally, Sir, in The Straits Times of 6th April 1993, Mr Chiam was reported to have called on me to return the tape to Dr Chee. He said, "By taking it, it is theft, you know." He does not know what he is talking about. He said, "It is his property and Dr Chee is entitled to it." I wish to inform Mr Chiam and hon. Members that both the tape-recorder and the cassette are the property of the Department of Social Work and Psychology. They were purchased with University funds and allocated to Dr Chee for departmental use.”
“Terminate his service? An hon. Member: Play the tape and let's hear.”
“He was not remorseful for his actions. Then, in his press statement, he said that I snatched his tape and then alleged that I would terminate his service. A man like me would say such a thing? Some hon. Members: No.”
“When I asked him, he denied it and said that the tape-recorder was for his classes. He said in no uncertain terms, "This is for my class, without doubt, for my class." I then took the tape-recorder from him and showed him that the cassette was still running. With the cassette running, who is so blind as not to see what it is? He still denied it. He swore blue and said, "It is not. I am not recording you." I removed the tape. When I played the tape later, it showed that he had not only recorded that conversation but had also recorded a previous conversation of ours. There were third parties and other people involved. In the tape, there were two conversations. After I listened to it, I said to myself this is a chap whom I cannot trust, because he had not told me about the tape recording. This is not the end. I will tell you more. How can one do such an unreasonable act, if you ask yourself? A man who treats you openly, deals with you honestly, and you come and do such a thing! It is indeed a betrayal. It is, to my mind, morally and ethically wrong. He calls himself a neuropsychologist, a professional. Yet, he did not know it was not right to secretly tape a private conversation. You know, in the American Psychological Association, when you talk with your clients, you have to tell them, "I am tape-recording you. You are on tape." You have to seek permission. He should know it. It is ethics of the American Psychological Association. What is worse, Sir, was that he persistently lied and he said that he was not recording when I showed him that the tape-recorder was running. He did not even apologise after being caught. I thought he would do it, but he never did. He behaved as if he had the right to do it. He displayed no human dignity or honour.”
“I have been Head of the Department since 1986 and as part of my responsibility, I have to submit reports on the work of 37 teaching staff and the use of all funds allocated by the University to the Department. Hundreds of thousands of dollars are given to staff to undertake research, to buy equipment, and these are people with integrity and who would have to be accountable for the funds for which they are given. These are all public funds and therefore they have to be accountable. Sir, Dr Chee came on 7th December 1992 to inform me about his candidature on the SDP ticket. He came to see me as a friend. I have always treated him as a friend and a colleague. I was open and honest about his participation in politics and I had always treated him as a friend and a professional colleague. I had no malaise against him. He knows it. It was an academic contact, a friendly, informal discussion between me and him. He was seeking advice. Our discussion was cordial and I interacted with him as Head of the Department in the academic context. But later I discovered that he came with a political motive. As I have already disclosed in the press, I discovered that he was tape recording our conversation without my knowledge. If he was a gentleman, he should tell me, "I would like to record. We will talk openly." Put the tape recorder there. Let's talk. But he did not do it. What kind of gentleman is that? That is the question. It was not in a political context that we held our talk. It was in an academic context. I was there as the Head, as a friend. Many people know me - I speak, interact and give them the best. That was what I did. I have disclosed to the press that he tape recorded our conversation and I stand by it.”
“But I argued for his appointment, because I felt that young people like him who have made it, who have tried hard, be given a chance in our society. That is why I persuaded the selection board to give him an opportunity within the University to work. Otherwise, he would not have an opportunity. Sir, the issues are whether Dr Chee had misused University research funds amounting to $226 to send his wife's dissertation for her PhD examination, and then dishonestly misled the University in its investigations. I think the crucial issue is that he sent his wife's dissertation for examination. And we need not be side-tracked by all other things. The others are all peripherals. The central issue is this: did he or did he not? And I will prove that he has, in fact, used University funds to send his wife's thesis for examination. And I state that it is his wife's PhD dissertations which were sent. Dr Chee was first appointed as a Teaching Fellow on 15th August 1990 and then confirmed as a Lecturer in August 1991. I argued for him because I thought that this young man was energetic, was working hard. I persuaded the Vice Chancellor to convert him from a Teaching Fellow to a Lecturer within 14 months, but the University decided not to do so. They said, "Assess him for a longer time." So, sometime after the 14th or 15th month, I persuaded the University to make him a Lecturer. The University got persuaded and he became a Lecturer retrospective from the time he was employed. It is not that I was vindictive. I thought that he had done his job well. I recognised it and gave my recommendations.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I must declare my interest as an academic staff in the context of this discussion today. Sir, I wish to speak on the motion as I am aware of the circumstances leading to the dismissal of Dr Chee Soon Juan. I am really disappointed that an academic matter like this is turned into a political issue. It is really unfortunate, Sir, because I did not expect a turn of such an event. This is all the making of the SDP, to turn this whole issue into a political issue. Furthermore, Sir, Dr Chee and the SDP have sought to question my motives. I will give the facts to rebut their allegations. I do not want to pre-empt what the Minister for Education has to say, but I feel it is my responsibility to tell the House what I personally know and have done. I have nothing to hide. I would like to tell the House openly so that Members will be able to form their conclusion in the case of Dr Chee. The disclosure, I am sure, will clear the air and enable hon. Members as well as the public to come to their own conclusion, whether Dr Chee's conduct was right or wrong. I think this is very crucial, Sir, and Members need to examine the way that I am going to present the facts. Sir, I speak more in sorrow than in anger, because he was a staff of mine. I have nurtured him. I have supported him. I have given him the best possible, but he was trying to play politics. That I discovered later. Despite all that, I took no advantage of that. The House may not know it, but it was I who recommended that Dr Chee be appointed as a Teaching Fellow in my Department, the Department of Social Work and Psychology. The University was not keen to appoint him because Dr Chee has poor 'O' and 'A' level results.”
“Sir, are there plans to restructure the hospital because the people are concerned and will fees in this hospital remain affordable?”
“Sir, are there any specific plans in the next one to two years to upgrade the older flats in Tanjong Pagar GRC?”
“Sir, thank you for allowing me to join in the debate. Sir, the social landscape in the old estates is greying. The population of the aged in these estates has increased quite dramatically. I am sure, Sir, your estate too faces a similar problem. The question is that we need to respond in terms of organising various programmes and encouraging better community support to meet the different changes and demands of this aging population. Sir, many families also have parents who become aged sick and they require support. Despite views that families should try and organise their resources to support them, many families have working members and therefore they are stressed and stretched in terms of the need to provide care and support. I would like to find out from the Ministry what plans there are to encourage more community groups to establish services to support the aged sick, and at the same time, to see how families can also be provided the necessary support to continue to provide care for their aged sick.”
“I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdraw. The sum of $108,887,240 for Head R ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. The sum of $47,395,100 for Head R ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. CLAUSE: Head J -”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head R of the Main Estimates be reduced by $10 in respect of Code RF 1500. Sir, a lot of small interest groups have been formed in recent years to promote arts, drama, music, literary writings. These groups are enthusiastic and they are looking for more support from the Ministry itself. They feel that bigger groups, more well-known groups, are getting the support required. I would like to ask the Minister what support is being given to these groups to encourage them to promote arts further.”
“Sir, in view of the exciting answer by the Minister, I beg leave to withdraw the amendemnt. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head R of the Main Estimates be reduced by $10 in respect of Code RC 1500. Sir, there is a case for the facilities of branch libraries to be further improved, eg, more reading facilities can be set up, the Children's Section in these libraries can also be improved, and at the same time on-line search facilities can also be further incorporated. These branch libraries have been built in the last 10 to 15 years and if you do an assessment, there is certainly a need to improve them. I would like to ask the Minister what plans have been made to modernise these libraries and I understand that there is a plan for Library 2000. When will this be implemented and where will this library be set up?”
“Sir, in response to your earlier request, I shall be brief and I am sure you will be relieved.”
“They inculcate values which may promote aggression or that aggression is acceptable. And values related to what is right and wrong become blurred with constant screening of such films with less cautious exercise of censorship. The greatest impact will be the impact on the young minds, because many children watch TV, although "parental guidance" has been suggested. I think the moment you switch on the black box, you get millions of people watching such films. One may say that the parents can exercise control but there is always this problem that once it is open to the family, there is very little exercise of control. The TV takes over and, in the longer term, it has tremendous impact on the value orientation of children towards life, towards relationship, towards acts of violence and what is justice. Various things become seriously blurred. I would like to find out from the Minister whether we are taking serious steps to control the showing of violent films. 4.45 pm The other issue that I would like to ask the Minister is on the restructuring of radio and TV. There is always a danger that in a restructuring exercise we may allow for privatisation. We have already gone into the establishment of Singapore Cable Vision. Would we lose control or influence in showing films which may not be very relevant and which may reinforce negative values on the society? Sir, I would like to ask the Minister whether, through privatisation, there is this danger that we will lose control of our censorship, and what steps are we taking to ensure that we are able to maintain a fair balance in terms of showing and viewing positive films which will promote a healthy lifestyle.”
“Though one may argue that it is essentially good to do so - an activity such as this is fairly sensitive and may require a very cautious track - one should probably promote this activity through the various umbrella organisations like the Malay central cultural organisation, the Indian central cultural organisation, and likewise, the Chinese central cultural organisation, which can undertake such an activity. I would also like to find out from the Ministry itself what plans it has and what support it is giving to various cultural groups to promote cultural activities. Sir, I have another cut following this regarding censorship and restructuring of radio and TV service. Sir, since the censorship review, there have been uncertain signals to the public. The signals are whether we have gone more relaxed in relation to films which depict violence and soft pornography. There is this thinking that we have gone soft in terms of promoting such films and programmes through the TV. It appears to the public that our censorship has become more relaxed. In the various cinemas, I think R(A) films have taken over and become the major screenings of the day. This is because we have relaxed censorship in the last one year or so. In the process of this relaxation, insufficient control has been exercised, and I hope we would not carry or stretch ourselves so far that such claims would become rampant in the context of Singapore. I am pleased to note that the Ministry of Information and the Arts, together with the Ministry of Home Affairs, has set up a special committee to view films related to violence. Sir, from many researches, reviews and public opinions on showing of violent films on TV, too much of them do in a way have serious influence on the value orientation of children.”
“Sir, thank you for allowing me to join in the debate. Sir, in the last few years, the Ministry of Information and the Arts has taken active steps to promote cultural heritage. This is indeed a right move because it will enable our young people to have a better understanding of our cultural roots. This is a very good move. But there is always this danger that by persuading various cultural groups to undertake activities, there would be an over-zealous competition between groups. One may argue that competition between various ethnic and cultural groups may be useful, but in this area one has to be very cautious. I would like to exercise caution here in the sense that there may be fall-outs, there may be problems, and the Ministry of Information and the Arts may have to mediate very carefully in the promotion of cultural heritage activities. Sir, Government will have to be seen to be even-handed in the promotion of cultural heritage, lest it be misinterpreted by various ethnic groups that support has been given strongly for one group vis-a-vis support for other groups. Nevertheless, it is essential that we should take various steps to promote cultural heritage. And I would like to see that various cultural groups, organised under umbrella organisations, be encouraged to centrally promote cultural heritage. Allow them to allow various groups to spawn and to organise various cultural activities related to the group's interest.”
“For example, in the Singapore General Hospital, paediatric cases have to be admitted in Class B2 or B1 wards. I would like to ask why is this so.”
“Therefore, I hope that the Ministry of Health would start to attach more importance to Chinese physicians and Chinese medicine in our society and also recognise the qualification of the first batch of properly trained Chinese physicians who will be graduating in 1998 under the new system so that they will enjoy the same professional legalised status as their counterparts in China, USA, Japan, Indonesia and Thailand. Encik Othman bin Haron Eusofe (Marine Parade GRC): Sir, like many of my PAP colleagues, I am also concerned about the rising cost of hospitalisation. Sir, Class B2 and C wards are available in the Government and restructured hospitals to meet the needs of the lower income groups. They are subsidised. Yet, Sir, many of the people who use these wards find difficulty in paying the charges. From time to time, my constituents have approached me at my meet-the-people sessions to seek help for remission of the charges or part thereof. Sir, we therefore need to take steps to ensure that these charges will be affordable. I would like, therefore, to ask the Minister to give the assurance that the measures which his Ministry is taking to monitor and control cost increases are effective. I understand that labour cost is the primary cost factor. It is necessary, therefore, to ensure that hospital employees are highly motivated and well trained. Hospital systems and procedures will have to be regularly reviewed to cut down unnecessary work. Cost of medicine is another area, especially non-standard drugs. I would like to know on what basis the hospitals price medicines and drugs which they provide to their patients. Finally, Sir, I understand that some hospitals do not offer certain medical services in the Class C wards.”