Sam Tan Chin Siong
Singapore
“Sir, the Temporary Relief Fund was set up to provide timely financial assistance to lower- and middle-income Singapore Citizens and Permanent Residents who lost their jobs or faced significant income loss due to the economic impact of COVID-19.”
“The Workgroups will release their recommendations later this year. (In English): Mr Chairman, in closing, everyone has a part to play in building a caring and inclusive society. Inclusion is not just a vision. It is action.”
“We will continue to deepen our engagement with the EU leadership and also our ties with individual EU member states. We will also continue to engage the UK post-Brexit.”
“It is a very important prerequisite to prepare young children for future employment. There is another workgroup under EMP3 which focuses on the improvement to employment opportunities and prospects. This workgroup is co-chaired by Member Ms Denise Phua and myself.”
“I thank the Member for the questions. We have sufficient places in our Sheltered Workshops. Right now, we have altogether 1,700 places. If there is a need for more capacity, we will certainly increase it.”
“Mr Chairman, I thank the Member for the clarification. The difference between CKS and PDD is that PDD helps persons who have lost the mental capacity to make major decisions like liquidating the assets, bank accounts and all that to provide institutional care or some other major financial needs.”
The complete record
Every one of 391 lines we hold for Sam Tan Chin Siong, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 8 of 8.
“"Dear Mr Abdullah, My name is Sam Tan and I work in a highly-placed organisation in Singapore. The country is the financial hub of South East Asia, and as a result, I am in possession of many interesting money-making stories and opportunities. I have recently come across an investment opportunity that may be of interest to you. One of my contacts has come across the estate of a man who died more than 20 years ago and he did not make a will, nor did he have a family. So the money of this man's estate is now lying unclaimed. It is a sum of US$1 million and there's a way to get the money released with your assistance. And of course there will be financial rewards for your participation in claiming this money." Mr Speaker, Sir, I will stop here since by this time, you would have seen through my ruse. Yes, this is a spam mail. As this is a trick, of course I do not have anything that could benefit you - only a scam that would benefit me, should you swallow it. Although the above is a spam mail, it can still get money out of people. There are thousands of such spam mails flying around in the cyberspace waiting to strike at innocent people. From the stories that we have heard from people or read in the newspapers, indeed there have been people cheated out of their money or even life savings by unsolicited spam mails. Sir, there have been many arguments in support of the Bill which we have heard from a few Members speaking before me. The main one being protection of consumers. Spam mails, such as the one that I had tried to replicate above, often put out false claims and it is to the consumer's benefit that we restrict the propagation of false information. Privacy is another argument being put forward.”
“My clarifications for the Minister are on the HOPE scheme. In his reply to my question yesterday, the Minister said that the criteria for the HOPE scheme were reviewed, revised and relaxed last year. So I thank the Minister for that. I would like to request the Minister to re-examine two of the criteria at an opportune time. One is the age of the mother. The current criterion for the age of the mother is 35 and below, but I know that for mothers who are 36, maybe up to 40, they still have young children. So, if they are kept out of this scheme, the educational prospect of their children will be dented. The second criterion that I hope the Minister will review is the condition that the husband must be working in order to qualify for the HOPE scheme. I know there are some cases where the husbands are not able to work because they are retrenched or because of some medical conditions. If they are kept out of the scheme again, this actually will be like a double whammy for the family. So I hope that the Minister can review these two criteria at the right time. In the meanwhile, I hope that the Ministry can exercise some flexibility.”
“If many people are also not eligible to eat the cake, the cake will become mouldy and needs to be replaced by another pastry yet again. Sir, if nothing is done to the cake now, I fear that the mouldy history will repeat itself. Sir, I have learnt from a report in the New Paper in September 2006 that only 600 out of 6,000 families have joined the HOPE scheme and the Government is aiming to sign up 1,000 by 2008. Sir, my questions are: (a) Why is it that only 10% of people have signed up? (b) Why set a low target of 1,000 by 2008 when there are about 6,000 families out there who can benefit from the scheme? Sir, the HOPE is a good and generous scheme. The best thing is that, out of the $100,000, not all the money goes in the form of handouts, but also an investment for the future, as much of the money goes to home ownership, skills training fund for the parents, and education grant for the children. As only 10% of the eligible families have taken up the scheme, I hope the Minister can re-examine the eligibility criteria to see if they are indeed too stringent and not appealing to the target group. Sir, due to the very strict criteria, we have seen how the Small Families Improvement Scheme has become "So Few Families in the Scheme". And now that this scheme has been replaced by the HOPE scheme, I really hope that the current criteria will not make this new scheme to become a "Handful Of People Eligible" scheme. Charities 3.00 pm”
“I have been told that a similar situation is also facing other outreach agencies. Sir, the aim of the HOPE scheme is to help the low-income families keep the family size small, and the Government will assist them to build a better future through a range of financial incentives. Indeed, the original name of the scheme is called Small Families Improvement Scheme (SFIS). I understand that the response to this scheme had been lukewarm and, hence, the MCYS had to revamp it and change the name to HOPE. The eligibility criteria of the HOPE scheme are as follows: (a) the mother's age must be 35 or below; (b) with no more than two children; (c) the monthly household income must be $1,500 or lower; (d) the father must be working; and (e) one of the parents must be a Singapore Citizen, and the spouse must be a citizen or PR. I understand the rationale of setting these criteria as the HOPE scheme is specifically meant to help low-income Singaporean families to stop at two children. With the Government’s incentive schemes, they will receive a housing grant to ensure that they have a roof over their head, their children will receive bursaries to pursue their education, and the parents will receive training grants to upgrade their skills. The total quantum for each family can be up to a maximum of $100,000. All these are designed to help the needy family break out of the poverty circle. Sir, we often hear that the proof of the pudding is in the eating. While we can have very sound principles and rationale behind any good scheme, if very few people are eligible to take a bite at it, the pudding will be left on the tray. It will become mouldy after a while, and needs to be replaced by another pastry called cake. The SFIS is like the pudding and the HOPE scheme is like the cake.”
“Mr Chairman, Sir, like Mr Ang Mong Seng, I would also like to take this opportunity to wish all the lady Members in this House and all the ladies out there, a "Happy International Women's Day". Sir, my first cut is on ComCare. Originally, I wanted to request the Ministry to make the ComCare database widely accessible to all the VWOs. However, after filing my cut, I received a circular from the MOS that the ComCare database now is available to 134 agencies. Sir, I believe this must be a pure coincidence. Anyway, as my question has been answered by the Ministry’s action, I have nothing further to comment on the ComCare. I would just like to move on to my second cut, which is on the HOPE scheme. Home Ownership Plus Education Scheme Sir, I would like to first declare my interest as a staff member of the Chinese Development Assistance Council, which is an outreach agency of the MCYS for the HOPE Scheme. HOPE is the acronym for Home Ownership Plus Education Scheme. The HOPE scheme was launched in 2004. I would like to request the Minister for an update on the progress of this scheme which has been implemented for about two years now. As one of the outreach agencies, CDAC has made limited progress in the HOPE scheme, not, I think, because of the lack of effort, but mainly due to the rather stringent eligibility criteria. Sir, the CDAC has checked through its 2,500 bursary students to identify the potential families for the HOPE Scheme. Out of these 2,500 low-income families, only 20 families were found to be eligible at the first screening. After sending letters to these 20 eligible ones, only five had applied for the scheme. Those who did not take up the scheme said that the criteria were too stringent.”
“For a start, I would like to suggest that the Ministry conducts a review, if this is not done yet, on the HMOs to see if the delivery of the healthcare service is up to the industry's benchmark. The review should be able to provide useful findings for the Ministry to consider the next course of action. Many employees in Singapore rely on the healthcare given by their company's doctor, as a major part of their healthcare planning. It is estimated that spending by companies account for about 30% of the national health expenditure in Singapore. This is quite significant. It is therefore in the interest of our healthcare system to make sure that there is some oversight on this matter. Singapore Medicine”
“Their grievances include low consultation fees, slow payment by the HMOs and, at times, even restrictions on the type of medicine they can prescribe and the specialists they are allowed to refer the patients to. I am not fighting for doctors to make more money, but I think all these conditions and restrictions do affect the quality of care provided by doctors. We know that there is always a trade-off between cost and quality of care. I am not advocating a Rolls Royce standard in a company healthcare scheme. But what I am concerned with is an adequate level of care for patients, particularly those whose employers contract out their healthcare service to HMOs. In Singapore, doctors are subject to a strict code of ethics for their conduct. As far as I know, HMOs are not subject to any regulatory framework. In fact, anyone can register an HMO and start soliciting business from employers to provide healthcare services to their employees. So, how then can we ensure that the HMOs' business and coffee-making agenda do not compromise the healthcare services quality? In Hong Kong, there has been a legislation put in place to regulate the HMOs compelling them to observe a certain set of code of conduct to ensure that a certain quality of healthcare is delivered to patients under their programme. As the situation and conditions between Singapore and Hong Kong are quite different, it may not be necessary for Singapore to also provide similar regulatory framework on the HMOs. Notwithstanding this, I think we can still start cautiously and prudently on the monitoring of the HMOs at the current stage.”
“Madam, I would like to dive into a relatively murky water, which is the managed healthcare scheme. I say it is murky because much of it is unknown to most people and yet it affects many Singaporeans' healthcare. In Singapore, there are many healthcare schemes. The one that I would like to talk about is the kind that requires doctors to provide medical services and care to workers at a group rate that is fixed for the year. Many large companies here are on some kind of managed healthcare system. Under this kind of scheme, doctors are contracted by managed healthcare companies to see patients at a fixed rate for consultation and medicine. They have a set of parameters to abide by. All these, including the price of consultation, are not transparent to patients or their companies. These managed healthcare companies are generally called health maintenance organisations, or HMOs in short. As an illustration, let us say a company engages an HMO to provide medical services to its employees, and the company pays the HMO $20 per patient per visit. How much of this goes to the doctor? We do not know. The doctor and the HMO staff, of course, know, but under the terms of the agreement, they are not allowed to disclose the amount. One doctor, writing in the Singapore Medical Association's newsletter, recently said that he gets no more than the price of a meal at the McDonald's per patient. In 2003, a survey of 220 doctors by the Singapore Medical Association showed that doctors are generally unhappy with the way that they have to treat patients under their contract with a HMO.”
“While acknowledging the hardwork and good work of our healthcare professionals, I think the service gaps need to be plugged. While focusing on improving the facilities and amenities, I feel that the restructured hospitals should adopt a patient-centric approach in providing medical care and services. While we strive to become a medical hub, we need to ensure that our focus remains on patient care, not just making sure that our hospitals can attract more foreign and well-paying private patients, not just making sure that doctors and nurses are well trained, not just making sure that we have the state-of-the-art equipment, but also making sure that we turn our attention to things that matter to the patients and their families. With so many medical advances today and even more rapid advances tomorrow, I am sure that the care for the patient can only become more complicated and sophisticated with an ageing population, and all the more reason then to focus on getting our basics right.”
“I fully agree with her that our restructured hospitals should focus on taking care of the public patients and improving their services. I would like to share a personal experience at a large restructured hospital recently to illustrate the importance of patient care. A few weeks ago, I visited a relative and found him to be quite ill. So I accompanied him to a restructured hospital. He was sent to the A&E Department around 2.30 pm. Within an hour, the A&E doctor had examined him, and informed us that he needed to be hospitalised for treatment. This was an excellent and speedy action taken by the doctor, and I think the doctor deserved a commendation. We were told to wait for a ward and a bed. At 5.00 pm, the ward admission procedure was done as a bed had been made available. However, from 5.00 pm to 7.00 pm, the patient and family members were made to wait outside the A&E Department. Despite making four enquires on the status, the patient was still left at the A&E Department. At 7.00 pm, I finally went up to the A&E counter to enquire about the long wait. The nurse on duty checked and explained that due to manpower shortage, they could not send the patient to the ward early. I am not sure whether it is manpower shortage or communication gap, or both, that had resulted in two hours of unnecessary waiting time. This is not a unique experience to us. I asked some people waiting around at the A&E Department, and they told me they had been waiting for between four and six hours, and they were still waiting. Long waiting time is just one of the many complaints we often hear from people, or read about in the newspapers' Forum articles. Indeed, Lianhe Zaobao carried two more complaints on 12th February 2007 and yesterday.”
“Madam, the Ministry of Health has been given an extra $300 million in this Budget. So, the Ministry has more money to spend in this financial year. My concern, and I am sure the Minister's as well, is that the fund should go to the right places. To begin with, I must say that our restructured hospitals are already one of the best, if not the best, in the region. However, like many other things, there is always room for improvement. In my opinion, building a large water feature, three-man high and about the length of a small swimming pool, in a place mostly meant for hospital staff, is not the best way to spend the money. Hiring high profile consultants at millions of dollars is not the best way either. Having more non-professional than professional directors is also not the best way too. Yet, all these are being done in a large restructured hospital. I believe we can afford to be more restrained in our landscaping and renovations in our restructured hospitals, especially those at the staff block where few patients go to. Madam, my second point is more paradoxical. I believe that our restructured hospitals should be more concerned with taking care of patients than the bottom line. It is good to be able to say that our private patients subsidise our public patients, and hence, each hospital is able to cut its spending, require less funding support from the Government, and lower the tax burden on Singaporeans. To me, this is an attractive argument but not a convincing one. I feel that our restructured hospitals should not be in the business of competing with private hospitals to improve their bottom line. My GPC Chairperson had elaborated on this point in her speech just now.”
“Sir, I would like to move from the mosquito problem to birds. I notice that in many estates, there are always large crowds of birds gathered together to produce bird symphonies. I know that NEA has been very effective in dealing with the problem of crows. I just wonder whether the Ministry has got any plans to deal with the bird symphony. Assoc. Prof. Dr Yaacob Ibrahim: Sir, unfortunately, the birds do not listen to us. But NEA will continue to cull crows as and when we receive feedback that the numbers are growing. This is done not by NEA officers but we have outsourced to some private agencies.”
“Sir, I would like to thank the Minister of State for addressing my concerns on the masking effect of the pay-as-you-use scheme and the arrears scheme. But I do not think he has responded to my suggestion on whether his Ministry will be considering stepping up efforts on public education in teaching Singaporeans, especially the poor families, on how to save energy and therefore to reduce their bills and their arrears.”
“On the contrary, I think they deserve the credit for doing their job well. They earn their keep. However, I believe we should go beyond the Pay-As-You-Use meter to really address the root cause of the arrears problem. The most effective way is for the households to consume the energy prudently. During my house-to-house visits, whenever residents have complained about high utilities bills, I would always ask the Town Council officers to check their electrical appliances and consumption pattern, and advise them how to save energy consumption and reduce utilities bills through some simple steps, and I have found this approach to be useful. I would therefore like to ask the Minister, besides using the Pay-As-You-Use meter to reduce the statistics of arrears cases, whether his Ministry will consider stepping up other measures to educate and incentivise Singaporeans, especially low-income families, to reduce their energy consumption and henceforth their bills or arrears. I believe this two-pronged approach - Pay-As-You-Use meter and public education on energy saving - will likely provide a real help to the poor. Alternative Fuel Sources”
“Sir, I would like to talk about the huge sudden decline in the number of people in utilities arrears. According to a Straits Times' report on 26th June 2005, there were about 9,000 households in arrears every year. But in the year 2006, this number magically went down to 3,600. How did it happen? I know 2006 was a very good year. But no year can be so good that suddenly almost 6,000 households were able to settle their outstanding utilities bills just within the same period. Or did something happen to the classification that changed the number? I remember there was a device called Pay-As-You-Use meter introduced some years ago. Households on the scheme get a “smart-key”, like a cashcard, which can be topped up to a maximum of $250. At every top-up, 20% of the amount goes to paying for the arrears, while the rest is stored onto the key to pay for future bills. In July 2005, there were 1,000 such meters installed. In October 2006, there were 12,500 meters. Sir, with this Pay-As-You-Use meter, in one stroke, the number of people with utilities arrears has come down dramatically. And the power company has an effective way to recover the utilities arrears with each top-up by the users. But is this meter really effective in helping poor families to reduce their arrears, or improve their financial status? I am afraid the answer is probably, no. Because even when the household has only $1 in his meter and he still owes a few hundred dollars in arrears, his name will not appear on the arrears list. So, my point is that the real arrears cases are probably “masked” by the Pay-As-You-Use meter. Sir, I have no intention to criticise the power company for its creativity in collecting bad debts.”
“One day, one man, wiser, braver, more curious than the rest, ventured outside. He saw what it was - the real world. He went back into the cave and got his fellow men. He told them to do the hard things that they needed to do, so that all could progress from the cave into a new reality. This is not a fairy tale from Hans Christian Anderson which I have mentioned in my maiden speech. Quite the reverse. It is from Greek philosopher Plato's Republic, which was written about 2,300 years ago. Mdm Deputy Speaker, we the people in this House are collectively that man who has wandered out from that cave. We are the ones who have the ability and capability to show and lead the rest of the men. We know the truth and the severe cost about climate change, we know the many drastic measures we have to take, if our grandchildren are to continue to have a beautiful world to grow up in. We have a choice - either to ignore these facts or bring them up to our fellowmen. For me, this is Hobson's choice. We have emerged from the cave and we need to go back to tell our fellow men what we have seen. Not because we are any smarter, not because we have better answers, but because we have promised to be their leaders and it is our duty to lead them out of the cave and into a new and better life. On this note, Mdm Deputy Speaker, I support the Budget. 7.06 pm”
“It was not something that made us immediately popular then, but it was good for the long haul. Similarly, we resettled people from their homes and farms into high-rise HDB flats from 1960s through to the 1980s. It was a very difficult and unpopular move, but we did it. We need to build on the trust that we have established over the past four decades and ask the people to change their way of living. We all need to realise that simple but significant changes need to be made to our lifestyles if we are to conserve the fragile balance of our environment. As policy makers, there are five simple things which I think the Government can do: (i) Make sure that recycling bins and efforts are widespread and in every ward; (ii) Give tax rebates for companies which are environmentally friendly; (iii) Think twice or three times before cutting down old and mature trees; (iv) Be less aggressive in acquisition efforts and tearing down old but still functional buildings, eg, the old National Library was torn down and replaced by a tunnel; and (v) Participate more actively in global efforts to save the environment. Our Ambassador-at-large Prof. Tommy Koh's efforts on this front have been exemplary. He has chaired the Earth Summit and the Law of the Sea. Mdm Deputy Speaker, we should give Prof. Koh a larger role and leverage on Singapore's role as an impartial and responsible world player on environmental issues. We can be the champion for environment conservation. I would like to share a little story that has created a big impression on me. There was once a man who lived in a cave with other men. They had no idea of the world outside and were content to live within the stone walls, scrawling pictures with coal and watching the fire burn.”
“We have to guard against breeding an over-dependence on the Government which may inadvertently create a Singapore populated by citizens who think of themselves as "never satisfied" customers. Coming out of Plato's cave Mdm Deputy Speaker, I have said earlier that this Budget has broken new barriers but is also a return to our political roots. In a way, it is an easy decision because the social and economic problems addressed in this Budget are real and immediate. I want to suggest another area which is quite visibly missed out in this Budget, but one that has to be done - a far more intractable area, because the problems are long term and, for now, intangible. I am talking about the environment - an issue which quite a few Members of the House had mentioned before me. I am happy for this, because it means that more of us are conscious of this urgent need. Today, I would like to add my voice to this cause. As I speak now, we are standing, or sitting, if you prefer, on the tip of a fast-melting iceberg. The global consumption of energy, the disregard of the rapid rates of deforestation, the contamination of water, all these are unsustainable, and yet there is a relentless eating up of these resources in many parts of the world. We, the people of today, are making the decisions for the people of tomorrow. It is always hard to make decisions that will be popular only 50 years from today, when it is easier to make decisions that will win the next election. But, in Singapore, we have taken hard and unpopular decisions before. For example, we have looked towards the long term, and helped to break the backs of anti-business unions in Singapore in the 1960s. After that, unions and business have worked together to solve problems for the long term.”
“We have, I think, adopted a kind of modern socialism where state subsidies are accompanied by a preservation of the work ethic. In other words, it is work-driven and not needs-based. To me, a permanent work-driven Workfare scheme is a sound principle and a much superior approach to the permanent needs-based social welfare scheme. Even the hon. Member for Hougang has conceded this and supported the Workfare programme although his party has been advocating permanent needs-based social assistance. Workfare does not erode the workers' motivation to work, and yet helps those whose work does not yield as much pay as they need. This is a unique and special formula which can make our society more caring without losing our competitive spirit. New social contract Mdm Deputy Speaker, that is on a philosophical level. On a human relationship level, we need to establish a new relationship with Singaporeans. I read some news reports on people's reactions to the Budget and could not help but had a feeling that some people are, perhaps unconsciously, beginning to take the various help packages as their rights. For example, I read an article in a Chinese newspaper of a man whose family received almost $5,000 from the various help packages under the new Budget. His reaction to these goodies? He said that the Budget is only "okay" - hai ke yi - and more needs to be done. He further commented that his family has a few children and therefore should get more money than his friend who is a single. From his perspective, these feelings are understandable, but that in itself is also a manifestation of "never enough" attitude. He probably forgot that his school-going children would get other incentives while his single friend would not.”
“But, for me, this Budget is very special because it is a return to the socialist roots of the People's Action Party. Mdm Deputy Speaker, we have been called by many people as pragmatists, as if we have neither a brain nor a heart, but merely a super efficient computer or calculator to churn out the maximum output from a limited input. However, this Budget shows that we are more than a computer or a calculator. In this Budget, there is compassion beyond logic, there is warm empathy beyond cool rationality. This Budget also shows that our Government has maintained the founding leaders' commitment towards equality in opportunities and fairness in the distribution of goods. It also shows that the idea of equity and equality needs to be clearly distinguished. We do not give everyone the same amount of help, because we are not all created equally. Some need more help than others. This is the context in which the Workfare bonus, CPF increase, GST offset package and other incentives and tax measures ought to be seen. A new socialism Madam, with this Budget, the Government has created a permanent structure in giving people money creatively in the name of Workfare. In the past, the Government has given out money to Singaporeans mainly under crisis conditions, such as during the SARS period, and we all know that the help packages will stop once life is back to normal. Occasionally, the Government also gives out bonuses, such as New Singapore Shares, when there are budget surpluses. Now, the Government has made Workfare a permanent feature of its policy. Workfare is not a simple needs-based welfare system where "from each his needs" is the principle, like the traditional socialism.”
“This will, no doubt, be a tedious process, but it will ensure that the lower income and the elderly group will benefit from the Budget. In this regard, I would like to propose that the Government put in place some measures to prevent businessmen and hawkers from making use of this opportunity to jack up the prices of their goods. This will weaken the intended benefits of the GST offset package. In the past, I understand that the Government had set up a committee to look into this matter. But, according to past experiences, the grassroots leaders appointed by the committee had to carry out mediation and they advised businessmen and hawkers against carrying out unlawful practices. The mediator did not have the power to enforce the laws and, as such, it did not have much binding effect on the businessmen. This is like the Chinese saying, "a paper tiger" meaning it is ineffective. The above views and comments may not have direct impact or relationship on the Budget-related assistance packages, but they are the aspirations and voices as well as the hopes of the people. Hence, I do hope that the Government can pay closer attention to the voices of these people, so that we can achieve complete success for this Budget. Madam, I would like to continue my speech in English. (In English): Watershed Many people have called this Budget a watershed. From my memory, many Budgets have been called "watersheds" in the past. For me, this Budget is not special just because we spend money on the poor - it is of no great difficulty to know that we should help the poor, and our Government has always done so. This is also not the first time that the Government's Budget is pro-business or pro-worker. So, this Budget is again not special in this sense.”
“Since the Government announced the Budget on 15th February 2007, I have been observing the different views and opinions of the people, especially the low-income group and the elderly group. As this is indeed a very generous Budget, it is expected that the people will give positive feedback. However, there are some people who are confused by the Budget. For instance, they do not know how much cash will be given by the Government, the amount of subsidy given to their CPF account, the criteria to be entitled for these benefits, etc. This is because the Budget can be complicated for those who are lowly educated and illiterate. If we recall, last year, when the Government distributed the Progress Package to the people, as many as 19,000 people did not apply for it by June 2006. It was through subsequent house-to-house visits conducted by the grassroots leaders that people understand more about the Progress Package. Eventually, about 20% of the people in this group managed to receive their Progress Package. It is a pity that many more people were not able to benefit from this package. Budget 2007 provides more assistance schemes, each with varying amounts. For those who are not well educated, it may be difficult for them to successfully obtain these schemes. Therefore, I would like to urge the Government to take into consideration the previous experience, so as to simplify the administrative process. At the same time, we should educate the people through various channels about the application procedures, as well as the deadline for application. Also, the grassroots organisations and the People's Association could assist those who are not clear about the application process.”
“Mdm Deputy Speaker, I would like to speak in Mandarin first and in English later. (In Mandarin): [For vernacular speech, please refer to Appendix A *.] Mr Speaker, Sir, this Budget is generally well received at all levels of the society. The general comment of this Budget is that this is by far one of the most heart-warming, humanitarian and forward-looking Budgets. Many have termed it as heart-warming because it takes special care of the low-income family and elderly people. Others have termed it as humanitarian because it gives away ang bao to all strata of society. It is forward-looking because it invests heavily in education, infrastructure services and R&D projects. This will allow Singapore to continue to be a step ahead of other countries, as well as retaining Singapore's competitive edge while facing competition from globalisation. This year's Budget is comprehensive, so it shows concern and gives consideration to different income groups, workers, elderly people, big corporations, and small employers. But there is an old saying, "Even the wise are not always free from error." Some of the MPs have pointed out that the Budget has its inadequacy. However, one point to take note is that the comments are pertaining to the policy details. As for the overall Budget, it is worthy of praise. Even the Member for Hougang, Mr Low Thia Khiang, makes positive appraisal of this *Cols. 2053-2056. Budget. He feels that the Government need not increase GST and it will still be able to afford a series of assistance schemes and subsidy allowances. As my fellow colleagues have already refuted his views, I will not elaborate further on this.”
“Hence, I urge the Government to consider other measures, such as stricter advertising guidelines for health supplements, in ensuring that no superlative, unfounded claims are made. The Government can also step up public education on the dos and don'ts of taking health supplements, through the already very active Health Promotion Board. I must stress that I urge this not because I want fewer supplements in the market - indeed, going by my trips to the health stores, I would welcome more choices for all. I am also not suggesting to over-regulate the control of health supplements, as this will result in lengthy testing of health products as well as pushing up their costs which will eventually be passed on to the consumers. Madam, what I am looking for is for the Ministry of Health to keep one eyeball on the regulation of health devices now and the other eyeball on health supplements in the near future. Mdm Deputy Speaker, with that, I support the Bill. * Cols. 1335-1338. 4.17 pm”
“There, I found supplements to wake you up, put you to sleep; to slim you down or fatten you up; to make you younger, to help you age slower. There was even one medicine called Mega-man, whose function, I guess, is self-explanatory. Mdm Deputy Speaker, as Singapore moves towards making itself a medical hub, there will be more health products and medicines brought in for the consumers, for both the foreign and local patients. I therefore support the Government's move in stepping up regulatory framework and powers to ensure that only credible products are made available for public consumption. However, I understand that the preoccupation of the current Bill is with the regulation of medical devices. It does not cover health supplements. The Minister has said that he will study other categories of health products, such as biologicals and health supplements in future. He also said that "we do not intend to rush this", and do more work before including additional products under the Health Products Act. Mdm Deputy Speaker, the current laws do not cover products that hold themselves out to be mere supplements which do not make medical claims. Importers can bring in many health products, both Western medicines and Chinese proprietary medicines. As the public has high confidence in the Government, they will tend to believe that all the health products available in medical outlets or through the multi-tiered sales networks are safe to consume, as the Government surely must have tested and approved them. This is a misplaced confidence. We remember well the severe cost in the Slim 10 case, where at least one woman lost her life and another had to have an organ transplant. There could be other cases too. I appreciate the need to be circumspect and resist over-legislation.”
“In view of the increasing affluence of Singaporeans, increasing purchasing power and ageing population, more and more people are in need of these medical devices. Therefore, the control over these medical devices and medicines has become more and more critical. However, the current Bill only covers the regulation of medical devices. As pointed out by the Minister earlier, other medicines and supplements are not subject to control. So it is not really that ideal because there are different varieties of health supplements. And there are numerous consumers consuming this kind of health supplements. If we do not control these supplements, we cannot protect the interest of the consumers. To evaluate and to study all kinds of health supplements available in the market is rather difficult. And to classify them appropriately is also a very difficult process. In this regard, I hope that the Ministry of Health will set a timeline and target and gradually, for those health supplements which are widely consumed, to be subject to control. I hope that the Ministry of Health will also formulate some advertising guidelines for health supplements so that the promoters, advertising companies and mass media, in promoting these supplements and medicines, can be more careful. Indirectly, it can also reduce the chances of false and misleading advertising. The Ministry of Health can also step up public education to ensure that the consumers select and take these medicines and supplements wisely. Last but not least, with this three-pronged approach and policy, I do believe that it will bring us closer to our goal of becoming a leading medical hub in the world. (In English): As part of my research for this speech, I wandered into several health stores in a few shopping centres.”
“Thank you, Mdm Deputy Speaker, for allowing me to join in the debate today. I would like to speak in Mandarin first and followed by English. (In Mandarin): [For vernacular speech, please refer to Appendix A*.] I support the Health Products Bill submitted by the Minister for Health. When we open the newspapers, magazines or other publications, one can hardly miss advertisements or reports on healthcare products and medical devices. In this regard, one can find more of such medicines, tonics and healthcare products in pharmacy stores of shopping centres. Such products include drugs, ointments, medicines for external application, as well as drugs to be taken orally. There is a great variety in the selection, from head to toe, from being applied on the body to implants into the internal organs. As such, consumers are confused. There are certainly plenty of choices and the consumers may not know how to select the right type which would meet the safety standards and whether, after taking or using it, it would cause any harm to the body. As these products are not subject to control, we do not have a comprehensive system to ensure that these medical and health products can meet the safety standards to safeguard the interest of the consumers. Due to plenty of choices, consumers rely on word of mouth and recommendations from their relatives and friends and even advertisements in order to make decisions about purchasing such products. Among these products, they include health equipment or devices that must be implanted into the internal organs through operational procedures. These devices, for example, the heart stent, valves and pacemaker, have a high degree of risk. Even if they are effective, they will be very risky for the consumers.”
“If Parliament is debating a topic which is of concern to them, and the MP can use the mother tongue, it will certainly improve the effectiveness of communication. The people will be more interested and concerned with the issue in question. This is in line with Government's policy to allow more people to understand the broad directions of our policy. This is most beneficial. So I personally fully support this proposal to allow the MPs to use one or more of the official languages. At the last sitting of Parliament in November 2006, PM suggested that the MPs be allowed to switch to the other official languages in their speeches. This proposal was moved by the Leader of the House and approved by Parliament. Almost all of us are in favour. But the suspension of Standing Order was an ad hoc measure that allowed the MPs to use more than one language in a speech, only during that particular sitting. This is not good enough. When many of my MP colleagues knew that the Deputy Leader was going to move this motion to allow MPs to use multiple languages in one speech once and for all, all showed support and enthusiasm. On behalf of all my parliamentary colleagues, I would like to thank the PM for his suggestion and the Deputy Leader for moving this motion. Singapore is a multi-racial country and I would like to express my thanks in all the four official languages. In English, we say, "Thank you". In Malay, we say, "Terima kasih". In Tamil, we say, "Nandri." In Mandarin, we say, "Xie xie". Sir, I support the motion. *Cols. 1101-1102. 3.12 pm”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to deliver my speech in Mandarin. (In Mandarin ): [For vernacular speech, please refer to Appendix A *.] Mr Speaker, Sir, let me thank the Deputy Leader of the House, Mr Mah, in moving this proposal to allow the use of different languages in a same speech. This proposal is far-sighted. It allows the MPs more flexibility in using any one or more of our four official languages to better reflect the feelings on the ground. At the same time, it allows the different communities in Singapore to listen directly to the MPs using the languages they are most familiar with. To the many citizens who do not know English, especially the senior citizens, this is definitely good news. Now they can listen directly to the MPs and understand the contents of their speeches in the language that they are most familiar with. If the various communities in Singapore can understand the contents of parliamentary debate, Government policies will certainly be disseminated to the public more effectively. Singapore is a multi-racial society and, in our society, there are many senior citizens who do not understand English. This may well be one of the reasons why hitherto, they are not very keen to follow parliamentary debates. Of course, one of the reasons may be that they are confident that the Government will discuss and make decisions which are in the interest of the country. It is also possible that many senior citizens do not know English, they simply give up watching televised reports of parliamentary debates. Although there is simultaneous interpretation into Chinese, Tamil and Malay in Parliament, it is always better to hear the MPs themselves speaking in the language that they are most familiar with.”
“Sir, I studied in a Barisan Sosialis kindergarten, so I could recognise their logo. And during the street protests, they carried a banner with the logo of the Barisan Sosialis on it. So I knew.”
“[Incidentally, for those who want to know, the gangster did not get to keep the princess, or the kingdom, but you have to find out the ending by reading the story yourself!] Sir, we have done a great thing in building this country, a little "red dot" that shines on the world map. This is a new Parliament, with many new MPs, including a new Opposition Member. I would like to urge all of us to remember the story of the beautiful clock. Singapore is fragile, as well as successful. The greatest thing that we can do would be to work on it, delicately, carefully, to try to make it an even greater country. To do so, we need to create new conditions for Singapore's success, by allowing the ablest and brightest to take to the sky, and uplifting the less successful and needy to live their lives with dignity and purpose. If we can do so together, putting aside our partisan loyalties and our overriding concerns with economic indicators of success, that, to me, would be the "most incredible thing". With that, Sir, I support the motion.”
“As our senior citizens are generally more healthy, better trained and still able to work beyond 62 years old, I hope that the Minister for Manpower could keep this line of thought open, ie, to allow our workers to work to 65 or 67 years old if they are still physically fit and possessing the right skill set for their job. However, we should not artificially extend the retirement age just to solve the ageing problem without due regard for older workers' competency and productivity. The greatest thing Mr Speaker, Sir, I started my speech by speaking on Singapore's success using a serious research by Dr Henri Ghesquiere. Now, I would like to end my speech with a fairy tale from Hans Christian Andersen. In one of Andersen's stories, a whole kingdom was in search of "the most incredible thing". Whoever created this most incredible thing would marry the king's daughter and inherit half the kingdom. A young artist then carefully built an extraordinary clock. A thing of beauty which, upon striking of each hour, different groups of figures would appear - the three wise men, five senses, seven deadly sins, and so on and so forth. This was an incredible thing, and the artist was about to win the hand of the princess. Suddenly, a gangster burst into the room and smashed the clock into pieces! "Breaking a work of art like that. Surely that must be the most incredible thing!", cried the judges, and they gave him the hand of the princess. "The Most Incredible Thing" is a tale for the children, but a wise one nonetheless, for we need to know the difference between creating a truly incredible thing, and destroying it merely because of the desire to score political points or playing to the gallery.”
“Second, they are under-insured for their old age medical needs. And third, their children are providing insufficient financial support. Some do not even provide support at all. Through my conversations with them, it is clear that very few elderly know how much they have to save for their old-age needs. Quite often, their CPF savings could last them from the retirement age of 55 to 65 or 70 years old. Thereafter, their CPF savings would run out and they had to turn to others for help, if their children are not willing or not able to support them. As the average life expectancy for Singaporean men is 77 years old and women, 81 years old, they would have to live on financial assistance for 7-15 years if their life savings are depleted at 65 or 70 years old. This should not be the state of condition that we would like our senior citizens to go through. Sir, to address their concern, we need to firstly strengthen the family network to ensure that inter-generational ties are strong enough to withstand the pressures that will be brought to bear. For children who do not want to take care of their aged parents, the option to toughen the Maintenance of Parents Act should remain open if the current provisions are found to be inadequate to compel the children to care for their parents. Secondly, there will be an increasing lobby for more healthcare benefits for the elderly. We need to seriously look at what can be done on a long-term and sustainable basis to address this, whether in terms of medical insurance or preventive healthcare. Thirdly, the question of livelihood.”
“I applaud the MOH for taking a far-sighted view on ElderCare by taking an early intervention to tackle the medical needs of older Singaporeans before the first sign of trouble emerges. I was told that, in Israel, there is a party called the “Pensioners' Party” which got into their Parliament on the basis of one issue, the elderly. The people who voted for this party are not just the old but also the children of the elderly who do not want the problems of their elderly parents to land on them. It is said that two parents can take care of four children, but four children are not enough to take care of two parents. So, if we do not address our ageing issue properly, we may end up having a Pensioners' Party in Singapore one day. Sir, let me share what I have experienced as an MP for my constituency, Radin Mas. Radin Mas is an old constituency in terms of its history and the number of old people. Here, more than 20% of residents are above 60 years old. This is likely to be what Singapore may look like in 2030, if the present population policy remains unchanged and the Eldercare and ElderShield schemes are not revised timely. During my house-to-house visits and the meet-the-people sessions, I came across many elderly who live alone without financial support from their children. Many of them are on some form of financial assistance, from the Government's Public Assistance Scheme, to the CDC's welfare grant and the CCC's ComCare Fund. And to be honest, Sir, my CCC's ComCare Fund has run out of money and we have to put up a request to the Central Singapore CDC for top-up. Sir, my observation is that three factors contributed to the plight of all these senior citizens. First, they are under-saved for their retirement needs.”
“In fact, I am supporting these, provided we do it the right way without taking away the motivation for Singaporeans to work hard, upgrade and improve their lot. Sir, we have witnessed in recent years the widening of the income gap and that the lower-income group has a smaller wage increment compared to the other income groups. If this is left unchecked and uncorrected, I fear that one day it will threaten our harmonious social fabric when the financial divide between the haves and have-nots has become too wide a gulf to bridge. We should not restrain our ablest and the brightest to make their millions and in the process create economic wealth and jobs for other Singaporeans. However, we can create a social environment for the better off to help the worse off through voluntary work and donations. We have made reasonably good progress in this area as the number of volunteers has increased over the years and the Government has given double tax deductions for donations to charities. I think more can be done, given the widening of the income gap. One group of Singaporeans who are more vulnerable and can fall through the social safety net are the senior citizens. Despite our short history, Singapore is one of the fastest ageing countries where, in 24 years' time, one in five Singaporeans will be 65 years or older. And as older people are more prone to illnesses, the healthcare cost will be a major concern for them. Although 2030 seems quite a distance away, I feel that we should start doing the groundwork now to prepare Singaporeans for their old age needs. Sir, I am very happy to note that in its Addendum to the President's Address, the Ministry of Health has included improvement to the ElderShield as part of its future plan.”
“By and large, we have proved ourselves on this front. Now, we have to pay more attention to wealth sharing. In this area, I think we have made a good start. Dr Ghesquiere points to our strategy in this respect. He writes: “The preferred strategy was to arm men and women with the means and opportunities to earn a living and acquire assets for their families by raising the skill level, including that of lower-income groups, and thus ensuing upward mobility. For Singapore's elite, this win-win offer was perfectly rational: wealth would be shared or it would not exist. The only viable model was export-led growth that would take advantage of Singapore's location and make optimal use of its one resource, its people, creating social unity in the process.” Sir, social cohesion is our aim, and one way to preserve this is to share wealth. I feel that we can do more to help the lowest 20% of households in Singapore. The Progress Package is a good way to do this. But we need to change the way we explain what we do. We explain the package as a way of recognising Singaporeans' contributions. But then, this leads to the middle-income group voicing out that they do not get as much as the lower-income group, despite contributing and paying more income tax. Sir, I think we need to be explicit on this. The Progress Package is, in fact, a leg up for the poor. It is to help them progress. I know that our Government deliberately shies away from welfarism for a good reason. We have a tough Government that does not hand out things for free. But, it is also no secret that from time to time we creatively give welfare, handouts in the name of Progress Package, ComCare Fund, New Singapore Shares, Workfare Bonus, etc. Sir, I am not complaining about all these schemes.”
“I would also not want any children at the age of six or seven to have to see it. But having witnessed it, it has been etched into my mind, which means that all my life, I will be carrying this burden of that horrifying experience. I know what it is like to have men kill one another just because of their race. I have seen how senseless and meaningless it is. I have worked hard to prevent it, not as an abstract principle, but as a value of life and death. Mr Speaker, Sir, we pledge as a country that we will all stand shoulder to shoulder, regardless of race, language or religion. Working in CDAC, I know that I am working for the interest of the Chinese community. But at the same time, I have very close contacts with my counterparts in the other self-help groups. We have collaborated on many joint projects whenever the conditions are right and the opportunities arise. We are different and yet united. I believe that this is one of the reasons for Singapore's success. And we should continue to hold this value of unity in diversity dearly as it is the basic social and political foundation to ensure stability in the society. Next, our sharing of wealth. Sir, Dr Ghesquiere points to Singapore's obsession with long-term economic prosperity for our society as a whole. He quotes Dr Goh Keng Swee, Singapore's first Finance Minister and also Defence Minister as saying: “We must strive continuously to achieve economic growth, which requires political stability, and should not be distracted by other goals.” Sir, I believe the Government has achieved this. Over the years, we have seen and heard from the Government that, given the rapidly changing global and regional challenges, Singapore must continuously remake itself to make sure that we do not lose in competitiveness.”
“But they were rickety wooden things with big and small cracks in between, and the smoke from the tear gas just seeped through the cracks. The tear gas was prickly and spicy. When it got in contact with the eyes and nose, tears and mucus would just flow out uncontrollably. It was a very unpleasant experience and painful sensation even for the adults, not to mention a young boy like me. I am not sure how many Members in this House had inhaled tear gas before, but my neighbourhood had experienced it a few times, for it seemed that the crossroad junction of Queen Street and Rochor Road was a hot place for street demonstrations in those days. The street protests had badly affected the livelihood of the people in the area, as customers would be too frightened to come and the shop properties and vehicles were often damaged by the agitators and trouble makers. Another unforgettable violent event was the racial riot in 1964. Again, the neighbourhoods of Queen Street and Rochor Road was one of the flashpoints in this historical event. During the period of racial riot, I saw two Malay men alighting from a green bus that drove into the bus terminus which happened to be opposite my house. The green bus was heading south from Johore. The two Malay men were walking on the street, then someone shouted ”pak”, which meant “attack” in Hokkien, and a group of Chinese men ran after the two Malay men. One of them managed to escape while the other fell into a deep drain and I saw many Chinese men piled into it and one of them was carrying a long bread knife. All of them were roaring. Sir, I was six years old then and this event happened almost 42 years ago. But these images still look so vivid after all these years. I would not want my children to see what I had seen.”
“Luckily, there were the bursaries available in the schools that helped me and my younger siblings to carry on with our studies. And I managed to receive a scholarship from the Government to complete my tertiary education in NUS. Sir, my personal life journey makes me truly believe that, in Singapore, no one will be denied of opportunities, if he or she works hard and has the gumption and courage to fight on. And the very principle that drives the whole mechanism to give Singaporeans opportunities is meritocracy. Second, our handling of race relations. Sir, much has been made of the post-65 generation, or P65 as they are called, and their strengths in connecting with the young. I am also one of those in the P65 generation, but I am referring to the pre-65 generation. I think the pre-65 generation also has the strengths to connect to the not-so-young. One of our strengths must surely be our personal and emotional view of Singapore's history. Mr Speaker, Sir, I was born in the late 1950s and had personally experienced two extraordinary events before Singapore gained independence. The first was the communist insurgency, and the second was the racial riots. I lived in a two-storey pre-war shophouse along Rochor Road during my childhood days. At the time, Rochor Road was a place for gangsters and agitators who wanted to stir up trouble, and these included the members of the Barisan Sosialis. I remember there were street demonstrations organised by the pro-communist elements. When things got out of hand on the streets, the police fired tear gas onto the demonstrators to disperse the crowds. My family would huddle together and my mother would shut the windows and doors.”
“To my mind, there are three principles underlined by Dr Ghesquiere which cut to the heart of Singapore's success. These three principles are: meritocracy, our handling of race relations and our sharing of wealth. But as an outsider, he identifies them in terms of principles, facts, statistics and charts. An outsider's view, no matter how informed, does not resonate as strongly as an insider's. Our relationship to these principles is in the form of personal stories and experiences. And I think it is worthwhile to dwell on these, to underline this Parliament's commitment to them. Sir, Opposition parties or the PAP, whether on the Government's side or the opposite side of the House, I believe we all share these values. First, meritocracy. Sir, I would like to share my personal experience to explain how meritocracy works in Singapore. I came from a low-income family, and both my parents did not have a chance to receive education. My father was a taxi driver and my mother was a housewife. Life was hard then, but we managed to live from hand-to-mouth, from the little income that my father brought home. Life was made much harder when my father suddenly fell ill to cancer and he left us after putting up two months of spirited fight against the illness. I was about to take my GCE 'O' level examinations when my father passed away. His final words to my mother were: “Let the children continue to study, no matter what. This is the only way for them to have a good future.” Quite frankly, it was a daunting task for a widow whose sole responsibility had been to look after five children to suddenly assume the role of sole breadwinner and to ensure that the children could continue with their education.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I support the Motion of Thanks to the President for his Address. The President's Address is moving, because it addresses the very principles of Singapore's success. The President has given a clear message to Singaporeans that the success of Singapore cannot only be measured by its economy, infrastructure, GDP and per capita income, but also by its ability to uplift the less able and the less successful in the society, so that no one will be left behind. This inclusive approach, where all Singaporeans matter, is key in ensuring that we will continue to maintain a cohesive social and political compact while facing the intense competition brought about by globalisation. Sir, by all international benchmarks and standards, Singapore has been very successful in the last 41 years since independence. I would like to point to a distillation of the values which has contributed to our success so far. One remarkable work which discusses these values comes from Dr Henri Ghesquiere. His book is entitled "Singapore's Success - Engineering Economic Growth". The book is full of abstract principles and insights, many of which, in my opinion, are objective and accurate. This is a man who has a PhD in economics from Yale University. He has studied the economies of more than 14 countries. He has worked in the International Monetary Fund for 27 years. Last December, he retired as Director of the IMF-Singapore Regional Training Institute. This institute was a joint venture between the IMF and the Government. It was created eight years ago, in the wake of the Asian financial crisis, to train visiting central bank and government officials from the Asia-Pacific region.”