Seah Kian Peng
Singapore
“I thank the Senior Minister of State for his reply. Just a few supplementary questions. Given the decline in volume and given that I can understand SingPost having their challenges, how does the Ministry ensure that there is no degradation of services that are provided by SingPost?”
“Yet, violence, domination, pain, harm and abuse also occur within the walls of a family. We need to be vigilant and sensitive in our approach. Hard rules and automatic application of these rules are a poor response to the challenges that we face today.”
“Both parents and schools have a role to play in shaping our children in the way they should go and I agree with Mr Don Wee that it is important for families to have open conversations about these matters.”
“Just a quick supplementary question for the Senior Minister of State. First, I must say I am surprised but happy that the number of cases has gone down. Having said that, we need to also pay attention to the number of unreported cases. Personally, I am sure we have heard from many residents who come to us for these cases.”
“Second, we propose to put in place new processes to prevent the misuse of the MPA by parents who have abandoned, abused or neglected their children and did not fulfil their parental duties. In so doing, we also protect and spare their children from unnecessary distress.”
“The way we feed ourselves will not be the same. The way we live and the way we work will also be different – telemedicine, work from home, online learning and the need for insurance. But there are other things which will remain the same – resilience, unity, and a single-minded commitment to our joint future.”
The complete record
Every one of 752 lines we hold for Seah Kian Peng, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 11 of 16.
“Mdm Speaker, yesterday, the hon Member Mr Png Eng Huat made some statements about one such NTUC cooperative, NTUC Foodfare, to be precise. His comments, I felt, cast certain aspersions which I feel compelled to respond and clarify. Foodfare Co-operative was set up by NTUC in 1995 – just like all other NTUC social enterprises – to help all Singaporeans, not just union members or certain target groups. Foodfare was set up amidst a backdrop of rampant price increases and profiteering by F&B private operators during the introduction of the GST. Foodfare's mission is to keep cooked food prices affordable and ensure that all Singaporeans and consumers can benefit from its initiatives. How do they do this? First and foremost, Foodfare benchmarks its food and beverage prices against similar locations to ensure they are fair. It moderates the prices of its food and beverage in the coffeeshops and food courts that it operates at by controlling price increases to prevent unchecked increases that hurt consumers. Foodfare has, on many occasions, held prices of basic food and beverage down during recessions when the need is greatest. For example, in February 2011, when there was a tide of price increases within the coffeeshop/foodcourt industry, Foodfare announced that it would hold off any price increases at all its outlets for the rest of the year. While Foodfare is not immune to the business pressures of rising food, labour and rental costs, it did so in order that all Singaporeans, not just union members, can better cope with inflation. By setting this price floor, Foodfare stood against the rage of others who had been raising their prices and, as some would say, profiteer. I think this is something to be applauded, not derided.”
“They have set up a central kitchen to hire and train clients of IMH. These clients are encouraged to be self-reliant and have gained important inter-personal and other life skills, setting down the road to financial independence. These groups have benefited from on-the-job training in the various aspects of F&B and have been fully integrated into their business model – one which is sustainable. Laksania, for those who are not sure what they are, as the name suggests and implies, it is a laksa specialty café where you can try all kinds of laksa. You will be amazed what kind of laksa and how many different types there are. Indeed, in this year's Budget, all social enterprises will benefit from the various schemes, such as the PIC, Wage Credit Scheme and others. But, certainly, I hope they could be given even more help. Let me now turn to a different kind of social enterprises – co-operatives. UN Secretary General Mr Ban Ki Moon said, "Co-operatives are a unique and invaluable presence in today's world. They help to reduce poverty and generate Page: 72 jobs." In his message to commemorate International Year of the Co-operatives in 2012, Mr Ban Ki Moon emphasised the role that co-operatives play in strengthening communities socially and economically. He recognised that co-operatives are value-based businesses and are rooted in their communities because they are owned by their members. I certainly agree with what Mr Ban Ki Moon has said and wish to state upfront my contention that co-operatives also help to make for a Better Singapore. As you know, NTUC has set up various cooperatives and they include NTUC Fairprice, NTUC Income, NTUC First Campus and NTUC Foodfare.”
“In this Budget, and in future budgets, I hope the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance can look to see how we can further recognise, fund and incentivise social enterprises and also the people behind these social Page: 71 enterprises. Let me now share some inspiring stories of two such social enterprises here that have done well and played a significant role in helping us build a more inclusive society and, in turn, a better Singapore. Last December, I was honoured to attend the inaugural President's Challenge Social Enterprise Awards, and I was delighted that Benny Se Teo was one of the winners of the Social Enterprise Awards. Chef Benny Se Teo founded Eighteen Chefs in 2007. It is a social enterprise which employs and trains ex-drugs offenders. Benny Se Teo takes in ex-offenders like himself during their last few months of their jail sentence to train them in necessary skills so that they can have a new start in life. Through employment, he helps to ease their integration back to the society. Benny went in and out of prison between 1980 and 1993 for heroin addiction from the age of 14. After a near-death experience, he turned over a new leaf and started learning how to cook. Benny serves up not only good food, but a strong dose of hope for other ex-offenders. More recently, just last month, in February, Mdm Sim Sin Sin, who is the CEO of Laksania, invited me to join her and other friends to celebrate the opening of their latest eatery at Upper East Coast. Laksania is another social enterprise, a social enterprise that Sin Sin herself started in 2008. Their social mission is to help persons with mental or physical disability to gain employment. Laksania employs them and enables them to earn a living using their own efforts.”
“Mdm Speaker, Budget 2013, the narrative reads "A Better Singapore: Quality Growth, An Inclusive Society". The last three words are also the three most meaningful words – when we build and have an inclusive society, we will have a Better Singapore. So, today, I wish to confine my speech on just this aspect. Building an inclusive society cannot be mere rhetoric. It covers several tenets. It is about looking after and offering a dignified life to all segments of our population; it is about caring and doing the right things for various groups in our community, our staff, our fellow Singaporeans; it is about helping the poor and elderly, those who are physically challenged or have special needs; or those who had served time in prison and strive to start afresh; it is also about helping and providing better jobs for our fellow citizens. For corporates, it is about being socially responsible to their staff, their community and the environment they operate in. It is about making normal and reasonable profits and, certainly, not about maximising profits. For corporates, the notion of an inclusive society compels us to put our money in our talk. I am talking about this creature called social enterprise. Let me first declare my interest as the co-chair of Social Enterprise Association of Singapore and also declare my interest as the CEO of NTUC Fairprice Co-operative which is part of the stable of social enterprises under the NTUC Group. I think social enterprises play an invaluable role in helping us build a more inclusive society. It is a rare creature that has a capitalist mind but a socialist heart.”
“Mdm Speaker, some supplementary questions for the Minister. Given the recent tightening in manpower policies, the slowdown in our economic growth projections, and the recent developments on the political front, I would just like to ask the Minister what is his assessment of these benchmarks going forward and, in particular, the implications for Singapore and Singaporeans.”
“Mdm Speaker, I support the Motion. 5.50 pm”
“Page: 93 The second – ideological welfarism – denying help to the needy and downtrodden, with the mistaken justification of upholding work ethic and freeloaders. Third – the pursuit of growth without regard to social goals, such as income disparity and social cohesion. This creates a country without a soul, a population without an identity. Mdm Speaker, I know that these biases have already been recognised – I put them starkly here so that our debate can be constructive and that we remain open to new ideas. Only then can we truly see the bright and shining future of Singapore, as we continue to build a Singapore that we all love and where we are all proud to be called a Singaporean.”
“The first is an issue of national identity; the second is a matter of politics. But really, an answer to both can only be found in our sense of values. So, again, what is growth for? It is apparent by now that I have no answer. But I do have a sort of list of "anti-answers" – I know what growth is NOT for. It is not an end in itself – it is not to meet some 4% target that we have written in stone, that growth is always a necessary condition for the good life. It is not to make sure that everyone has the four Cs in life. It is not even about building flats or ensuring that each one of us has affordable health care or a seat on the train. It is not about material things – but neither is it a completely personal choice. Because this is a land we all share, not a piece of private property. This is Singapore, and we need to discuss the substance of our collective action. This is what the on-going National Conversation is about. Madam, this is not an easy point in our history – because the things we value are so diverse. To decide in a joint direction, we need a collaborative, open-ended and intellectual approach to addressing a political and moral question. Let us all focus on the outcomes that these three papers seek to achieve. By all means, all of us here should raise ideas and suggestions and not simply criticise for the sake of scoring points. If there are valid and good suggestions and worth a review and a rethink, I urge Government to be receptive and be prepared to do so. On both sides of the House, we need to review our biases – the first, to think that what follows is necessarily caused by what went on before. This is the stuff that leads to grandstanding and populism.”
“I use this example to show why this issue needs to be calibrated more finely and to speak up on behalf of all SMEs here who, like NTUC Fairprice, collectively employ thousands of Singaporeans – it is not just a them/us dichotomy. Now, let me wear my Member of Parliament hat, I still need to answer: what is growth for? Economic growth is a public good. It is non-exclusionary. Foreigners who come here, too, are under protection of law, and have the same rights to infrastructure. Do we not provide jobs for hundreds of thousands of maids, bus captains, nurses and wait staff from overseas to help us grow our economy and also for our own convenience? Is our growth not for them too? Do they not ride on trains? Is Singapore also not a place for them to build their dreams? It gets harder. What is growth for? Is it just for food in our stomachs and roof over our heads? What about "happiness"? Depending on your temperament, either $2,000 or $10,000 is required for happiness. More insidiously, research has shown that relativity is important in happiness. Ten thousand dollars is not going to make you happy if someone less hardworking, less gifted, less driven than you, is making more than you. Happiness is as much a personal, as well as a practical issue. And so, too, then is growth. But as policymakers, we need to take care of the practical issues Page: 92 of happiness. Three years ago, in 2010, I had in this very House cautioned about the growth strategy and called for an "ethical limit" to growth. In 1985, Herman Daly, a renowned economist, had then already pointed out that the limits of growth are determined neither by physics or economics but by morality. Madam, a large part of my speech has been on what is the "Singapore Core" that we want, and how we are going to get there.”
“But what about the many foreigners who live here too? Is growth for them too? And this is the second reason people are unhappy with the Population Paper. We see this tiny island as very much a zero-sum game. There are already many foreigners in Singapore. Can we have more? For my many friends in SMEs and also sectors such as in F&B, hospitality, services, these sectors all need more foreign workers as well. Now, wearing the hat of the CEO of NTUC FairPrice, I have been receiving many calls and requests from the public and community to have more supermarkets closer to their homes − they also want longer trading hours for their convenience. Page: 91 We employ close to 9,000 staff. But we have close to 900 vacancies. As is, our workforce comprises about 80% citizens, 10% PRs and 10% foreign staff. Our dependency ratio actually allows us to get up to 45% foreign staff but we choose not to. NTUC FairPrice's management team, for that matter our entire team, is solidly Singapore Core and we will have it no other way. But like many other businesses, the manpower shortage is hurting us. Our staff is feeling the strain. We cannot open new supermarkets as fast and as many as we would like in response to what the public wants. But we do need and we do appreciate the 10% foreign staff that is part of our employ. They, together with our 80% local staff and 10% PR staff, all help us provide the level of service and convenience to the public. Still, we do from time to time get criticised for employing "so many foreigners" when we employ only 10% of the 45% that is allowed. And yet, we are 900 staff short. Yes, we will continue to leverage on IT to help mitigate our manpower shortage and up our productivity.”
“Page: 90 For the present, this means that we must continue to build and to subsidise and help the needy. For the future, we must give greater security to Singaporeans for them to feel that whatever hand life deals them, the government of the day is for them. We must resist our self-righteous, sanctimonious chant that "We do what is right, rather than what is popular". Sometimes, it is right to do what the people want, not because we think it is right, but because they do. The Government does not always know best, it may only know what is efficient, what is rational, what costs the most, or the least. If we admit the long and uncertain chain of causation, we would give more, even if it does create messiness, even if it does allow some gaming of the system. I know this runs some risks but I believe this is a risk that we can now afford to take. Bias Number Three. Growth is good, More Growth is Better. And this brings me back to growth. We can take risks now because of the strong growth of the past. Growth is, indeed, the bedrock of our success in the past. This is the one key justification for the Population Plan of the future. I am sure we do not want a 2030 headline to read "Singapore − a country in decline". That we need more people is partly because we need growth. Growth is good because it gives us a better life. And so, Government must also illustrate clearly how as a result of the population policies, an intended objective is to create better job opportunities and higher salaries for Singaporeans. And then make it happen. Indeed, Singapore has grown from mud flats to metropolis because of economic prosperity. And now from metropolis to what? What is growth for? On the surface, this is an easy question: growth is for Singaporeans of course.”
“The Prime Minister has said emphatically that we are building ahead of demand − we cannot always plan perfectly, so let us plan generously. Economically, it is not a wise thing to do so. But economics do not rule Singapore. We should recognise that this is a fundamental change because it shows that we are deviating from one of our most deeply-held past practices. This building ahead of demand is a move I fully support and I am glad the Prime Minister himself has stated this categorically. I also urge the Government to draw up intermediate milestones in five years, or 2017, or in 10 years, what will happen and communicate them clearly so that Singaporeans can better visualise and, for that matter, Singaporeans can also hold Government accountable to these milestones. But I think we need the change to go deeper – we need to examine this strain of anti-welfarism in our political philosophy and see whether it still fits into the Singapore of the future – whether, when the ratio of Singaporeans to foreigners is a mere 1.5:1, the assurance of meritocracy, as we know it, is enough to secure the Singapore Dream for everyone. What if success is not because of hard work but because of luck? What if it is because both your parents are rich, and can afford $1,000 in tuition each month? What if your grades are good, not because you work any harder but because you are chauffeured to school every day and back? Conversely, what if poverty is not the result of laziness but of a large medical bill that wiped out your savings for the last 10 years? What if, no matter how many times you tried, how hard you worked, you never made your business work? The chain of causation does not run straight and the more we do policy, the less we can be sure of how X leads to Y.”
“In healthcare, housing and education, you will have a safety net. How is that? Is that not a good thing for Singaporeans? I know this may perhaps sound too good to be true and, indeed, I can sense some disbelief in some of my colleagues. But actually the PAP was born on the back of recognising that we have the chance of making our own destiny – we are for Singaporeans, our party political philosophy is one of capitalist socialism – the market does our bidding, so that we can slant our policies to favour and to help those who need it most. At the same time, another one of our key principles is "self-help" − of making every man do his best and then assuming that a strong work ethic and personal ambition will be the great equalizer. This is sensible on the face of it, but over the years, this has hardened to an ideology of anti-welfarism. As a result, we kept welfare to a minimum. We do our best to get every Singaporean a job, saying that a job is the best welfare, a view that I certainly agree with. For years, we have trumpeted our low spending on direct welfare and lack of unemployment benefits – if we do not work, we do not get paid; otherwise, we would get soft and we would be landed with a large government Page: 89 deficit like many "soft" western models. Look at all the governments in debt, with no financial discipline and the ensuing bail-outs. We do not want to be in that state. In public finance, we plan to the last decimal, because time is money and we do not build ahead of demand. We want to ensure our limited resources are all efficiently used. But this White Paper makes a fundamental change in the way we regard bricks and mortar.”
“Currently, we have less than two Singaporeans to one non-Singaporean, which is already low for me. But in future, this may potentially go down to less than 1.5:1. And then you ask, what is the point of it all? So, I hope that the ratio can be maintained at current levels and not decline further by 2030. We do need to do more to have more citizens. Not just by getting new citizens in, but also by getting our people to get married and getting Page: 88 our married couples to have more babies. Singaporeans ourselves can and must respond and answer to this call too. At the same time, can we moderate the flow of immigration as we strive to grow our citizen population? Only within these figures can the notion of "maintaining a strong Singapore Core" make sense. At the same time, we need to continually review and continually enhance the privileges of being a Singapore Citizen. This must be on the Government's radar screen all the time. And together with this, let me ask squarely this question: why are so many people so unhappy with the Population White Paper? First, not many of us want more people, more strangers living in our midst. I have addressed that briefly in my remarks on procreation. But let us go at it another way. Assuming that we do not get more people to get married and for those married to have more babies. Let me say this, suppose we keep the 6.9 million figure, but the Government promises more than enough trains and homes; a steady supply of good jobs if you can work, unemployment benefits if you cannot, and a top-up to your salary if you do not draw a high enough salary. Suppose, as long as you are Singaporean, you are assured of a place in the sun, even if there are more people, simply because this is our land, and the land of our parents.”
“I would like to point out two biases which started out with good justifications, but will need to be re-thought: anti-welfarism and pro-market mechanism. Bias Number Two. Hard work leads to success; poverty is the result of lack of trying. Madam, we have, in the White Paper, made provision for up to a 6.9 million population. The public reaction so far has been less than euphoric, to say the least. The Government has been careful to say that more immigrants are needed because Singaporeans are getting older. Yes, we need growth and continued prosperity. But – there are many buts. But Singapore is already so crowded. But foreigners will take away some of our jobs. But do we really want to keep on growing? Singapore is crowded as is. The current bottlenecks, especially transport, are already there. These are legitimate concerns that Singaporeans have raised and I share them too. So, before we go further, we need to resolve current strains on infrastructure, especially transportation − this is an imperative. The second large worry − do we have enough land to accommodate potentially 6.9 million people in our island? While 6.9 million is a big number, when we examine it closely, we are already slowing down population growth rate from an average of 2.5% in the last 30 years to about 1.35% in the next 20 years. So, this is almost half the rate that we used to grow and, at these reduced rates, by 2030, the number comes up to a maximum of 6.9 million. Rather than the "worst case scenario", we ought to consider this as the "hard constraint" that planners need to work with. Within this constraint, my most severe reservation about the White Paper is the ratio of citizens to non-citizens.”
“I hope these measures will go some way to boost our TFR − I shudder to think that a possible headline in 2030 reads: "Singaporeans − an endangered species" or "The Last Singaporean projected in the year XXXX". Three Biases. Madam, planning and implementing public policy is not easy. I know my own role in the entire process is a modest one. Listening to what people wants – that is important. Making speeches in Parliament, writing blogs, conveying the interests of different groups – and making criticisms of the plans that meet or do not meet these assorted interests – that is the easy part. My parliamentary colleagues, whatever colour of shirt or blouse they wear, know this, but in the heat of elections, the temptation to crow like the rooster, claiming he makes the sun rise with his crowing, may be too great. Bias Number One. The causes of things. That which follows after is caused by that which came before. What is the true cause of things in social life? I think as long as Singapore is the better for it, why does it matter who has the credit for it? Yes, we know that voters need to know what Members of Parliament have done, and can do. Today's debate is about the joint future of Singapore, and it is a collaborative effort. So, I urge the debate to take a mutual interest approach, rather than paving the way for future credit claiming. Together, both sides of Page: 87 the House can make Singapore better for our fellow Singaporeans. Madam, I make this point about the need for cool debate only because the issues that I, and I am sure several others, will bring up will be hot ones. Madam, policy formulation is never easy − over time, we need to review and refine policies.”
“Mdm Speaker, thank you for the opportunity to kick off the debate on the White Paper. Today, I want to speak about three biases that inform both policy and political life in Singapore, and why we need to be aware of them – even if, as you will see, we cannot get rid of them altogether. Over the last few weeks, we have had a series of announcements and my emotions have been on a roller coaster ride. I started on a high when the Marriage and Parenthood package came out; I got concerned when the Population White Paper came out and, finally, I felt better and reassured when the Land Use Paper was published. Page: 86 First, on the Marriage and Parenthood (M&P) package. I was most delighted at the recent announcements and I will tell you why. Since becoming a Member of Parliament in 2006, I have spoken many times on Total Fertility Rate (TFR). On legislating paternity leave, I never give up and I have spoken on this every year since 2007. Three years ago, I asked if those starting a family could be given higher priority in their HDB flat applications. This has been done. Altogether, I am very heartened that several suggestions which I have made over the years have been considered and are now incorporated in this latest M&P package − paternity leave, maternity leave to be made more flexible, childcare leave, work-life balance, childcare centres, priority housing, and also funds for assisted fertility. Having said all these, I know many of my colleagues here have also in their own ways pushed for these measures over the years. We should all acknowledge and celebrate these improvements to family life with this new M&P package.”
“The casinos are here, and if I had to lay my cards, pun intended, I should say that I support their being here. Still, I feel that there should be just two casinos – just two casinos. This is not based on policy theories or an expected erosion of values, but on sheer empirical realities. Already, stresses on infrastructure can be seen. Jobs for Singaporeans – that was the original reason for the casinos, but now we have jobs looking for people, rather than the other way. I am aware that this is a very needs-based justification for casinos, but this is the reality. The outline of this reality is not laid out by values or futures, but by the physical limits of land. Until we can overcome this in some way, I say, for now, let us pause and say: thus far and no more. 3.21 pm”
“We have seen that many people see no more than four visits as being acceptable. The frequency of visits, however, is but one measure. Is there a way to measure the intensity of such visits, the compulsiveness, the loss of control? Ten thousand dollars may be a small flutter for one who makes millions but it is a lifetime's savings for the poor. My survey bears out the feeling that the lower income should be barred from going to the casinos, with two-thirds feeling that people from low-income families should be barred from going to the casinos. In a way, this is already the case with people on Public Assistance and undischarged bankrupts, for example, being banned. The list will also widen to those in rental arrears to the HDB. I do not think a simple means test is sufficient for this, but perhaps we can run a check with some other agencies – Singapore Power, for example. I do think if a person is unable to pay for his water bill, he is financially vulnerable. This may be seen to be draconian. Some may say it is anti-human rights. But in this case, I prefer to err on the side of being conservative. I have not heard of anyone trying to make a case for a human right to gamble, but I do want to say that the financially challenged ought to be protected from the temptation. I say again, the financially challenged ought to be protected from the temptation. The Minister mentioned just now that MSF had estimated that there is this potential group of 4,000 to 6,000 people. I think this is the group that we should really be concerned with. Page: 1381 The casinos have been a mixed blessing for us. We have seen the benefits, but my feeling is that we have not yet appreciated the true costs.”
“Page: 1380 There is necessarily some tension between the regulator and the operators, but in this case, I think we need to see that there is some common ground between the two. It is in our joint interest to prevent the financially vulnerable from becoming addicted to casinos, and to target their marketing more accurately. So, in this case, I urge the Government to work more closely with the two operators and vice versa. I would like to make one last point about perception and social values. These are more difficult to measure, and I cannot say if it has changed since the casinos came on board, but let us look at a rough and ready snapshot. I carried out my own survey and some 133 residents, grassroots leaders and colleagues responded. From these survey results, it told me that while many still do not accept gambling as a way of life, they do see visits to the casinos as something of a social event. About half think it is okay as a social past time, but more than 83% believe that an acceptable number of visits to the casino is four times or fewer each month. Only about a fifth feel that the current safeguards are enough. Hence, the Bill needs to reflect stronger, stronger restrictions. Half feel that more people should be excluded and a majority, almost 60%, feel that it should be easier for people to exclude family members. As of end May, over 93,000 individuals are barred from entering the two casinos in Singapore. They include over 64,000 self-exclusions – 13% are Singaporeans and PRs, while 87% are foreigners and there were also over 1,000 family exclusion orders. So, we see that although the absolute numbers are large, the number of Singaporeans who are actually excluded is actually quite small.”
“There was another case where one IR was openly announcing winners of jackpots from the casino, which I guess subtly encourages people to have a go at it themselves. Buses have stopped and regulations have been expanded to cover promotional activities – including membership campaigns and loyalty programme. And the website page publicising the jackpot winners has been taken down – I know, as I was the one who raised this in Parliament. But this is clearly not the end of the road. The Government, as regulator, does not mean taking a sanitary, arm's length of setting policies and then pushing paper to "regulate". It means getting our hands dirty, it means monitoring, it means constantly speaking to the ground. Members can do our part, too. It is, therefore, important to have increased monitoring as part of the changes we are thinking about. Mr Loh Meng See had also noted the somewhat unfair battleground in regulating casinos. He said, and I quote him, "Remember, if we enter this realm, we are at the mercy of expert gamblers. On our side are politicians and civil servants who are, I think and hope, novices in this game." Today, seven years later, I would like to think that we are a little bit more informed. And given this, I wonder if we can have more regulatory innovativeness. The current amendments do the important task of making the stick bigger, but can maybe more incentives be provided for meeting the public interests? I include some examples – can a casino which registers a lower proportion of local visitors be given a lower tax rate? Can the one who makes fewer mistakes in admitting the excluded and so on be given some carrots?”
“These are the hard figures – but I will also throw into this bag the many anecdotal examples – the increase we see in the financial hardship cases at MPS, the children who have had to bear the weight of debts from retired parents, who had visited the casinos as no more than a day of social fun, and even the rise in pawnshops – I do not ever remember seeing so many pawnshops in such great numbers and at MRT stations before the casinos. Now, I come to the specifics of this Bill. My arguments above are that economic gains have been reaped but remember that policies do not only increase gains, but also distribute them. In addition, the negative externalities we predicted also came to pass. We need to ensure two things – fairer distribution and greater protection against the fallout. Page: 1379 The first is not the subject of this Bill, but the second is. Here, I must add that the distribution of gains, not just from casinos, but from all economic activities, needs to be one of the key topics for this House, and urgently so. To this Bill, Sir, we have seen how the casino operators flout regulations – and how lightly monetary fines eat into their profits. What is a few hundred thousand dollars to a company that counts its revenues in billions? I briefly mention two examples of flouting of regulations by operators and how constant vigilance is needed. In 2010, shuttle buses operated to bring Singaporeans from the heartlands to the casinos. These were stopped after Members and other community leaders brought this up – in fact, it was Mr Liang Eng Hwa who brought this up in Parliament. This was the case too, for patrons who were given Universal Studio tickets for renewing their yearly passes at the casinos.”
“The numbers are easy enough – the overall net increase in tax revenue from the two IRs has hit or will hit $1.1 billion in this financial year. In all, in 2011, over 136,000 unique local patrons visited the casino at Resorts World Sentosa (RWS) and over 137,000 visited the one at Marina Bay Sands (MBS). Taking into account an estimated 30% overlap in local visitors between these two casinos, I think the number of locals who visited the two casinos is about 200,000 in 2011. Last year, it was reported that the MBS casino saw an average of 25,000 visitors daily, with a third comprising of locals. In 2010, our country saw $18.8 billion in tourism dollars, the highest in 10 years. It is a massive 49% increase from 2009 and in this case fortunately it did beat our forecasts. So, as far as growth is concerned, we have succeeded beyond expectations. what about jobs? The MTI estimated that 40,000 jobs have been created through the economy as a result of the IRs. But how many jobs have been created for locals? According to recent press reports, 70% of the 22,000 people working in the two IRs are locals. That makes about 15,400 jobs. The number may be more if we look at the other jobs that have been created because of the IRs. Secondly and an equally if not more important empirical question: what of the social costs? A survey conducted by the National Council on Problem Gambling last year found that the average monthly betting amount in Singapore has risen 20% since 2008 to $212 now, while the proportion of Singapore residents who gambled more than $1,000 on average each month has also increased. The proportion of respondents classified as "probable pathological gamblers", it said, has risen to 1.4% from 1.2% in 2008.”
“At one of his last appearances as a Member of Parliament, he revisited the debate and was manifestly torn between the two – the economic gains and the possible moral decay. He did not want the casinos, but with the 35,000 jobs to be created, he could not say no. For him, therefore, the casinos were a right decision if it means more jobs for Singaporeans. Mr Loh Meng See, the Member for Kampong Glam in Jalan Besar, he made his argument in a less forgiving fashion. For him, gambling is wrong, and absolutely so. But since the Cabinet had decided, he would, and I quote him, "render to God what is God's, and to Caesar what is Caesar's." He maintained that it was a morally wrong decision, and in submitting to it, he urged Singaporeans to refrain from going to the casinos and denying them the one-third revenue that was to come from locals. These speeches give an idea of the feeling and the trepidation of this House at that point in time. We were unsure of many things. We were discussing values and holding them up against different versions of the future, trying to find out what we could accept, and what not, in a universe where there were many possible futures. Page: 1378 Today, I hope to set the debate beyond this rhetoric of good and evil – not because values and beliefs are not important, but because I think we need to see these within a context of a coherent national narrative, a narrative which includes not just values and morals, but also the realities we live in today – all these count towards the narrative which we hope to write together in the future; something which I hope our on-going Singapore conversation will also address. First, have what we hoped for, what we feared, have they come about?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the IRs are built for the same reason as our telecommunications satellite, our seaports and airports and our water treatment plans. They contribute to the economic development of Singapore, they give Singaporeans jobs and they bring in investment dollars. Page: 1377 The difference is that the IRs do not just have an economic dimension, they have a moral one too. We sometimes collapse this argument into a "social ills" package because we are a secular and pragmatic country, and it is both convenient and correct to be tempted to do so. But in so doing, we rob the debate of its essential core and weight. Whatever our religion, or even we if we have no religion, our beliefs about gambling and the harm it can cause – I say can, rather than must – we must acknowledge that there is a moral dimension to this argument. Sir, I was not in the House in 2005 when the Great Casino Debate took place. The case for casinos was made by the Prime Minister. It was a scientific, economic and pragmatic argument; hard to refute in logic, harder to oppose against the realities of a downturn of that time. Yet, a few Members did. To me, two speeches against the casinos were the defining moments of the debate. The first was made by a Member of the Cabinet, a staunch Catholic and a key figure in the unions; the second by a party stalwart, a man who had fought and won elections and held his ward for four terms. Both of them are not here today, but I will revisit their arguments to see in what way they have been upheld. Mr Lim Boon Heng was the Secretary General of the NTUC, representing workers. He is also a father, now a grandfather, a champion of workers, a man with strong values and a good engineering mind. For him, the casinos were a necessary evil.”
“I have a few clarifications for Minister. The first is the TSR breaches. I wonder whether Minister could share with us what the trend has been in SAF, with regard to TSR breaches. Secondly, I also hope that beyond instilling the safety culture in SAF, I would like to suggest that the SAF also encourages a system of reporting near misses. Through that, there is a lot of useful lessons which could help SAF minimise future accidents from happening. Page: 1257 Regarding the weak safety culture in the Combat Intelligence School (CIS), I would like to ask whether, beyond CIS, what is the record like in other units? And is this isolated or also the case in some other units? Finally, one of the things that Singaporeans are very proud of is a strong SAF, and also, for the parents and sons, a safe SAF. There must also be steps to restore these two pillars of what the SAF means to Singapore and to Singaporeans.”
“Sir, I thank the Second Minister for the answers. I have the following supplementary questions. The first is: I recognise that the contracts were called at different times for different hawker centres. So, my first supplementary question is whether the quantum of any increase in cleaning fees is clearly stated in the contracts. Going forward, I think that it is important to make such provisions clear from the onset. My second supplementary question is: would the cleaning fees at the other hawker centres be expected to rise, going forward? Next, with these increases, can we expect cleaning services to improve, and in what ways? Finally, with the on-going push for the Tray Return scheme – which all of us are fully supportive of – what would the impact be on the efficiency and productivity of these cleaning services at these hawker centres and whether these factors will be taken into account in any new cleaning fee increase?”
“I would just like to ask the Minister of State whether the breaches that have been committed in the last few elections were committed by several parties or just one party.”
“What has been done to improve the dissemination of information to commuters for them to make better journey decisions? Has the introduction of distance fares improved the overall integration of our public transport network? Are our commuters really benefiting from distance fares? Or have the profits accrued more to the private companies? Finally, do we have a robust system in place to ensure that there are no further errors in the system?”
“Sir, we have all noticed over the past five years that the much respected Singapore way of dealing with traffic jams has been replicated in China and in the United Kingdom. This is a sign that others have observed what we have done, and they think it will work in their country. The truth, however, is that it may not be working as well as we have thought. Everyone that I have spoken to all say that the roads are getting more crowded these days. A poll on my Facebook, which I have just set up a few days ago, reiterated this view. Sir, Singapore has, over the years, thought of many ways to improve the use of land. Our masters measure every last inch to extract multiple uses out of our tiny space. Yet, roads are the ones which are immovable. So we have to get fewer cars on the road and more people onto trains and buses. Sir, to get fewer cars onto the roads, I suggest that one family be limited to one car. The second and subsequent cars must attract a higher COE. We have used the price mechanism in the past to successfully curb car ownership. There is no reason why this should not work. If a family is rich enough to afford two cars, when the majority of Singaporeans take public transport, then surely they are rich enough to pay a little more for it. The third car, needless to say, ought to attract an even higher COE. Sir, I suggest a 30% increase for the second car owned by one household, and a 50% increase for the third and subsequent cars. I move on to the integration of the public transport network, which is an integral part of a slew of solutions to our land transport issues. I hope the Minister can address the following: have there been improvements in the planning and coordination between the bus and rail networks?”
“Mr Chairman, Sir, I would like to thank Minister Dr Vivian Balakrishnan, Minister Lim Boon Heng, Minister Dr Yaacob Ibrahim, Minister of State Mrs Yu-Foo Yee Shoon and Senior Parliamentary Secretary Teo Ser Luck for their comprehensive and supportive replies to all the cuts filed by Members. I cannot help but notice that lately, there are a lot of students coming into the Chamber. Indeed, the "A" level results were just released last week. If MCYS had a report card for this financial year and, in fact, they do, which is all here [indicating ], I think they would have scored an "A" grade. Indeed, MCYS has its own "Grow and Share" package. "Grow" – they have done so in strengthening the community bonds. And "Share" – they have been ensuring that those who need help will be helped. But we know that MCYS' work and progress never end. Sir, on that note, I wish to seek leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The sum of $1,775,063,600 for Head I ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. The sum of $57,123,400 for Head I ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. *Cols. 4377-4308; 4309-4310. The Chairman: I propose to take the break now. Thereupon Mr Speaker left the Chair of the Committee and took the Chair of the House.”
“Sir, I have two points of clarification. The first is for the Minister. This concerns my cut on responsible gambling and compliance. I agree that it is too early to understand the full impact and the social cost. I also note that the Ministry has a slew of measures and levers to work on. What I would like to propose to the Minister to consider is for the Ministry to set a definitive timeline to undertake a comprehensive review of these various measures to see whether they are working and achieving the objectives that it sets out to do; and, if not, to come up with new measures. My second clarification is for Senior Parliamentary Secretary Teo Ser Luck. This concerns foreign sports talent. I must say that I was quite perturbed when I heard Ms Joscelin Yeo's account of what her friend had to go through when her friend was taken into that particular team. I am not sure what sport or which NSA she referred to. But I think that that observation or account is important enough for SSC and the Ministry to look into that particular incident in greater detail, and to ensure that it is addressed head-on and that we do not allow this to occur again. I am sure it is an exception, but this needs to be addressed because we need all the talents that we have. I urge the Senior Parliamentary Secretary to take a look at it in greater detail.”
“It would be helpful for SSC and MOE to review their charges for rental of schools fields and sports facilities by the CSCs and GROs under the SSC-MOE Dual Scheme and SSC sports facilities. Finally, I would also like to ask the Minister to give an update on the facilities master plan under this year's Budget.”
“Sir, promoting sports for all is important for the Government as a healthy nation means a leaner health budget and sports is a great way to bond people. I would like to first ask what are the Ministry's plans to promote a sporting culture in Singapore. Availability and access to sports facilities can be improved – it will allow more residents to be more active on the sporting front. Some years ago, I brought my children and nephews to play football in a nearby stadium on Sunday mornings. All went well for a couple of weeks. After that, the supervisor of the stadium came to tell me we cannot play on the pitch. So I said, "Okay. We will play by the side, off the pitch." That was also not allowed. He told me we could play, but I had to book the entire pitch to do so. It did not make any sense since there were no other competing users on the pitch at the time. In addition, we did not need the whole pitch. There were only seven of us! Sir, today, the sports activities and programmes organised by the Community Sports Clubs (CSCs) are often held at the CCs, common spaces and facilities in the neighbourhoods, tapping on the community infrastructures, to make sporting opportunities available closer to home. However, the free sports facilities in the community for organising large-scale community sports events and ongoing programmes are limited. Logically, we should tap on the schools and Sports Council facilities for organising such events but there are rental charges which many sports clubs cannot afford to pay. To expand outreach through community sports, availability of free sports facilities would enable and encourage the CSCs to organise more such sports activities to engage the residents.”
“Sir, I want to ask the Minister’s assessment of the measures in place to promote responsible gambling and making sure IRs comply with the guidelines so far. What else should be done? Casino”
“Sir, much has been said in this House about the impact of the IRs on ordinary Singaporeans and the need to protect them from undue influences. I have heard the messages on radio in Mandarin, depicting a man’s downfall at the gambling tables: first, borrowing from the loansharks, and then losing the love of his wife, esteem from his teenage son, and the respect of his daughter. Sir, gamblers know all these. They know the odds, better than most of us. They know the outcomes. They would have seen their circle of friends go the same way. They know, and yet the flesh is weak. That is why we need a mixture of pre- and post-casino measures. We take measures to prevent those whose addiction is particularly great from going into the casinos and we help those who have already fallen prey, to dig themselves up from the hole. Sir, the vice taxes are a great way to redistribute wealth, assuming it comes from the comfortable cushions of the very rich, and not the meagre earnings of the poor. But I think we do not yet know nor fully understand what the social impact is. Sir, I do not want nor do I think the IRs will fail. But we need a win-win approach to ensure that even as the IRs succeed, the social costs and issues are always on top of the mind of our Government, and that the various measures do kick in. As we have seen, with the need to reduce free buses or advertisements, there are always refined or new ideas that may be introduced to achieve this. MPs, grassroots leaders and yes, the IRs themselves, are partners in these. The IRs must do more to promote responsible gambling and it is in their interest to comply with guidelines and to work together with us.”
“Finally, given that this is the key contributing factor to the low TFR, I propose that we ensure that sufficient and more resources are deployed to this front. 12.15 pm Single parents”
“Sir, much has been said about the need to give incentives to people to have babies. The debate about whether these incentives work or do not is a moot one. Detractors will say that the fact that our TFR remains low shows that the measures are not working, while proponents will say that the incentives are working because if these incentives were not present, then we would have fewer babies. Last week, Deputy Prime Minister Wong shared that a key contributing cause to the low TFR is a lot simpler than we thought. From the year 2000 to 2010, the number of single citizens, both male and female, has been on the increase. The trends are quite clear and it is not a pretty sight and does not look like it will slow down, let alone reverse. Sir, people are not getting married, and those who are, are getting older. Needless to say, this combination is not conducive to increasing TFR. Even as I read that last sentence, I am conscious of how poorly it sits with the usual notions of marriage – of a matter of heart, not mind, of a matter of matches in heaven, not matchmaking on earth. The Social Development Network (SDN) coordinates the work of dating agencies, and promotes marriages. It has classifications of activities, dating, self-enrichment, wine and dine or travel. In particular, I like the "heart" section, where you can select 1, 2, or 3. I do not know the basis of selection, but I guess, to put it bluntly, it is how much you want to get married! Sir, I would like to encourage the SDN in its work. I would like to know what strategies SDN is deploying to combat the declining marriage rates. Should a strategic review be carried out?”
“Madam, in conclusion, I hope that we will ensure that adequate funds are set aside to support the People's Association and its mission and building the two bridges I have pointed out. These, I feel, are as vital to the development of Singapore as a physical infrastructure that we are building. Neighbourhood Committees”
“At wee hours of the morning, there were large crowds of residents of all races and ages, chatting with their neighbours, people whom may have stayed next door for years but they have never met. It was a great success. In fact, Senior Minister Goh came to join me and my grassroots leaders and residents for one of the quarter-final matches. Unfortunately, the team I supported lost that quarter-final match. I have digressed. 5.30 pm Music is another fine example to bond people. Again, my Youth ExCo started a band which has since performed both in Singapore and Malaysia. Every month, it organises board games and several other activities. During this Chinese New Year, my Youth ExCo worked with the Singapore Nurses Association to distribute food and necessities to needy elderly within my ward. They also made sure that these old people had access to basic medical supplies and services. I put the success of my YEC to the enthusiasm of young people in the ward, but also the vision and leadership skills of its Chairman, Mohd Ridzuan Bin Rosli, who is barely in his 20s – he is about 26 – and is currently in the Police Force. He is a fine example of a young Singaporean who is ready to step up into a leadership role, bringing his love of music and his organisation skills to depth. The editor of my constituency's newsletter is Mr Azami Bin Salim, another active grassroots leader. All these are actually the more remarkable ones because in my Braddell Heights Constituency, less than 6% of my residents are Malays. We are all proud of our residents and grassroots leaders. Regardless of their race and religion, they have made great progress in building and strengthening our community bonds, which I consider to be our most precious asset.”
“My question is: how does PA intend to build on this very high base and whether they have the resources to do so? PA is an organisation that coordinates the work of grassroots leaders. These volunteers are supported by paid staff who worked very hard and often very long hours because volunteers only worked during non-office hours. So what is the turnover rate for PA staff in recent years? How do their salaries match up to the private sector? Finally, I would like to say that our efforts and those of the grassroots leaders have seen some success only because the residents themselves see each other as being part of the same community, regardless of race, language or religion. Recently, Prime Minister Lee commented that our Malay-Muslim community, and I quote, "has made great efforts to integrate with the other communities and with Singapore society to join the mainstream." I certainly share Prime Minister's view. Madam, my Malay friends eat with me, shake hands with me and we speak in the same mix of English, Malay, Hokkien and Singlish too, that we do with all races. We have had four decades of National Service (NS), economic ups and downs and our children have been schooled in the same language and, by and large, they share the same world view. One of my best primary school friends is a Malay and our recent class reunion was a memorable one. Amongst the six Malay Activity ExCo (MAEC) in the Marine Parade GRC, we have Chinese, Indian and Eurasian members, jointly organising various programmes for the residents. That we have non-Malays in the MAEC speak of the openness of the community. My Youth ExCo (YEC) organised the screening of live matches during last year's World Cup in our Community Club.”
“Madam, I did this experiment to show what we all know already through personal experience that happiness, contentment or richness if you will, they are all relative. For many people in the world, what we call subsistence diet – kaya, half a chicken, rice, it is already complete contentment. It is something that they have been striving and working for all their lives. But this is not what the average Singapore family wants. I thank the Minister for giving us an assurance that even the very poor amongst us, they can have enough for the $400 subsistence meals. No one need go hungry here if he does not turn up his nose at housebrand rice and half a chicken for his whole family to share. At the same time, I note there is a gap between the $400 meal that we can afford and the $1,000 meal that we aspire to. This budget holds out that promise, ie, if we want to have any help with education and job training, there are enough schemes out there to give us a leg-up. And with these, our family can have a $1,000 meal plan by our own work and effort. Madam, the broad strokes of the budget paint a good picture. I would just like to ask the Minister to fill in the following points. One, what are we doing to help those too poor even to afford the $400 meal plan? What are we doing in terms of infrastructure, for example? Do we have plans for a new welfare home? Can the Minister give an update on the current Boys Complex? What are we doing for persons with disabilities, in particular, those covered under the Enabling Masterplan? Madam, I move on to the second bridge that we ought to build. Under Community 2015 Masterplan, the People's Association (PA), through its grassroots organisations, aims to reach out to one in two residents by 2015. This is up from the current one in three.”
“Madam, I beg to move, That the total sum to be allocated for Head I of the Estimates be reduced by $100. Madam, I wish to speak about two bridges that need to be built. First, between the rich and the poor and, second, between the different races and between old and new citizens. First, let me share some perspectives on the cost of living in Singapore. There are some definitions of income which uses the amount needed to meet the 2,200 calorie diet as the minimum income needed. My colleagues at NTUC FairPrice gave me the following figures. For meeting the basic nutritional needs for a family of four, ie, two adults and two teenagers, the cost is about $370 a month. This is based on the nutritional requirements of the Health Promotion Board, and we take the simplest food plan. We have tofu for lunch and chicken for dinner. We then added some frills, eg, kaya, coffee, soya sauce, biscuits, things like that. This comes up to another $20 a month. Hence, on a subsistence level, I think $400 will probably feed a family of four a balanced diet. I would like to highlight that this is really subsistence – white rice, tofu, one vegetable and one fruit for a meal. Even for the meal with chicken, it is half a chicken for the family. The average middle class of Singapore will probably have Royal Umbrella rice with prawns, salmon and so on. And most middle-class families have more than one protein and one vegetable for their meals. Looking at the data, we have on what Singapore families eat. They will go for a $15 or $20 meal. So you can probably say that food for such an average middle-class family will cost about $1,000 a month.”
“I just want to state that perhaps the NDP was not a good example. I would now like to ask the Minister whether we could consider the National Clean and Green Week as one event to aim for to be the first carbon-neutral national event. Assoc. Prof. Dr Yaacob Ibrahim: Certainly, we will consider all opportunities available. The Clean and Green Singapore (CGS), as he rightly pointed out, is a good example. But let me just add one further example which just came to my mind. If you ever visit the Marina Barrage, you will realise that there are no bins, and the reason is very simple. When we started providing bins, they overflowed, and the situation was terrible. What the PUB did, after consultation with NEA, was to give people plastic bags. Only on the way out of the Marina Barrage will they throw away the plastic bags in the bins. As a consequence, the place has been kept clean. So he is right, we should take some of these available opportunities where there is higher human traffic to bring about such changes in behaviour, but it may cause some difficulties in the early days. When we removed the bins at the Marina Barrage and only had a few at the exits, it required some adjustments. So the PUB deployed some officers on the ground. But, today, it is working quite well.”
“Together, Sir, we can safeguard our environment for the present and for future generations to come.”
“These projects are part of more than 100 identified islandwide under the ABC Waters Masterplan, including Sungei Whampoa in Mr Heng's ward, which will be implemented in phases over the next 20 years. 3.30 pm PUB is also working closely with other public and private agencies to encourage the adoption of ABC Waters design features within their developments. ABC Waters design features have been introduced in public housing projects such as the Punggol Waterway and private developments like the Tree House Condominium by CDL. Sir, water we can drink from the tap, reservoirs we can canoe in, vibrant hawker centres, clean streets, fresh air – these are for us to use, but not to be taken for granted. We have to nurture a clean and liveable home for everyone through the combined efforts of all. Our efforts are recognised internationally today, with Singapore ranked first out of the 151 countries in Gallup's 2010 Air and Water Survey and maintaining its top placing among Asian cities in Mercer's Quality of Living Survey for the past three years. Sir, in conclusion, doing our part in safeguarding the environment does not have to be an extraordinary event or activity. Simple everyday actions can protect the environment. Adopting energy and water efficient devices at home can help extend the lifespan of our resources. Everything we buy or throw away has some impact on the environment because it requires energy, water and resources to produce or dispose. Reducing our food waste, avoiding excess packaging and recycling are all easy ways that take us one step closer to our vision of a sustainable and liveable Singapore. We can create an even better environment through positive changes in the way we think and act.”
“Beyond using national events as platforms to build up a stronger sense of community ownership and responsibility, our officers at the five regional offices islandwide have engaged the grassroots through CCC meetings and grassroots events to better understand and address the community's concerns. A $1.5 million 3P Partnership Fund is also available to support 3Ps efforts by grassroots, schools, NGOs and companies. My Ministry will continue to grow our network of teachers, youth, grassroots and corporate partners to champion the environment in their respective communities and organisations. Such community partnership has been a centre-piece of our water sustainability efforts. The Active, Beautiful and Clean (ABC) Waters programme was launched by our Prime Minister in 2006 to encourage the public to get closer to water so that they can better value and enjoy this precious resource. To address Mr Heng Chee How's query on the status of the ABC Waters programme, I am pleased to share that 15 projects have been completed and these have been well-received by the community. 2011 promises an equally exciting array of projects for the community. The flagship project this year is the Kallang River-Bishan Park project where the river will become the focus of the park following its transformation into a natural meandering waterway. The project also features innovative bio-engineering techniques and natural cleansing systems using plants. At MacRitchie Reservoir, amongst other improvements, visitors can expect a new submerged boardwalk that will allow people to work through shallow waters and appreciate water from a totally different perspective.”
“Sir, the challenge of realising our vision of a sustainable Singapore is as much one of partnership and personal responsibility, as it is of public policy. To build a future that we desire and that our children deserve, we need to embrace the idea that taking care of the environment is everyone's shared responsibility, and not just the Government's. In doing so, we will also play our part as a responsible global citizen to tackle climate change, as suggested by Mr Seah Kian Peng. Mr Seah also asked if we can make it mandatory for major national events to be carbon-neutral going forward. On his suggestion for NDP, I will refer the suggestion to Deputy Prime Minister Teo Chee Hean for MINDEF to consider. Given their high visibility, major national events provide a good opportunity for us to promote environmental protection and ownership. In fact, NEA has been engaging the organisers and stakeholders of major events, including the NDP organisers, to make their events environmental-friendly. These include introducing measures to cut down on packaging and litter, providing adequate recycling bins, using energy-efficient lighting and encouraging participants to use public transport. These all will help reduce the carbon footprint of such large scale events. For example, NEA has worked with organisers of the Youth Olympic Games, National Day Parade, the River Hongbao and Chingay to encourage participants and visitors to keep the venues litter-free through the provision of adequate refuse bins, display of educational materials and public announcements at event sites.”
“As I shared at last year's COS, construction sites near residential and noise-sensitive areas that started work from 1st September 2010 have not been allowed to carry out construction activities from 10.00 pm on the night before Sunday or public holiday till 10.00 am the day itself. This prohibition will be extended to cover the rest of the day for construction sites that commence work from September 2011. Going forward, we will also consider tighter noise limits for construction equipment and methods. NEA is also taking steps to reduce traffic noise. Noise standards for new vehicles were tightened in October last year, and standards for existing vehicles will be tightened in April this year. NEA is also working with the LTA to look into the feasibility of measures to further manage traffic noise. Sir, I share Dr Maliki's concern that community noise is a growing challenge. However, stepping up on legislation and enforcement is not necessarily the most practical approach in such instances. While NEA has established and enforced noise limits for noise sources such as construction sites, factories and motor vehicles which could pose a risk to public health, community noise cannot be addressed as easily. This is because of its transient and subjective nature. As we work, live and play in a compact city, greater civic mindedness is very important. This is especially so given our high population and urban density which amplify the impact of noise. Even as we review noise mitigation measures through improved infrastructure design and more effective enforcement, for a better quality of life for all, everyone in the society needs to continue exercising consideration and tolerance for one another.”
“Sir, I ask the Government to consider increasing the number of carbon-neutral events, to publish data that makes itself accountable in terms of green targets and to reduce the number of goodies bags at major national events. Assoc. Prof. Dr Yaacob Ibrahim: Sir, Mr Lim Biow Chuan asked about the Government's hawker stalls policy. Sir, we recognise that over time our hawker centres have evolved to become not just a source of affordable food but also an important shared community space. About 42% of the nearly 15,000 cooked food and market stalls that NEA manages are paying subsidised rentals. This has helped to keep food prices affordable, although there may be other several factors that affect food prices. Sir, there are no immediate plans to build new hawker centres but we will continue to ensure that hawker centres provide patrons with a comfortable dining environment through our Hawker Centre Upgrading Programme. Since 2001, over 80% of our 110 hawker centres have been upgraded with improvements made in ventilation, utilities and layout. Mr Lim also asked about allocating stalls at subsidised rent to low-income individuals, while Mr Chiam See Tong asked about NEA's approach to illegal hawking by disabled people. There are currently various schemes to support families in hardships and persons with disabilities. Low-income families who need assistance with basic living can approach the Community Development Councils for help. Persons with disabilities can be referred to the various job placement or support services for employment opportunities. Mr Liang Eng Hwa asked what the Government is doing to minimise noise nuisance.”