Sin Boon Ann
Singapore
“Madam, with growing affluence, rising obesity has also become a national problem. Other than the health risk for the individuals, there are other related problems such as healthcare expenses, loss in productivity and so on.”
“Madam, mental health problems still hold some stigma in the society and will prevent patients from seeking help and professional advice early and impede their re-integration into the workforce and community after treatment.”
“Sir, the silver tsunami is almost upon us and we must be prepared for the transformation of our social landscape. One in every five residents will be above the age of 65 by 2030. Many Singaporeans can expect to live another 20 years more but the quality of life can vary greatly.”
“If they are eligible for HDB concessionary loans, they will not be affected. However, quite a number of HDB upgraders or downgraders do not qualify for such loans. They may be upgrading due to additional children in the family or taking in elderly parents.”
“Sir, rigorous and thorough training for our servicemen is necessary to prepare them adequately for their role as defenders of our country. However, training safety is just as important.”
“But I feel more needs to be done to consolidate the understanding even further. What are MINDEF's action plans with this aspiration in mind? What are the upcoming educational publicity and other programmes MINDEF has planned to enhance the awareness and understanding of our public.”
The complete record
Every one of 965 lines we hold for Sin Boon Ann, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 10 of 20.
“Sir, the Minister of State says that the Ministry has a handbook for teachers. I would like to ask him whether the Minister has a handbook for parents to educate them on where the Government draws its line on physical child abuse. Because, very often, it is not uncommon to have parents giving a spank on the buttock of a child for mischievous behaviour. Will that, in the eyes of the Government, be considered as abuse?”
“Sir, in a competitive environment, I would like to ask the Minister who decides when he collaborates and when he competes. Presumably, it is the Government and if the Government decides finally who competes and when you collaborate, can you effectively have free market forces operating in the healthcare industry in such a context?”
“Directors must act in good faith, make proper inquiries and have no knowledge that this reliance is unwarranted. Sir, while the policy intention of the clarification is good, it still does not remove the anxiety on the part of directors that they may still get it wrong. As I see it, the present amendment merely codifies what I believe is the common law position of the duty of care of a director. It does not provide any further guidance on what exactly is the proper scope of inquiry on the part of the director. Conduct based on words like "proper" or "reasonable care" are always, in a legal sense, determined ex post facto. In other words, anxiety continues to remain on the part of a director and I would say that the proposed changes have not exactly given directors much relief by way of clarification. Apart from the above comments, I should add that the Government should be commended for its laudable efforts in seeking to make bold changes to our companies legislation to bring our laws in line with international standards and to make Singapore more competitive internationally. With that, Sir, I support the Bill.”
“Often, where companies are in a position to raise money from the public, the cost involved together with the demands of regulatory compliance often serve to act as a deterrent. Allowing private companies an easier route to raise money may actually help to lower the cost of business for smaller companies. While we want to make it easier for small companies to raise money, one must recognise and accept that there are costs involved. Presumably, standards governing such invitations to investors to put money with these companies will not be as rigorous as the IPOs of public companies. Otherwise, the cost may just be too prohibitive for the company to even consider trying. However, Sir, if the standards of disclosure expected of such companies are not going to be as rigorous as that of a conventional IPO, how can we be sure that the public interest will be adequately protected from shenanigans and scams? In the case of publicly listed companies, there is always the presence of the Singapore Stock Exchange to act as a watchdog for the public interest. But for non-listed companies, we should continue to ensure that our legal regime will not make it easier for foreign crooks to try their luck here. Otherwise, there is a risk that some unwary and non-financially sophisticated uncles and aunties here may be scammed of their hard-earned money and life-long savings. Thirdly, the proposed amendment in clause 31 seeks to introduce a new section 157C which allows directors to place reliance on information provided by management and professional advisers. The amendment seeks to clarify the extent of a director's duty when it comes to acting on information and advice of others. However, there is a caveat.”
“They are expected to act as managers, counsellors, lawyers and astute negotiators. These are qualities that their primary training may not prepare them for, and something that they have to pick up along the way. More than just skills, liquidators are also required to exercise judgment that only experience can give. They are also required to balance generally the different interest groups in a liquidation from creditors, employees and shareholders. Above all, liquidators are expected to exercise ethical consideration in their judgment. Sir, unfortunately, there is nothing that exists today that can properly be said to formally prepare a person for a career as a professional liquidator. Yet, the role of a liquidator in a winding up situation is no less important than that of an accountant or solicitor. A liquidator's job requires a high level of professionalism and training. In the CLRFC report, there is specific mention of setting up a body similar to the Law Society or Institute of Certified Public Accountants to set the standards, training and regulation of liquidators and insolvency practitioners. Our Government has indicated that it has accepted the recommendation and I am pleased to note that this is not one of those recommendations that Government has put a reservation on. I hope that it will, sooner than later, be the case when such a body is set up. Secondly, clause 6 gives effect to recommendation 1.5 of the CLRFC report which argues for more liberal policy of allowing private limited companies to raise money from members of the public. Presently, private limited companies are not allowed to raise money from the public. This has often been a severe limitation on private limited companies that seek additional working capital or funds for expansion.”
“Sir, the present amendment Bill before this House is part of a series of amendments to the Companies Act that the Government has put in place to implement the changes proposed by the CLRFC to make our business environment more cost competitive and efficient. These changes are timely and, in some cases, long overdue. I was in the Committee that mooted these changes and, quite naturally, I fully support the amendments that are now contained in the Bill. Sir, even though I generally support the Bill, I do have a number of observations that I wish to place before this House. First, clause 3 amends the present section 9 of the Act by widening the category of persons who are allowed to act as liquidators. Previously, only auditors are qualified to act. However, it would seem that the job of a liquidator may be carried out by other professionals or whoever through experience or training. I believe they are equally qualified to rise to the undertaking; hence, the widening of the categories of those who may act as liquidators. While the widening of the categories of people who may qualify to act as liquidators will result in giving the public a wider range to choose from and, hopefully, lower fees in the process, what the amendment Bill has not addressed really are the professional standards and training of liquidators. Up until now, liquidators in Singapore are not qualified by virtue of any specific and dedicated course of study either in a professional or tertiary institute. The principal reason why auditors have traditionally been asked to act as liquidators may perhaps have to do with their familiarity with accounts and finance. Yet, Sir, we all know that liquidating a company involves skill sets that are more than just an ability to handle accounts.”
“Sir, Prime Minister Abdullah made reference to resolving some issues first when he said, "We have to pluck some low-hanging fruits and deal with it before the musang comes and takes them away." Can the Minister comment on this approach and what are these low-hanging fruits?”
“The question should be whether or not there is sufficient evidence of unfair practice on the part of the retailer to warrant the matter to be heard by the judge, and for the judge to decide whether or not an injunctive relief should be issued.”
“Could the Minister therefore clarify what exactly are the parameters or considerations that go into, in deciding whether or not a matter would be brought before a judge in court?”
“Sir, I am just puzzled by the Minister of State's explanation of the need to balance between the needs of the traders and consumers. In this regard, he said that whether or not an injunctive relief is to be given depends on the panel beforehand. But surely whether or not there is unfair trade practice is a question of fact to be decided by law. Would it not be a proper forum for the judge, rather than for a separate panel, to decide, because if you have broken the law, you have broken the law. Why is it for the panel then to determine whether or not it is in the interest of the parties concerned to determine the question of law? Should it not be the judge?”
“We would love to have a magazine like this in Singapore. However, would the Government be prepared to support its publication, and not only the publication, but also to provide it with funds to collaborate with SPRING to carry out independent tests on consumer products and services? Sir, if the Government is determined about wanting to strengthen the consumers' position in Singapore, then it could truly do much more than what it is doing at the moment. I am just somewhat pessimistic that unless we step up our efforts in consumer education to create a greater transparency in the marketplace, not even the present Consumer Protection (Fair Trading) Bill will be sufficient to truly protect consumers from unscrupulous retailers. Subject to the above comments, I support the Bill.”
“What I want help on would be information that will help me decide and a forum that will allow me to provide feedback to help other consumers make the right choice. Unfortunately, in Singapore, the culture and the climate of consumer education is rather lacking. I applaud the effort of CASE in seeking to advance the cause of consumers in Singapore through battles with the retailers on specific issues. However, I also recognise that, as an organisation that depends on members' subscription to fund its activities, its ability to do more for consumers by way of its public education programme is rather limited. Such programmes, to achieve any real effort, can be expensive to undertake and would often continue to remain on the wish list of CASE unless Government is prepared to substantially support it through adequate subvention on its part. For instance, in the United Kingdom, there is a consumer magazine called "Which", a trusted publication of the consumer watchdog body there. It is a magazine that has earned the trust of readers as it independently reports on the quality of goods and services provided. Independent tests and surveys are objectively conducted and the results are often published in the magazine for the benefit of its readers. It is, I believe, a magazine that retailers respect and perhaps fear because of the potential damage that an adverse report may do to their sales. A magazine such as "Which" is therefore a blessing to consumers as it gives them the ability to make the right choice. However, publishing such magazines can be expensive and would require Government funding and support. Typically, advertising revenue for such magazines is never an option if integrity and independence are to be preserved.”
“Although the right to terminate a time-share contract may be given by a Minister pursuant to the provisions of the Act, has the Government considered whether or not there are other remedies that the aggrieved party may want to pursue arising from the time-share contract? And I say that it is a toothless tiger even for the Government because of the rather unusual requirement for a specified body to consult a panel before taking any action against the errant retailer. Since when has the Government got to consult anyone before taking action in the public interest? I would therefore urge the Minister that, if the Government is serious in its intent to protect the consumer, then more can and should be done specifically by way of criminalising the more serious aspects of unfair trading practices. Sir, my second comment on the present Bill relates more broadly to the question of redressing the imbalance of information between the retailer and the consumer. At the marketplace, money is often made on the basis of imperfect information flows. Thus, an ignorant consumer is often an easier target for salesman to close a deal than one who is well knowledgeable about the product that he is looking for. It is therefore arguable that the best protection for the consumer is often not the law which helps him post facto, but information which helps the consumer decide what to buy, where to buy and when to buy. Consumers will also want to know which shops to avoid, which operators to choose and how much to pay. Such information, if made freely available, will minimise the risk of being taken for a ride. The point is that if I bought a handphone, the last thing on my mind is to want to take the vendor to court because it keeps breaking down.”
“The prospect of going to jail will have a greater effect on the behaviour of the retailer than the prospect of being sued for damages. Our policy towards protecting members of the public is full of inconsistencies. On the one hand, under the Securities and Futures Act, a person cannot offer securities to members of the public without an accompanying prospectus that gives full and accurate information about the issuer. Any fradulent or negligent misrepresentation by those involved will result in prosecution by the authority and the punishment, besides civil remedies, can include jail terms. On the other hand, we allow people to sell foreign real estate, even time-share rights, using hard pressure techniques and often on the basis of misleading representations, almost with impunity. And people have lost huge sums of money that way. Just look at the recent newspaper reports about people who have been misled about time-share contracts. In both cases, whether it is share investments, or purchases in time-share rights, people are put at risk of losing vast sums of money. Yet, with one particular type of investment, there is an overwhelming overload of protective legislation, and in the other case, the investor or the buyer is left very much on his own. Why the inconsistency? Seen from this perspective, the present Bill does seem very much like that of a toothless tiger. I need say no more than to lament that even the right of the consumer to take action against an unethical time-share seller in the Small Claims Tribunal, a supposedly easier forum to prosecute a claim, is not given to him in the Bill.”
“Litigation is often seen as time-consuming and an expensive way to deal with a problem. Additionally, we do not know if the prospect of being sued by the consumer would have a sobering effect on the retailer to behave. The truth of the matter is that, in the majority of the cases, consumers who have been misled or unfairly treated, would just blame it on their misfortune to have encountered such an unethical retailer. The pots and pans seller who cons the housewife, my mother included, into buying such wares on wild promises of its quality is unlikely to be brought to task before a judge in court. It is just not in our Asian culture for an aggrieved party to seek redress in court. The approach in the West may be different, but it is just not the culture here. Sir, I am disappointed to learn that the Government has decided not to criminalise any aspect of unfair trade practices. A crime and punishment approach to complement civil remedy may be better suited in the circumstance. The point about criminalising an action is not about making it more onerous for the retailer to operate, but to serve, as my colleague has said earlier, as a deterrent against reprehensible conduct. The description of specific unfair practices in the Schedule makes one wonder whether there is any difference between cheating and unfair practices. Yet, on the one hand, cheating is a Penal Code offence, the punishment of which is a jail term. On the other hand, the remedy for unfair practices, as is the basis of the proposed Bill, is injunctive relief, restitution and damages. Unfortunately, unfair practices in law is not cheating as such and, yet, it is no less morally reprehensible. Sir, let me repeat.”
“Obviously, there was a misrepresentation by the salesman and the contract, which the grassroots leader signed, had put him in a weaker position in the eyes of the law as, indeed, my friend was in that position when he subsequently caved in to the seller's legal demand. I need not have to tell you what happened between he and his wife. Sir, in a market driven economy, we celebrate the diversity of choices that the consumer is given. Yet, at the same time, the playing field is never even for the consumer. Often, it is the one with the financial resources who has the upper hand. Supposing a German car company buys a business-class ticket for a motoring journalist, wines and dines him for a week in Stuttgart. Do you think that bad car review is in the making? Sir, I support the Bill whose function is to allow consumers to take action against retailers who are engaged in unfair practices. It has been a long time in coming, in making illegal, practices which we know to be totally reprehensible; such as bait and switch tactics, bogus last-day and closing down sales, and making advertisements look like editorials. For once, it is now possible for the consumer either on his own or through an independent body seek redress in court against unfair practices. While I welcome the introduction of such legislation, Sir, I do not think that the objects of the Act has gone far enough to try to redress the imbalance that exists between the consumer and the retailer. There are two reasons for this. Let me explain. First, the current Bill gives the consumer redress largely through the courts. It presupposes that the consumer will always have the wherewithal to mount or initiate litigation against the erring retailer. Such an approach has its limitation.”
“Sir, it is the duty of advertisers to tempt buyers, and it is the duty of buyers to resist them; or at least to carefully evaluate them. Consumers are not stupid. But they are often either too busy, illiterate or not in the best position, when confronted with a hard driving and smooth talking salesman. And all too often, consumers are either taken for a ride or could have made better decisions with regard to their purchases. Recently, a grassroots leader, who is a polytechnic diploma holder, came to see me about a contract he entered into with a door-to-door salesman for a purchase of a vacuum cleaner. This was no ordinary vacuum cleaner, but one which cost $3,000 to purchase. Now, why would anyone want to buy a $3,000 vacuum cleaner? Obviously, my grassroots leader was sufficiently tempted to want to consider it, subject, as he told the salesman, to getting his queen's, that is, his wife's, consent. Mind you, he was retrenched and was not drawing an income at that time. The salesman said it was okay and arranged for him to take the vacuum cleaner and to sign some papers which, as it turned out, was the sales agreement. There was no effort on the part of the salesman to either explain the terms of the agreement or allow the buyer to study the terms of the agreement. All my grassroots leader was told was to just sign the agreement and leave the rest to him. As it turned out, his wife thought that the purchase was a stupid one and went totally ballistic on finding out about the vacuum cleaner. Ah, but my friend said not to worry. The contract was subject to her consent. However, he was wrong. The contract that he signed was a firm commitment to buy and there was nothing that said he could renege from it if his wife had objected.”
“Sir, I accept that it is very difficult to control human feelings which may lead to lapses in safety standards. In the case of Sergeant Hu's tragic and untimely death, I was wondering whether or not it could have been avoided if we had an independent officer accompanying the training troop at the time when they were going through a training session. For example, if we had a sadistic instructor, meting out all these punishments to the trainees, at least we would have an independent officer accompanying the training troop to act as an independent check against abuses and lapses in observing those training safety requirements. RAdm Teo Chee Hean: Sir, I will ask the Army to consider this proposal from Mr Sin Boon Ann. The case here is that individuals who are charged with the responsibilities must carry out their responsibilities properly. Whether the person comes from the unit or outside the unit, he has to carry out his responsibilities properly. That is the key in making sure that the system works. You can put in certain levels of checks, but beyond a certain level, many more checks become counter-productive because everyone presumes that everyone else has checked, and therefore, he does not check. But if you know that you are the one and the only one responsible for checking, and if you did not, and something went wrong because you did not check properly, there is no doubt about who is responsible. I think, in this case, it is a question of discharging your duties properly and with responsibility.”
“Sir, I thought the earlier question asked by my colleague was: how does the Ministry intend to reduce the number of cycle deaths because, in the same comparable period, the number of fatalities has actually gone up? Can the Minister of State give an indication of the steps that the Ministry is contemplating in this regard?”
“Sir, since the Deputy Prime Minister has said that investors are basically on their own lookout for investment making decisions, is it possible for the Government to go beyond just informing investors on the types of products available by allowing them the opportunity to participate in Investment 101 type guidelines, where they can better understand basic strategies in making investment decisions and therefore make better informed choices as to what they are letting themselves into, what the trade-offs against returns are, and what kind of returns they are looking at? I think that would then give them a better approach towards making a decision rather than just telling them these types of investments that are available.”
“This is not a problem if these outsourced jobs go to Singaporeans but, unfortunately, many of these outsourced jobs go to foreigners in the process. Sir, in case you get me wrong, I am not against the principle of hiring foreigners who can contribute to this country. What I am saying is the timing judgment by these non-profit oriented public sector organisations to undertake restructuring exercise presently, knowing full well how scarce jobs can be particularly for those who are in the middle age group. Let us not forget that these middle-age workers are the ones who carried the economy on their backs at a time when we were industrialising and trying to build up this country. It is to them that we owe our gratitude and these are the people whom we must not abandon in this hour of need. I would, therefore, urge the Government that, if they are thinking of further downsizing involving redundancies or outsourcing, such plans be put on hold until such time when the economy and employment situation have significantly improved. With that, Sir, I support the Prime Minister's statement enunciating the Government's policy on CPF changes.”
“But for a worker who earns $1,000, a 6% cut will be quite substantial indeed in terms of cash flow. While I do not expect any regulatory intervention to lower the salary of these high income earners, it will be good if companies and managers can take a serious view of their own salaries and are prepared to voluntarily take a deeper cut in order to sustain viability of the company and also the employment of others. At a time like this, if the workers can perceive that their managers are prepared to bite the bullet with them, and to take the tough journey together, then I am very sure the bonds between the managers, the owners and the workers will be better established and this will augur well for the company in the longer term. Sir, the Government has spoken of the need to restructure to face the demands of the changing times. While I can understand the need to reorganise to help companies improve their profitability, there is a question which remains as to whether or not this is a good time to reorganise public agencies that are not similarly motivated by the same concerns of profitability. The workers can understand if Motorola and Seagate have to lay-off workers to remain competitive and profitable. But, at a time like this, when jobs are so scarce, one questions whether or not it is appropriate now to trim the size of public agencies. On one hand, we hear the cry of Government for more jobs to be created in Singapore for the workers, yet, on the other hand, I am given to understand that many public sector jobs are being made redundant because of outsourcing. We have a contradiction on hand here, a situation of the Government calling for more jobs to be created and yet, at the same time, have many Government agencies outsourcing many of the job functions to others.”
“If you believe, as some companies do, in the principle that the employees of any organisation are the most important assets, then how you manage the process of bonding with the people will be critical to the outcome of the organisation. Sir, the truth of the matter is that even in this economic climate, not all companies are equally affected by weak economic conditions. Some have been able to ride through this tough time better than others and have, in fact, out-performed themselves in the past. For these companies, I hope that they would not use the excuse of the present CPF restructuring exercise to increase their profitability further at the expense of the workers. Such measures are opportunistic and I am sure will be made obvious to the employees in no time. I certainly hope that the employers in this category will find a way of ploughing back the savings from the CPF to the employees for their benefit. At the same time, there is another category of employers who are genuinely suffering. Although the reduction in CPF contribution cuts across the board for all employees who are CPF account holders, the question which we have to address is whether or not more could have been done by way of cost reduction to ensure that that pain is fairly borne by all. Let me explain. For the very high income earners, cutting the CPF by 6% does not matter very much as compared to one who, say, earns $1,000 a month. Our present rule does not require anyone to contribute that part of the salary beyond $6,000 into the CPF account. So if your pay is $30,000, your CPF take-home will be $960 from your employer and with a cut of 10%, it will be just $600. What difference is this $360 to someone who is looking at about $28,000 cash flow a month.”
“Sir, last week, my honourable colleague, Mr Nithiah Nandan, spoke of his meeting with union members to discuss proposed changes to CPF. I too was at that meeting. There was a general consensus at the meeting that we need to retune our CPF in order to enhance our competitiveness and to ensure the continuing survival of our country. I need not say that the prospect of further cuts in our CPF was no morale booster for the workers and, in fact, after a string of bad news over the last six months relating to corporate restructuring, the weak economy, SARS and Iraqi war, the proposed changes to the CPF have been seen as yet another blow in the stomach. But, Sir, like all good citizens, the workers understood the need for these changes in order to preserve jobs and to keep the economy going. I can feel the concerns of the workers at a time like this. There is much uncertainty which hangs around them as there is no guarantee that reducing CPF contribution by 3% is going to assure them their jobs and future employment. I am glad, however, to learn of last week's announcement by DPM Lee of the package of measures to mitigate the harshness of the proposed reduction to the rate of CPF contribution. Any form of relief will always be welcomed at this time and will certainly be appreciated. Sir, we have always spoken of the need to bond with the workers in order to ensure their commitment and loyalty. This need to bond with the workers is perhaps, in part, a reflection of a broader need on our desire to want to bond the people to the country. Whether you like it or not, a reduction in the salary, a restructuring, or a retrenchment exercise is always an emotionally traumatic experience for the workers.”
“Will the Minister elaborate on what he meant by quality students and quality staff in the context of the analysis?”
“Sir, would the Minister of State give an assurance that, notwithstanding the fact that there is a scheme, there would be no further cuts or reductions in the budget set aside for the engagement of counsellors for the schools? Secondly, the Minister of State, in his earlier reply, said that a lot is dependent on the teachers' ability to spot students with such suicidal tendency. I am wondering whether the Ministry would put in place a more proactive scheme to work with the students regularly to detect and sieve out the students who have great difficulties in managing relationships or work stress.”
“Would the Minister of State not agree with me that if the cost is going to be passed on to the residents, imposing a levy of 5% at this moment may not be an appropriate time because, ultimately, it would be the residents who end up picking up the 5% levy rather than the trainers?”
“Would the Minister agree with me that the understanding among different ethnic groups could be better fostered if students are given opportunities to interact on a daily basis, rather than on the occasional performances that they put up? In this regard, I was wondering whether the Minister would consider allowing SAP schools at the primary level to offer non-Chinese as a second language so that non-Chinese students can enrol into the schools, thus creating a better environment and providing better opportunities for children to interact on a daily basis, rather than on an occasional basis.”
“Can I just ask the Minister whether he thinks that Singapore can effectively compete in the manufacturing sector in the coming years in the light of the competition that we face from India and, particularly, China, with their cheaper source of labour? Mr Raymond Lim Siang Keat: I am quite confident that we will be able to compete. What is important is that we ensure that the economy as a whole is cost-competitive and what is important in terms of competition for the investment dollar is really the total package. It is not just a question of absolute cost but, at the end of the day, it is really output per unit of cost that is important. It is for this reason that Singapore has managed to continue to hold its own in the contest for the investment dollar. Last year, we brought in about $9 billion in fixed asset manufacturing investment. This year, as the Prime Minister has announced in his National Day message, we are looking at about $7.5 billion. We will continue to get major investments into Singapore. So I think it is the totality. Cost is an important factor but there are other attributes that bring investments into Singapore. ASSISTANCE SCHEMES FOR LOCAL ENTERPRISES (Reduction of grants) 5. Dr Lily Neo asked the Minister for Trade and Industry what are the reasons for reducing the various grants such as Local Enterprise Technical Assistance Scheme (LETAS), Local Enterprise Finance Scheme (LEFS) and Micro Loan Programme (MLP) when the need for such schemes is even more pressing in view of our present economic climate.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I would like to thank the Deputy Prime Minister for hearing out the people in industry and making the necessary changes. Coming back to the other point about explanations for departures from the corporate governance code, would the Deputy Prime Minister not agree with me that part of the reason why people have gone to the other extreme of giving detailed explanation is because they fear the heavy hand of the regulator? What the Deputy Prime Minister has just said earlier was that you leave it to people to form their own judgment as to the appropriate level of disclosure and explanation and they will have to justify afterwards. I think it will take a while in the engagement between the regulator and the people concerned to find the appropriate level that they are comfortable with. In the interim, until such a comfort level is established, can the MAS give the assurance that there will be a light-handed and light-touch approach in enforcing the regulations?”
“Otherwise, you will have a front, a dummy, and then you operate a wayang kulit from behind, and that causes problems. While we need proper disclosure, we also recognise it is important to reduce the reporting burden for fund managers and investors. That is why we accepted the recommendation to make the changes which are in the Bill today: first, to require notification only when your shareholding changes by one percentage point, a discrete 1% threshold above the minimum 5%. So, if you go from 5.3% to 5.5%, you do not have to report. But if you cross the next threshold, which is 6%, then you will have to report, which is like what Hong Kong and the UK are doing. And instead of two calendar days, you will have two business days. So, over the weekend, you do not count those days. These are minor improvements. But, as Mrs Lim pointed out, there will still be reporting requirements that may still be onerous. So, we will study her suggestion to see whether it is feasible for us to exempt certain categories of investors and fund managers from the requirement to report their direct and deemed interests. We will have to study it, because it is a grey area. There are reasons why we want to know who the substantial shareholders are. For sensitive companies, there may be a double reason. But even for other companies, we must have an effective definition and one that is not too difficult and whose reporting requirements are not too burdensome. But we will study this.”
“It is, therefore, necessary that if we are to undertake a review of the Companies Act to help reduce business costs, we should also at the same time undertake the review of other relevant legislation and regulations with the same view in mind. With that, Sir, I support the Bill. Mr Lee Hsien Loong: Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I thank Mrs Lim Hwee Hua and also Mr Sin Boon Ann for their contributions. I have a lot of sympathy for their approach and priorities, and let me explain our position and what we can do. On the definition of substantive shareholding which Mrs Lim raised, currently, an investor holding 5% or more of the voting shares of a listed company has to notify the company and the SGX of any changes in shareholding within two calendar days. For example, if it moves from 5.3% to 5.5%, he has to tell the company and SGX about this 0.2% change. The aim is to make sure that the company and SGX are aware of who the substantial shareholders are and what are the movements in their shareholdings. In a takeover situation, this is important information for everybody. In computing this shareholding, the investor must include both his direct interest and his deemed interest. In other words, he has to aggregate several items together - very likely. Direct interest is what he holds himself. But, if he is in a corporation, deemed interest will include shares held by related corporations, eg, subsidiaries and associates. This requirement to aggregate their direct and deemed interests is similar to the practices in the US, UK, Australia and Hong Kong. So, it is not just the Commonwealth jurisdictions. And there is a rationale, which is to improve the level of transparency by allowing the company and SGX to know who exercises effective control over the company's shares.”
“In some cases, there is very little variation in information provided from quarter to quarter. This applies especially to property investment holding companies. I understand that not all stock exchanges around the world require quarterly reporting from their companies. It is significant to note that the main board of the Hong Kong Stock Exchange does not require quarterly reporting. I did also mention earlier that imposing quarterly reporting requirement may affect our ability to sell listings in Singapore as a value proposition. In this regard, I would like to ask the Minister whether the Government has come to any decision on quarterly reporting requirements. Sir, quarterly reporting is just one example of how, in our effort to be transparent, we may have gone overboard. I will cite another example. The present practice in the industry requires companies that depart from the Code of Corporate Governance to give detailed explanations for its departure. In the present regulatory climate in Singapore, and being afraid of the rap on the knuckle, companies have gone to great lengths to explain every instance of departure from the corporate governance code. Such an undertaking is also thought to be unduly burdensome. This, unfortunately, demonstrates the carrying out of the desire to be transparent and accountable to the extreme. You will appreciate, Sir, that every endeavour to comply with the regulations will come with a price. In this regard, I would also like to ask the Minister whether the MAS could issue a further directive to specify the extent to which explanation is required for not complying with the Code of Corporate Governance.”
“Streamlining our rules and regulations would not only simplify our compliance procedures but would also help to bring down our costs and hence increase our competitiveness. While I applaud, Sir, the present initiative by the Government in moving to change our company law framework and regulatory regime to make us more efficient and competitive, I do wonder whether we are doing enough by just focusing on the subject so narrowly. Can we do better? Sir, we should remember that the issue of the cost of business, even from a company law perspective, goes beyond the subject matter of company law. A review should also cover other similar regulatory regimes as well. For instance, we should review the SFA and the listing rules of the Singapore Exchange with the specific view of reducing our cost, if that is the intent of the Government. In this regard, you will recall, Sir, that at the last Committee of Supply sitting, I did mention that the listing rules in Singapore, while they seek to create greater transparency in the market place, have in some ways contributed to the cost of doing business here. I am referring in particular to quarterly reporting requirements which listed companies in Singapore must comply with over time. I may have mentioned then that many listed companies here find quarterly reporting to be unduly burdensome and may not be entirely appropriate in some cases. Recently, I did a survey amongst my firm's existing clients to determine whether they agree with the sentiments as expressed. In this regard, Sir, I would like to express my interest in the matter as a solicitor and may have an interest in the outcome of this legislation. All who replied were unanimous in telling me that they find quarterly reporting to be burdensome.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of the Bill. The present first instalment of amendments to the Companies Act comes not long after the Government's announcement of its adoption of all 77 recommendations of the Companies Legislation and Regulatory Framework Review Committee (CLRFC). That it comes so quickly demonstrates, to many in the business community, the seriousness of intent on the part of the Government in trying to reform and review the companies regulatory and legislative framework in Singapore, just to make it relevant and to help enhance the value proposition of Singapore as a place to do business. Indeed, Sir, the focus on reducing the cost of business in Singapore could not have come at a more appropriate time. Against the backdrop of an already weakened economy, businesses in Singapore are presently bracing themselves for tougher times ahead. The effects of the deadly SARS virus are beginning to bite hard into our economy. Already, we are seeing how people have been laid off in the airline industry because of poor business prospects and taxi drivers having to take home less, because of a general public fear of contracting the virus while riding in a taxi. At a time like this, any move by the Government to reduce cost, and in particular business cost, is welcome news indeed. In this regard, the move to change the legislative and regulatory framework for companies in order to keep business cost low is a positive step in the right direction. For too many years, businessmen, especially those running small and medium enterprises, have been suffering under the weight of rising business cost and becoming uncompetitive in the process. It is indeed true that every regulatory hurdle that is put in the way of businessman is a cost to him.”
“Sir, may I ask the Minister for Health two questions? The first is whether or not the Government has in place a policy of freeing up information on SARS patients to the community for them to take the necessary preventive measures while being mindful that information of such nature is obviously very sensitive. The second question essentially relates to whether or not the Government has a policy of naming persistent defaulters of Home Quarantine Orders publicly, in order for the public to take necessary cognisance of such defaulters.”
“The Government has already been working to change the mindsets of Singaporeans that sports can provide an equally good alternative career path. Our insistence on some minimum academic standards, however, as was indicated recently, may count against this. The second point is less well known - that sports needs a large amount of funding. The Government should not be the only one to fund this national effort. We ought to have a commercial strategy to fund already popular sports that have a following in Singapore, and there should be concerted efforts to promote sports as a worthwhile corporate expenditure. Last, we ought to have more role models besides Fandi and perhaps Mr Tan Howe Liang. We need stars to bring attention of our people to sports and this is a quality that we can tap. This will not only serve as a public relations tool but also an easy way to inspire and encourage younger Singaporeans to identify with sports.”
“Sir, we recognise that sports excellence is an important means to help our people to bond as a nation. To the credit of the Government we have embarked on various programmes to that end. We have gone some way towards improving some selected sports, including table tennis, bowling and bodybuilding. Yet, despite our efforts, and with imported talents, that first Olympic gold medal still eludes us. We used to think that our ability to excel is constrained by the size of our population. However, that seems like a fallacious argument as there are many other nations that are of the size of Singapore, or even smaller, that have gone on to sporting glory, while all we can claim for our sporting glory is our own Mr Tan Howe Liang. He won our only Olympic medal more than 40 years ago. I would like to ask the Minister for a realistic assessment of our potential to achieve world-class status in selected sports. Are we not hindered in our approach by requiring sporting talents and potentials to be scholars as well? Will the Minister please tell this House what else the Government is planning to do to ensure that our vision of sports excellence will come to pass? Sir, we may take a leaf out of the Australian government's book. In the Australian Sports Commission Strategic Plan 2000-2005, it said that it will continue to improve programmes for elite athletes to ensure Australians remain in the vanguard of international sports. At the same time, it said that it was to develop new sources of income through effective marketing of products and services and an increase in support from the private sector. For the first point, I believe we are already on the right track.”
“Would the Minister agree with me that with legal baby drop, it reduces the chance of babies being left in places which are not frequented by people. Even in the statistics cited by the Minister for the other countries, there are legal baby drops which reduce the number of babies being abandoned at places that are not desirable. I did not say that, by legalising baby drops, we are going to do away with abandonment of babies. That is not the point. The point is that it gives the babies a safe haven for them to be legally placed and be put up for adoption. Assoc. Prof. Dr Yaacob Ibrahim: I do not necessarily disagree with the Member that if we have a baby drop, it may help. But we have to look at the experiences of other countries and look at the experience of the system that we have in place. The system we have in place, so far, is effective. Maybe there is a lack of publicity. That is why we will step up the publicity efforts to encourage mothers, who want to give up their babies, to come to the shelters. The statistics that I cited earlier show that the system works. So far this year, out of the five who have been abandoned, two have been found and the first one was still born. I agree with Mr Sin that one baby dying is one too many. We have to find a way to help them. We are confident that with the current system in place, we will be able to help all mothers who either want to give up their babies or whatever their choices may be.”
“That is precisely my point, is it not? By providing a safe place for the baby to be dropped will enhance the safety of the baby, rather than to leave things as they are at the moment where babies are just left off at public places.”
“Sir, how would not knowing the background of the mother endanger the baby any more than if she just leaves him anonymously somewhere else? Assoc. Prof. Dr Yaacob Ibrahim: Sir, at the end of the day, we have to look at both the welfare of the mother and baby. The mother must have been very, very desperate to abandon the baby. So, there must be something that we can do to help her to walk through the process. If you ask me, I would prefer the mother to keep the baby, because we want the baby to be raised in the comfort of his or her natural parents. If we can help them as a family, that would be a better outcome than just to leave the baby by the roadside, and for us to deal with the baby alone. I am not saying that if the baby is dropped, we are not helping the baby. We will. But together, with the mother, we can do a lot more to ensure that her family is being helped.”
“Okay, I will save this for another day. My second clarification is this. The Minister has said that legalising baby drops is going to endanger the baby more. I do not understand why. Perhaps the Minister can explain. Assoc. Prof. Dr Yaacob Ibrahim: Sir, our view is that, by having a baby drop, we may not be able to trace the mother nor know the background of the family nor what we can do with the baby. If the mother comes to our shelter, we can do a lot more. What I have been demonstrating this morning is that the system that we have in place is indeed helpful to both mother and baby. The statistics that I have given earlier this morning demonstrate that there is a system that can help the mother walk through the process. If the baby is dropped somewhere, it will be very difficult for us to trace the parents and help them through the process. But, at this point in time, Sir, if a baby is dropped, I would like to call upon the community to also help us. As I mentioned in my speech, every front door is almost a baby drop, so, the role of the community is also important to help us in this sensitive issue.”
“Would not the Minister therefore agree with me that the prospect of prosecution under other laws itself may serve as ---”
“I would like to thank the Minister for his reply. I have three points for clarification. The first point is that I would like the Minister to confirm whether or not I heard him right when he said that the Government will not prosecute a mother who, in desperation, decides to leave the baby at the appropriate centre, that is, all forms of prosecution and not just the act of leaving the baby behind. Will the Minister please confirm this? Assoc. Prof. Dr Yaacob Ibrahim: If a mother walks into the shelter, we will walk her through the process. If she is a Singaporean and she has not contravened any law, she will not be prosecuted. The act of coming to the shelter means that she is not abandoning the baby and, therefore, she will not be prosecuted for abandonment. But if she is a foreign worker or she is of any other citizenship, other laws will probably have to come into play.”
“They are called - No Apologies and WAIT (Why Am I Tempted). Both are designed to help young people develop responsible attitudes and character traits and to assist parents to work with their teenagers on sexuality issues. So, men whose partners are grappling with unwanted pregnancies must be more responsible and encourage and support the women to seek help. The community can help by being alert to pregnant women in distress. Parents can be good role models and be supportive if their children get into trouble. If we, each and every one, do our part, we can be a more caring community. More babies will be saved. Sir, I begun my response this morning to Members earlier by talking about babies, and ending it now by talking about babies as well. I cannot emphasise the importance of babies to Singapore more. The causes of falling fertility are many and complex, and it is of concern to us, as a country and as individuals. Our package of incentives and support programmes may take time for it to be effective. We may need to modify them along the way. I thank my parliamentary colleagues for their many suggestions, such as to look at policies of the Nordic countries, expand the infant care support and many other useful comments. We would certainly look into all of these to see how else we should approach this matter. This is a national problem. We need all your support to see how we can help resolve this together. May I now call upon MOS, Mr Chan Soo Sen, to reply to the second part of the cuts.”
“Will a change of legislation and the setting up of baby drops really stop the abandonment of babies? Countries that have implemented baby drops have not seen a decrease in baby abandonment. In the US, some see the "Baby Drops" as an encouragement to abandon the babies. According to a State Legislative report by the US National Conference of State Legislatures, the Baby Drops were not "receiving" as many babies as expected. There were still cases of abandonment in public places, even with the presence of "baby drops". Ms Ng spoke about the Safe Haven law in the United States. An article in the Straits Times last week (12th March 2003) had this headline "US safe haven laws fail to save babies". In the Los Angeles County, despite its Safe Haven law, 14 babies were found abandoned in 2001, and 11 of them died. Not a single woman that year took advantage of the Safe Haven law. In 2002, 10 babies were safely surrendered, but 13 were abandoned, eight of whom died, according to county statistics. Baby drops are only a piecemeal solution to unwanted pregnancies and they may have unintended consequences. Ms Irene Ng is right that we should not think of baby abandonment as only a woman's problem. We must educate the men too. If the men are more responsible and stand by the women they made pregnant, then the women are less likely to abandon their babies. Indeed, Sir, everyone has a part to play. Parents too have an important role in the education process. Last year, there were about 850 births among teenage mothers. We should be mindful not to tar all teenage pregnancies as `unwanted' pregnancies. However, besides MOE's sexuality programmes in schools, MCDS, together with community partners, has also implemented two sexuality education programmes for teenagers and their parents.”
“Moreover, there is no evidence to suggest that, by legalising abandonment at baby drops, desperate acts, such as the recent instance where a baby was found with the umbilical cord intact, would be stopped. Today, we have a system where those who step forward early are supported by social workers and given shelter, if necessary. There are many instances where both mother and baby have been helped this way and have moved on with their lives. The system does not discriminate, and will help all those who come forward, local or foreign alike. I assure Members that the help is given with great sensitivity and, in really desperate situations, nothing will compromise the safety and health of mother and child. Contrary to what Ms Irene Ng thought, I can assure her that there is no obsession about obtaining the biological information of the mother. The priority must always be the safety of the mother and the child. In fact, we walk her through the process and allow her, at her own time and own pace, to give us whatever information that she is prepared to share with us. 11.30 am Mr Sin Boon Ann has alluded to the point that for baby drops to be effective, they have to be easily accessible and known to those who are likely to use them. Sir, based on my staff's consultations with their American counterparts, the US experience continues to be contentious as to whether baby drops are a good approach or whether publicity focusing on engaging pregnant girls early in their pregnancy might be a safer approach for both the mother and baby. For baby drops to work, almost every front door has to be a potential baby drop, as those in desperation will not be in any frame of mind to go to designated places. That is why the role of the community and the public is important.”
“Even countries that have tried safe havens or baby drops, have not been able to stop abandonment and related deaths, either because the mothers are in no frame of mind to use such baby drops, or because they were not aware of them. Ours is an approach that seeks to help both the mother and the baby. Of course, it is best for women to seek assistance early, before the birth of a baby but, even if they do not, we can still help them after the delivery, if they feel unable to keep their child. It is never too late to come forward for help. We need to further publicise the system and, especially, the helplines and hotlines for pregnant women in distress. In this regard, my Ministry has made 24-hour helpline numbers readily available at the notice boards of Residents Committee centres. This is the flyer that we have put up in all the Residents Committee centres [indicating]. Anyone who is facing problems and needs support should tap into the care and counselling system. Confidentiality is assured for all who come forward for help, and we will increase our publicity efforts. There have been calls for legislative changes and to set up baby drops. Both Mr Sin Boon Ann and Ms Irene Ng have said that it is not for us to judge the morality of the parents who dump their children. Let me assure them again that if mothers come forward, they will not be prosecuted for abandonment. That is key. Let me also say that it is not so much a question of morality as much as it is a concern that we will inadvertently endanger the lives of more babies, if we legalise abandonment. By lifting the inalienable responsibility of parents to care for and protect their children, we risk the safety and lives of many more babies and children.”
“Since January 2003, two babies were abandoned and two were found dead. Of the two dead, we know for sure that one of them was stillborn; the Coroner's report on the second is still pending. Notwithstanding these clarifications, I share Members' concern that babies are involved. This is a highly emotive issue, and there are no easy answers. What we all share is that we want babies to be safe, and we also want to help the mothers as well. Indeed, our hearts go out to the babies and their mothers. The question is how to help both of them effectively. Firstly, pregnant women in distress can seek help. They must be aware that, if they come forward and say that they are unable to keep their babies, they will not be prosecuted for abandonment. We have a care and counselling system that has prevented desperate acts of endangering a baby's well-being. This system has worked. Last year, 515 enquiries on pregnancy issues were received through the hotlines. Of these, 33 pregnant women were helped at the shelters, 19 later gave up their babies for adoption, while the rest were helped to keep their babies. In assisting the pregnant women, the social workers walk through all the options with them, and support them all the way. This will ensure that the well-being of both the baby and the mother is taken care of. Secondly, Sir, there is a role for the community. Pregnancy takes nine months. A woman cannot go about her life unnoticed. Those around her can and should encourage her and even accompany her to come forward for help. Whatever the circumstances she faces, abandonment can never be the solution. She could alert someone, even a stranger, to hand over the child, if she cannot take care of the baby. Publicity about the help is also very important.”
“Thus far, my Ministry has not received any application for a 24-hour childcare centre licence. I assure the Committee that my Ministry will assess all applications carefully to prevent abuse, and that the developmental well-being of the children is not compromised. Sir, in addition to centre-based infant care, my Ministry has piloted the Family Day Care, which is home-based infant care with trained babysitters. This scheme allows housewives and retirees to care for babies or young children, and earn income in their own home. I believe Dr Lily Neo mentioned this yesterday. It could be a suitable option, particularly for infants and children under 18 months, as it provides care by one consistent caregiver in a home setting. Since my announcement last year that the scheme would be piloted by Southeast and Southwest CDCs, Northeast CDC has also joined in the pilot. So far, 600 care-providers and 300 parents have registered for this scheme. It is premature to consider accrediting the caregivers at this stage. However the three CDCs keep a record of those who have been trained. There are possibly many more models of care which can be explored to suit the needs of different parents. My Ministry welcomes more suggestions, and also encourages more organisations and enterprises to come up with innovative ideas and solutions to meet our childcare needs. Sir, many Members have asked also about what we are doing to strengthen families in Singapore. I will ask my Minister of State, Mr Chan Soo Sen, to respond to these questions later. Let me now turn to the subject of abandoned babies. I share the concerns of Ms Irene Ng, Prof. Ngiam Tee Liang and Mr Sin Boon Ann about the plight of abandoned babies. On average, five babies were abandoned each year from 1997 to 2002.”