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 11 of 20.
“This is because babies need a greater amount of individual attention. Staff are also specially trained for infant care. Because of this, the fees for infant care range from $650 to $1,500, which are higher than the fees for the older age groups. My Ministry recognises that the childcare subsidy may be insufficient when compared to the infant care fees. While I have mentioned earlier that the baby bonus may also be used to offset the infant care fees, we are currently reviewing the situation to ensure that services remain affordable for parents. Ms Irene Ng mentioned that when she surveyed her constituency, she found that the demand for infant care centres was high. The waiting lists at the existing infant care centres are also testimony that centre-based care can be a suitable option for some families. Ms Ng will be pleased to know that MCDS is looking at how to increase the supply of infant care across the island. MCDS has no objection, should operators want to operate their centres round the clock, if this is to meet the needs of parents working night shifts and irregular work patterns. However, our regulations state that no one child should remain in the centre for 24 hours or more continuously. Members would agree with me that a childcare centre should not be operated as a residential institution for young children. My Ministry takes the view that no baby or pre-school child should remain in centre-based care for the better part of 24 hours on a regular basis. Home care, at least for part of the day, and the opportunity to bond with one consistent caregiver, preferably a parent, is in the best interest of babies and young children. Our approach is consistent with the practices observed in other developed countries.”
“In fact, I would also urge all employers to play their part to help us address this national concern. Dr Lily Neo and Ms Irene Ng asked about childcare centres. They have indeed raised a highly pertinent point, for the availability and affordability of childcare are critical, if we are to encourage family formation. There are now 632 childcare centres providing 53,000 places, and the take-up rate is about 72%. Thus, there are enough places to meet demand at the moment. While we have plans this year to develop 50 more centres to provide an additional 3,500 places, we will only do so when the enrolment picks up. We will also encourage employers to set up workplace childcare centres but, ultimately, this will have to depend on demand. The childcare centre subsidy rate is currently $150 for working mothers who place their children in full-day care, and $75 for working mothers who place their children in half-day care. Non-working mothers who place their children in full or half-day care also enjoy a subsidy of $75. In this financial year, my Ministry has disbursed a total of $54 million of subsidies so far. I informed this Committee last year that my Ministry would look into a pro-rated childcare subsidy to mothers who need flexible childcare. I am happy to inform the Committee that my Ministry has introduced such a subsidy programme from January this year. As of 13th March 2003, 140 children are benefiting from the pro-rated subsidy. Dr Lily Neo and Ms Irene Ng have also spoken on infant care. I agree with them that more needs to be done to develop infant care. Presently, there are 13 infant care centres with 170 places. Centres that offer infant care have stricter requirements in terms of staff-child ratios.”
“From a survey conducted by my Ministry, 18% of couples met their partners at their workplace, while another 17% met them at school or university. Dr Maliki would thus be pleased to know that the SDU is pro-active, and will be rolling out a funding scheme by the new academic year, called Project Network to co-fund student bodies' activities aimed at promoting gender interaction and relationship-building skills. Some years ago, Mr Eddie Teo, Permanent Secretary in the Prime Minister's Office, was asked what he would like to say about the President's scholarship that he got. His last words on this were: Oxford was where I met my wife. A year or two later, when he was addressing a PSC seminar, he reminded the young crowd of potential scholars and their parents of the importance of balancing school and social life. He shared how he had bought a bicycle so that he could visit his wife, then his girlfriend, every day. His only lament was that the PSC refused to up his allowance, and thus he could only afford a pounds5 bicycle with no brakes and no lights! Perhaps, PSC knew better, for who needs a bright lamp when romance is in the air? I hope my fellow MPs will agree that socialising is indeed important, and it is important to balance school and social life, or work and social life. SDU and SDS help our singles get that balance. Given Dr Maliki's fervent interest in the subject, I hope I can count on his support and assistance to promote social activities in the university; so too Prof. Ngiam. Dr Jennifer Lee talked about the importance of institutions. I would call on the universities and institutes of higher learning to play an active role in facilitating social activities for their students.”
“So, we facilitate interactions through the SDU and SDS, introduce procreation measures to help couples to have more babies, and provide care services for the young ones, so that the parents can continue to build their careers. Mr Charles Chong and Dr Maliki have asked about the effectiveness of the Social Development Unit (SDU) and the Social Development Services (SDS). The SDU and SDS ran an operating budget of about $3.7 million in FY2002. Together, they have about 105,000 members. On average, about 2,500 social activities are run every year for over 74,000 participants. In addition, about 10,000 members actively participate in both the units' dating services. Sir, the proportion of married female graduates increased from about 44% in 1987, to 57% in 2001. Since its inception 19 years ago, I am happy to say that nearly 30,000 SDU members have gotten married. For SDS, more than 100,000 members have married since 1985. This is a success rate of about 55% of total SDS membership. Dr Maliki asked if we do review the effectiveness of our SDU programmes in view of the changing profile of singles. Indeed, SDU reviews its programmes regularly to attract the interest of the changing needs of each cohort of singles. Towards the end of 2000, SDU outsourced the management of its socialisation activities to Premier Club, a private company. Since then, many new dating programmes have been introduced, including Speed Dating, Blind Dates, and Zodiac Dates, which have proven to be very popular. This positive change is evidenced by a 20% increase in the participation from members who were previously inactive. I share Dr Maliki's concern about marriage not being a priority among his students.”
“Graduate women tend to start a family when they are 30 while those with post-secondary education are only slightly earlier, usually starting their family when they are about 29 years old. After all, multi-tasking is a favourite buzzword today, but when it comes to life goals, we seem to be single-mindedly single-tasking! Sir, those who wait longer would come across another barrier, and Dr Balaji has mentioned this earlier. This time it is mother nature. In a Straits Times' article on 3rd January 2003, Dr Christopher Chen from the Gleneagles Hospital estimates that 1 in 5 couples here face fertility problems. Conceiving at a later age reduces the opportunity to have more children as the fertility window is narrower. 11.15 am Sir, here I would like to cite my own personal example. I followed the model that I mentioned earlier. I met my wife in the US, got married, but both of us were studying and had our first child when I was 40 years old, after I had established my career in NUS and bought a home. We had our second child when I was 42 years old. If you ask me now whether we want to have a third child, my wife would say no, only because she is getting older. So, it is very difficult that, as we try to plan for our lives, we also have to understand that there are choices that we have to make and, as we make the choices much later, we actually reduce the opportunity for us to have a larger family. I came from a family of nine; I wish to have four. But how do we overcome this challenge? It is not easy, but we must try. As Mr Charles Chong rightly pointed out, there must be both monetary support and non-monetary incentives to help create a conducive environment for Singaporeans to have more children.”
“We, of course, have to bear in mind the culture and societal norms which enabled those policies to work in the countries I mentioned earlier. The challenge for Singapore is to replicate the successful policies of those countries in a different operating environment and culture. Sir, Dr Jennifer Lee also notes that immigration should not be the only solution to our falling fertility problem. I agree with her. Whilst we must continue to attract new citizens to top up our population, we must be mindful that many countries are also competing for them. My Ministry believes that the renewal of the local population will remain critical in Singapore. Mr Charles Chong has suggested that there be an Inter-Ministerial Committee called Making Singaporeans Committee to arrest the decline of our TFR. I would like to assure the Member that the two existing committees that he mentioned will continue to consult our community partners and the public, particularly young married couples, in reviewing our policies to achieve that much needed breakthrough. More Singaporeans are marrying later. In 2002, the median age of marriage was 26.2 years for women and 28.9 years for men. In 1990, it was 25.3 years and 27.9 years respectively. At the same time, not many married couples would have their first child immediately. And if we are lucky, some may even consider having a second or even a third. Sir, this phenomenon is understandable. Our young, especially those who go on to tertiary education, spend a considerable amount of time studying. But once they start working, they want to focus on building their careers.”
“While Milligan's study may not be the last word, it does serve to caution us against prematurely evaluating our policies. So let us not be in a hurry to throw the proverbial baby out with the bathwater. Singapore's baby bonus helps couples to defray part of the cost of bringing up their children. Couples can use the baby bonus to pay for infant care, childcare and kindergarten fees for all their children. As at the end of February 2003, some 31,800 children and 3,400 mothers have benefited from the Baby Bonus and Third Child Paid Maternity Leave schemes respectively. They received a total of $46 million under the Baby Bonus scheme. For the Third Child Maternity Leave, $18.8 million was disbursed for the same time period. Close to 90% of the families have co-saved into the Children's Development Account. Dr Jennifer Lee suggested that we study the European countries which have higher fertility rates. Indeed, some countries have bucked the trend of falling fertility. One example is Norway. Norway's total fertility rate has remained around 1.8 in the past 10 years. Another example is France. In 1993, France's total fertility rate was 1.66, but 10 years later, in 2002, total fertility rate had rebounded to 1.9, which is high among developed countries. The relatively high birth rates in both countries were often attributed to generous maternity and parental leave schemes, as well as family and child support. Interestingly, the CNA reported last month that Singaporeans living in the Cazaux Airbase in France are enjoying a baby boom! There are valuable lessons that we can learn. My Ministry is far from throwing in the towel. Instead, we are studying the policies implemented in those countries to see what we can learn and adapt to the local context.”
“Our approach has been to create a total social environment conducive to family and having children. While my Ministry is concerned with the fall in fertility rates, we think that it would be too hasty to conclude that these initiatives are ineffective. Family policy, however well developed, requires a strong and stable economic environment to achieve its purpose of a stable or high TFR. Let me quote the experience of another country to explain. Between 1990 and 1993, Sweden suffered from an economic crisis. The Swedish GDP declined by 5%. At the same time, the number of jobs fell by nearly 10%. Along with the economic recession came the decline in TFR, from 2.14 in 1990 to 1.59 in 1996. Since then it has hovered around 1.5. Economic cycles and economic prospects impact fertility rates. For all we know, our birth rates could have been worse if not for the schemes that I mentioned earlier. Let me quote another example. Quebec introduced a baby bonus scheme, formally known as the Allowance for Newborn Children in 1988. After an initial rise in TFR, Quebec's TFR started falling. Many thought the scheme had failed. And in 1997, the scheme was removed. However, an empirical study published in 2002 by Kevin Milligan, an Associate Professor in Economics from the University of British Columbia, has a new perspective. Milligan says that Quebec's fertility rate was worse than the rest of Canada throughout the 1980s before the baby bonus. But after the baby bonus was introduced, the fertility gap between Quebec and the rest of Canada was reduced by 86%. Milligan estimates that the baby bonus probably resulted in an extra 93,000 births, over and above the births that would have taken place even if there was no baby bonus. This represented a 14.5% increase.”
“Yes, I am finishing. I will just finish by saying that a life is a life no less, no matter what the colour is. I would urge the Minister to reconsider. The Acting Minister for Community Development and Sports (Assoc. Prof. Dr Yaacob Ibrahim): Sir, I would like to thank hon. Members who have spoken about our TFR and the need for us to look into the issue of abandoned babies. My Ministry defines its policy goal on family in a simple phrase: "More Strong and Stable Families". Short and sweet, to the point. Our policies are designed to be pro-family, pro-marriage and pro-children. Let me first talk about our policy goal of "More Families". Mr Charles Chong, Mrs Yu-Foo Yee Shoon, Dr Jennifer Lee and Dr Maliki have asked about our marriage and birth trends. Sir, Members must well know that the birth rates have not been very encouraging in the past few years. The number of resident births fell to 38,700 in 2002, compared to 39,300 in 2001 and nearly 45,000 in 2000. The total fertility rate has continued to fall, from 1.6 in 2000 to 1.41 in 2001. Last year, it hit a record low of 1.37. In year 2000, the Prime Minister announced the Baby Bonus and the Third Child Paid Maternity Leave schemes. Together with these two schemes, we also introduced marriage and paternity leave in the civil service, and extended the childcare subsidy to non-working mothers. In 2002, the child sick leave was made available to male civil servants and extended to children up to 12 years old. The package of measures we introduced in 2000 takes a holistic approach, providing not only increased financial support, but also measures to strengthen childcare options, work-life practices as well as public education.”
“We can require them to go for more regular check-ups to surface their pregnancy way before the full term. And this leaves us only with a very small segment of the population who could possibly get away with an unlawful pregnancy. My suspicion is that, as in the days when we tacitly allowed babies to be dropped at CHIJ, we may never have a greater number of abandoned babies than was the case previously. This baby drop was stopped sometime in the 1980s. I submit that allowing parents to anonymously leave their babies will allow for greater opportunity for counselling and advice since they will have the absolute assurance that the full weight of the law will not be thrown at them. We have to relook at our policies. The problem will not go away by denying the legality of baby drops. Think of the babies who have been abandoned in the previous year. One was left bloodied and naked, in a lift lobby at Sims Place. She was lying on newspapers and could have been easily mauled by stray dogs, attracted by the smell of the mother's blood fresh on the skin of the new-born baby. Another was left on the bench at the basement of KK Women's and Children's Hospital on a November evening. Yet, a third was found in a cardboard box in the lift landing of a block of flats in Tiong Bahru. Over the last month, we had two abandoned babies who died. How many more babies have to die before the Government will act? I do not personally think that there are compelling reasons not to allow legal baby drops for adoption. The Chairman: Mr Sin, could you finish your speech soon?”
“Sir, yesterday, my colleague spoke on the abandonment of babies and the need to provide a safe environment for them. I could not agree more because, each year, there are many couples who head for places elsewhere to look for babies to adopt. Yet, in Singapore, we have, on average, five or more abandoned babies each year. I was told there were five in 2002. Sir, there are many well-meaning Singaporeans out there who are more than happy to accept these children and we give them a safe and warm environment. They are prepared to give our babies a second chance. It is not for us to judge the morality of the parents who dump these children. There are reasons for wanting to abandon the babies, albeit anonymously. The law, as Prof. Ngiam has earlier pointed out, does not make it legal for anyone to abandon babies. They could be jailed for up to seven years and be fined. There are penal provisions like these, and we wonder why people are not leaving their babies at HDB doorsteps, or even offering babies for adoption at home. Sir, the Minister, in his recent reply, said that only a few jurisdictions allow for legal dropping of babies. I had wanted to ask the Minister if in these jurisdictions, the introduction of such legislation has resulted in an increase in the number of babies being abandoned. Even if it has, does it matter? The issue at hand is one of morality. Of course, it may be said that permitting mothers to drop their babies anonymously may encourage foreign workers to unlawfully get pregnant, and to choose baby abandonment as opposed to abortion as the preferred route to deal with the problem. I am referring here to the sex workers and work permit holders. The problem may be more apparent than real, as it can be dealt with administratively.”
“As the economy weakens and to preserve our social unity and bond, we must be prepared to cast our safety nets wider and be prepared to provide more assistance for the poor and needy. We must be prepared to recognise that what was previously a luxury 10 years ago may well be a necessity today. We may not be a welfare state, but certainly we are not a heartless society either. We must not be seen to be niggardly in extending our assistance to those who are deprived. If we did that, we will surely alienate our people. We have told our people to sing "Count on Me Singapore", we should send a clear signal to tell our people that they too can count on us fully in such difficult times.”
“Sir, in this House, there are many of us who see jobless residents every week. Sadly, some of these residents have been coming to our meet-the-people sessions for more than a year. I can safely say that, for them, it is not for want of trying that they cannot find jobs. We are faced with the prospect of prolonged weakness in our economy. Many Singaporeans who helped to build this country and carry the economy on their backs are now without jobs; and not employable because China and India have stolen their lunches. We have always told our people that we are not a welfare state and that public handouts can be a crutch, which removes the dignity of labour. Yes, our people bought that argument then because there was full employment in the economy, it would be easy to frown upon those who do not work for a living. However, where unemployment runs at 4.8% of the population and rising, it would ring hollow really to tell these people to go for training and retraining, as if there are plenty of jobs waiting for them. Some have said that there are more than 600,000 jobs taken up by foreigners against about 80,000 who are unemployed in Singapore. We can make these jobs available and the unemployment in Singapore would be solved. This is not a realistic suggestion as many of these jobs are in the unskilled sector with wages that cannot realistically be expected to sustain a full family with school-going children in Singapore. We have seen how a weak economy translates into empty stomachs and angry minds in a few neighbouring countries. Now more than ever, we need to ensure that our social cohesion is not undermined by our state of the economy.”
“Singapore became a member of the Security Council at the time of great change and great tragedy in the world. Madam, now that Singapore is no longer a member of the Security Council, should we allow ourselves to just fade away from the world stage or is there still a role for us? I think that Singapore has a good opportunity to show to the world that small states can make significant contributions to the UN. I would therefore like to ask the Minister what steps his Ministry is taking to ensure that Singapore remains involved in the UN. Are we likely to send more of our men to peace-keeping missions around the world? Are we willing to offer aid, be it economic or financial, to developing countries around the world? Will we play a substantial role in United Nations institutions such as the UNESCO and UNICEF? All these efforts would signal our maturity as a country and allow us to continue to play a useful role in the world stage. Just because Singapore is no longer a member of the Security Council does not mean that we should let our efforts and our attention slide.”
“The question before us today is: is ASEAN still relevant? I would say that ASEAN has been more successful as a political group than as an economic one, even if the increase in the number of members has made consensus and collective action more difficult. To get 10 to agree is certainly more difficult than getting six, bearing in mind that the 10 members are at very different stages of development and, thus, having rather different national interests. The fact remains that cross-border economic cooperation among member countries could have made better progress. Many of the proposed projects, including AFTA, have been very slow to take off and, in any event, have yet to prove the result that we can all cheer about. The issues look set to continue. Yet, now more than ever, there is great urgency for the countries of ASEAN to all pull together in the same direction, particularly in the area of economic cooperation, as we see new economies emerging in China and India that are sucking away all potential direct investments from the region. Unless ASEAN member countries can come together to speed up its economic cooperation and deepen its integration, ASEAN, as a regional group, could well be marginalised. I would like to ask the Minister whether the belief still exists that ASEAN is relevant and what further measures the governments in the regional grouping are taking to speed up this cooperation and integration to deal with the challenges ahead.”
“Madam, there was a time when ASEAN was a regional grouping much envied by many for its ability to demonstrate its cohesiveness and unity in collectively dealing with the world. Its success as a political organisation even inspired many to suggest that ASEAN should move to the next level to become an economic union to tap on its huge market potential of half a billion people. Many had held the hope that ASEAN could rival China as the next economic powerhouse. During the sixties and the seventies, ASEAN was seen as a bastion of Southeast Asia's stand against the onslaught of communism, both within and outside the region. As a consequence of the perceived common threat, the then members of ASEAN were able to rally together, despite real differences. This successful coming together to deal with common problems, particularly in international forums like the United Nations, served as a basis for Southeast Asian nations to come together. Since then, the common threat of communism has receded and, in the process, so has the rallying call for ASEAN to come together. Some would argue that not even the common threat of terrorism is able to galvanise the region to the same extent as before. In fact, the level of intra-regional cooperation that should have come about to deal with terrorism could have been better. Today, ASEAN does not appear to have quite the same polish. Indonesia continues to struggle with its economy. Each country within the grouping seems beset with its own problems, whether it be rising nationalism or rising unemployment. The low point of ASEAN came with the sacking of the Thai embassy recently by an angry mob in Phnom Penh, with the authorities standing by and looking like they did nothing to prevent it.”
“Will the Minister please clarify whether the past resolutions of the UN Security Council on Iraq specifically allow the US to take unilateral action in the event of non-compliance by Iraq on these resolutions? Secondly, as a matter of international law, would it be right for the US to take such unilateral action without the specific sanction of the UN?”
“We also run the risk of making ourselves unpopular with our own Muslim population, if we do not manage emotions carefully. Sir, when this war starts, if it does, it can be short and intense or long and bloody. But whichever way it turns, as leaders of a multi-religious country, we have our work cut out for us. Over the past year, we have seen how fragile our national bonds are, against the primordial calls of religion, faith and language. I would like to ask the Minister how else have we prepared our people now for whatever that lies ahead of us in relation to this Iraqi crisis.”
“Madam, I think none of us here is naive enough to believe that there will be a 15-0 Security Council vote in favour of military action against Iraq. Every day brings new revelations and new alignments. Singapore has said that it hoped that US would act according to UN resolutions. It has also signalled to Iraq to comply with these resolutions. Now, it looks like both sides are quite prepared to go it alone. As things stand now, the US has made it clear that it will go ahead with its own battle against Saddam, whether or not the UN is with them. At the same time, Iraq continues its dangerous cat and mouse game with the arms inspectors. My question to the Minister is this: if the US decides to strike out on its own, what will Singapore's response be? We have long been allies with the US. To speak against any unilateral action by the US and turn our backs would make us fair weather friends with the US. At the same time, Singapore relies on the UN to secure its position and to ensure its survival as a nation state. We have always advocated the need to comply with and to act in accordance with the decisions of the United Nations. If the US were to unilaterally act without the sanction of the UN Security Council, we would be caught in a conundrum. Should we break the rule and support the US instead? More importantly, although the US has repeatedly said that it is fighting this war against terrorism, it has had to do a lot of work on home ground to make sure that it does not risk a Muslim uprising in its own country. Singapore is in a predominantly Muslim region. To stand with the US against the wishes of the UN Security Council may mean that we run the risk of alienating our neighbours, no matter how many clarifications we may make.”
“Sir, like my colleague before me, I just want to say that some months have passed since the occurrence of the incident involving the collision between a commercial ship and RSS Courageous. We lost four brave daughters in that tragic and unfortunate event. And to this day, one is still missing in the open sea. Our hearts go out to the families. The questions that I would like to ask were touched on by Dr Ong in his comments earlier. In addition to those questions, I would like to ask whether or not this accident was a result of a systemic error or a human error. And if it was a systemic error, would the Ministry give us an assurance that such an incident will not happen again? I would like to have an indication from the Minister when the Ministry is likely to be in a position to give us a full account of what happened.”
“The point is that, with a declining GDP, the absolute amount of defence dollars that we can raise will diminish. On the other hand, weapon systems and platforms, especially the more sophisticated ones, do not come cheap. If we want to maintain the present level of efficiency and sophistication, does it mean that we will have to raise our cap on defence spending? And, if a reduction in defence spending is necessary, how will this affect our security standing? On the other hand, there are also those who would argue that, with a weaker economy, we should perhaps be looking at cutting back on our defence spending and using the savings for other projects. I personally do not favour any defence cuts. Giving our SAF the military edge should continue to be our utmost priority. Our SAF is our best assurance and guarantee for our long-term survival. Any compromise, even if it is for the short-term, is likely to have long-term ramifications on the effectiveness of the SAF as a fighting unit. We certainly do not want to end up like some other armed forces where the operational efficiency of the units was compromised as a result of lack of spending. What assurance can the Minister for Defence give this House that this will not be the case?”
“Sir, the prognosis for our economy this year does not seem very good. If we are lucky, we may end up the year with some positive growth. However, if we are unlucky - which seems likely if the war in Iraq continues to turn out to be a long and prolonged one - there is a possibility that we may well end up the year in negative territory. Whatever it is, we have been told that even if the economy recovers, as a mature economy, we can expect our GDP to grow at best only between 3% and 4% or perhaps 5% annually. This is a far cry from days past when Singaporeans were used to our economy hitting double-digit growth. In fact, it was because of these double-digit growth rates that we were able to quickly build a modern and credible SAF, armed with some of the most technologically sophisticated equipment and weapons. Despite our strong economic growth, the Government has always exercised self-restraint on defence spending by capping it at 6% of our GDP. This has worked well for us, as we have never had to exceed the cap that was imposed. There is no denying that our policy on defence spending was the correct thing to do, as it helped to ensure the survival of a small state like Singapore. In the words of some, that up to 6% of our GDP spending is on defence is like a premium that Singaporeans pay for insurance on security. Few would deny that the money was well spent. Many defence analysts have looked at and come to the conclusion that the SAF is one of the leading armed forces in the region. That the SAF is a necessity is not in issue. Going forward, however, the question is, whether in the light of the falling GDP which we are likely to be faced with, we should increase the percentage cap on our defence spending in relation to our GDP.”
“While our people here will try to go about life as normally as possible, there will always be this fear and concern at the back of their mind that an explosion could take place in the backyard. This has given them much anxiety. In fact, I know of many Singaporeans here who are beginning to avoid places that are frequented by the expatriates. Against the present backdrop of the security situation in Singapore, I would like to ask the Minister for Defence whether the Government has taken additional measures to ensure the security of our people, and whether more may not be done to make sure that the possibility of a terrorist incident taking place in Singapore is almost non-existent. Additionally, I would also appreciate it if the Minister could enlighten this House on the extent to which ASEAN member countries have improved on their cooperative framework on intelligence sharing since September 11. Mr R. Ravindran: Sir, I would like to ask the Minister for Defence what is his assessment of the threats and vulnerabilities of the Singapore defence forces. In particular, I would like to ask the Minister to highlight the challenges which are posed to Singapore's security in the light of events unfolding in Northeast Asia and Iraq, and also in the light of the continuing challenge being posed by terrorism in Southeast Asia.”
“Sir, the September 11 terrorist attacks in the United States have redefined the nature of security risks in Singapore. Far from playing soldiers in training to deal with enemies in a conventional warfare, the discovery of a sinister plot by the JI to undermine peace and security in Singapore through a number of terrorist operations drives home the message that the war against terrorism has arrived at our doorsteps. As a consequence of their discovery, much adjustment in the daily routines of Singaporeans had to be made. We see, for instance, uniformed men bearing assault rifles patrolling important establishments, such as our ports and airports. It has now become more inconvenient for the public to enter civic buildings. In fact, as an MP, coming into this House, I have had to have my car searched each time I enter this building. For many Singaporeans, such inconveniences are a small price to pay for security. From the discovery of the JI terror plot in Singapore, it would appear that Singapore is now at the frontline of this battle. The fact that we are a close ally of the United States merely makes Singapore a prized target for these potential terror attacks. To be sure, these attacks are not just confined to bombing acts of terror, but include other forms of low-intensity attacks as well. These include biological and chemical threats as well. Soon, the United States will attack Iraq, if the pattern of Iraq's cat-and-mouse game continues. When that happens, one can expect the level of security threat to heighten. The resultant state of tension would unfortunately give rise to a siege mentality among our people.”
“On the other hand, companies that Singapore promoters are targeting at are those in India and China where precisely the culture of corporate governance and disclosure requirements may not be as mature as those in Western countries. In such a situation, we may well have to tweak our rules a little without compromising the integrity of the listing process. In fact, stock exchanges that understand this difference would have a clear advantage over Singapore. It may be necessary for the Singapore Exchange and MAS in such instances to exercise greater flexibility and hand-holding to help these companies to meet our listing standards rather than to play the part of a mere regulator and enforcer. In this regard, the MAS and the Singapore Exchange should play a role similar to the EDB in actively wooing and courting suitable foreign companies to list in Singapore. If they play a more active part, I believe our record of Chinese and Indian companies listing here could well be better than it was previously. In fact, I am given to understand that last year we did not have a single Chinese company listed on our Stock Exchange, and that shows how difficult it is to get these companies to come here. I would therefore like to ask the Minister whether more could be done to encourage foreign companies to list here. Perhaps it may be timely for us to do an ERC-type review of the securities industry to consider how Singapore can position itself as a centre for capital market activities in this part of the world.”
“Those of us who are involved with listed companies will attest to the fact that public reporting is an added expense that takes up quite a substantial part of the management's time and professional resource, and certainly this is one negative factor that will well put off prospective issuers. The question is, whether we have considered if there are alternative ways of putting out information without making it compulsory for all companies to report on a quarterly basis. Additionally, under the new legislative framework, forecast financial statements in the prospectus must be backed by an expert opinion as to the reasonableness of its assumption. While the policy is well-meaning, it is unfortunate that the policy makers did not fully appreciate whether there is anyone in the market who is prepared to assume the role of an expert. In fact, after it was introduced, no one, even the accountants, was prepared to assume the role of the expert. After a while, some accountants were prepared to provide such an opinion, albeit at a price. Some have been known to ask for a fee of as high as $240,000 for a simple written opinion. Needless to say, many have been put off by the potential additional expenditure. Again, this is another example of policy makers making policies without fully appreciating the cost implications on the ground. Secondly, in drawing up our regulations on securities, we have sought to benchmark our standards against the best practices in the world. These practices are to be found in the West, in London and New York. However, these are established in a more mature jurisdiction that understands the culture of corporate governance and disclosure requirements.”
“Sir, let me first of all declare my interest in the subject matter as a solicitor engaged in this area of practice. For Singapore to play an important role as an international finance centre it is crucial, among other things, to maintain itself as an attractive place for good quality companies in the region to list. Foreign listing of such companies helps to add gravitas to our Stock Exchange and also encourage liquidity and higher level of investment activities in the capital market. However, the strategy of attracting foreign companies to list in our capital market is not ours alone. The Singapore Exchange competes directly with home exchanges in countries where these companies are domiciled, but also with the more established exchanges like Nasdaq and Hong Kong Exchange. These more established exchanges, with a much higher level of market capitalisation than that of the Singapore Exchange, obviously have an advantage over us. In order to compete, Singapore must stand out from the other exchanges. To do that, there is a need to measure our listing environment against several yardsticks. Firstly, the relative cost and inconvenience of getting a company listed, and to stay listed, can be rather prohibitive. To be fair, the listing cost in Singapore is still cheaper than Hong Kong, although we are more expensive than Shanghai. However, investors interested in listing in Singapore would soon realise that there are inherent difficulties involved. To mention a few, under our present corporate governance code, listed companies in Singapore must now provide quarterly reporting as part of its obligations for greater transparency.”
“The MP's undertaking is a response to a call to public service. We all make personal sacrifices in the spirit of wanting to serve the people and it would be unrealistic or even naive to expect any of my colleagues here to make total sacrifices. We want good people in Parliament and for good people to serve. Why should we cut back just to save a few million dollars on MPs' allowances if the consequence is a weaker Government? Think of the billions that would be lost if the Government was weak. I would like to remind Mr Raj that MPs are already making the sacrifice when the Government decided last year that the allowance would be taxed, and not to mention the reduction to the allowances. To the credit of my colleagues here, no one protested because we felt that it was the right thing to do. At a time like this, we should be focusing on the bigger picture than just to quibble about who gets what. I would like therefore to ask the Prime Minister whether or not there are plans to change the composition of Parliament in the light of the state of the economy.”
“Sir, Mr Conrad Raj's article on "Time to relook at MPs, Mayors" in the recent publication in Streats generated some public interest. In his article, Mr Raj wondered whether it is time to reduce the number of MPs in Parliament and thereby save on the expense. The question is whether Parliamentarians are in excess. With due respect, Sir, I do not think so. The starting point of all democracy is that people must effectively have a say in the decision-making process and be able to participate in it. Given the practical difficulties of getting everybody in the same place and having a say at the same time, they then choose their representatives. In this arrangement, the ultimate number of representatives is really a function of what can physically and practically be accommodated. Democracy therefore must proximate towards an ideal of more representation rather than fewer representation. If you ask me, there can never be enough representatives in Parliament. For the record, it should be noted that in 1959, against a population of 1.5 million, we had 51 MPs. In 2001, against a population of 4.1 million people, we only had 84 MPs. You will see therefore that although the population has increased by more than 2.5 times, the number of MPs did not increase by the same margin. Perhaps the real beef in Mr Raj's argument is that we should be saving money on MPs' allowances. This is a silly suggestion. Why not have fewer newspapers and journalists? Perhaps there are too many journalists, which explains why they are looking hard for issues to justify their job and their salary. If the numbers are reduced, newspapers can save money for their shareholders. I will say it once again. The office of the MP is not an office of profit or gain.”
“Rather, we should boldly enter into such areas and add value by creating world-class companies with world-class brand names out of opportunities that we are Sir, in all my years, I have never seen the mood on the ground to be so despairing and despondent. It is dispiriting for our people to wake up in the morning, to learn of hundreds of fellow Singaporeans being made redundant by the HDB or PSA. How many more will have to lose their jobs before our economy recovers, if it recovers? How many more middle-aged workers can we employ under the present climate? In this crisis, what should stand out is our ability to inspire the confidence of our people through our leadership. We should provide our people with a very clear roadmap on how we are going to navigate out of our present structural economic problems. Making broad statements about what we are going to do is not going to add any more confidence to the people. As I have said before, we should continue to provide sharper focus on our strategies. For me, I know where we should be heading. I would say once again that we should continue to build a strong external wing by investing in or acquiring world-class companies with world-class brand names, and leveraging on these companies to help us build our own global brand names. If we could do that, and do that successfully, we could then afford to have some inefficiency in our domestic economy by subsidising employment for Singaporeans who are not able to adapt to the employment demands of the new world economic order. Subject to the comments above, I support the Budget Statement. 1.15 pm”
“How many startups we want to nurture, facilitating the growth and expansion of such businesses? This approach will give the exercise a stronger focus, enable us to offer more assistance where assistance is needed. Our strength is in our ability to work towards the long term, including investment, education and training. There is no reason why the ERC Report cannot aim for such concrete outcomes. This brings us back to the question that we have been grappling with over the years. How far should Government be involved in business? Leaving aside our usual gripes about the GLCs, I believe that there is still a role for Government in business. As in the past, our Government should continue to provide leadership in strategic areas where the private sector does not have the resources or the ability to venture into. Our Government should continue to divest its holdings in the private sector, businesses that can be handled by our businessmen. However, our Government should not cease to provide initiative in other areas where the leadership of which would help us with the crucial need to successfully build up our second economic wing. I do hope that, in venturing abroad, we would have learnt our lessons from the past and avoid making the same mistakes as before; not least of which is our Government's habit of getting civil servants with little or no commercial experience to drive such initiatives. What I have advocated for is a slight departure from the yellow pages rule. We should not be afraid of going into businesses that already exist locally.”
“This is due to a whole host of factors, which included, among other things, the country backtracking on its labour reforms. Over the years, New Zealand's economy has receded to such an extent that it could not now even afford to maintain a combat wing for its air force. If you went to New Zealand today, you would not see many signs of physical wealth, which often in Asian context is measured by the number of Mercedes Benzes on the road. Singapore does not have to go the way of New Zealand. Unlike New Zealand, Singapore has a strong political will to see through the restructuring. We will not resile from taking politically tough decisions. Yet, political will may not be enough to see us through our present difficulties. We need to have clearer and more defined markers; which brings me now to the point about the ERC Report. While few would deny the logic of the proposals in the ERC Report, one could arguably say that the devil is in the detail as to how the Government is going to go about its task. The present Budget Statement has given us a broad indication of the steps that the Government is going to take. However, it has been said that we should perhaps have a sharper focus. I have earlier sought to define a more specific strategy of focusing on branding and intellectual knowledge as part of the strategy of building a knowledge economy as a driver for Singapore's future. More, however, can be done. For instance, we can set clear goals for the next 10 to 15 years. It is not enough just to say that we will remake our economy and make it a pretty slogan. We ought to have specific measurable performance indicators, for instance, looking at how many companies we want to bring global. How many GLCs are going to privatise?”
“While that may be true in general, there is no comparison when the argument is scrutinised more closely. It would be true to say that social benefits generally tend to make a person lazy and a sloth. However, what we are speaking here is to give a man back his dignity by giving him work that he would not otherwise be given, but for the intervention of the state. I know that such a policy may not satisfy in the longer term the requirement of economic efficiency. However, the point of the matter is that we do not need our domestic economy to be efficient all the time if our external economy is powering away strongly, such that it allows us this option. These structurally unemployed workers are still Singaporeans, and we will still have to carry them. Rather than give them handouts, which we have a duty to do if they are truly down, it may be better to subsidise them indirectly through employment. Sir, we are now at what most would consider the most significant crossroads of our nation's history. We are faced with having to make choices that would decide our people's fate. If we take the wrong path, the outcome could well be very different. The one salutary lesson that we have before us is New Zealand. Like Singapore, New Zealand was very much at the crossroads since the mid-80s. New Zealand also realised the need to restructure its economy and to raise its growth rate. It pointed to the need to boost training, promote entrepreneurship and facilitate new information technologies and strengthen economic fundamentals. These are clear mantras for growth which are easy to spout. Yet, the reality in the eyes of many, New Zealand has failed to achieve the results that it aims for.”
“The way forward for Singapore is to consider its comparative advantage rather than its competitive advantage. Singapore's strength has always been its well-qualified English-speaking younger generation of the post-independence people and the quality of its public service. Additionally, the fact that it is small also means that it is nimble and could transform itself quite easily. Clearly, Singapore can be a leading centre for research and development and brand building and development. The overall total licensing market is estimated to be some $300 billion a year. If Singapore cannot aspire to clinch even 5% of that share of the market, we might as well give up any pretensions about being a global industrial nation. If we are able, Sir, to develop strong global brand names, we would be able to build up a strong external economy, which will then give us much room to be inefficient in our domestic economy. For instance, we can earn enough more from our external economy to consider some form of subvention or fiscal incentive to encourage the employment of those who are structurally unemployed, especially the middle-aged workers. For them, we do not have to measure their efficiency against the workers from countries where cheap and untrained labour exists in abundance. The unit cost of these unskilled middle-aged Singaporean workers can then be matched more attractively with the support of our Government. This will provide employers here with a greater incentive to hire local employees as opposed to foreign employees. Sir, I know that the Government does not always welcome any suggestion of public subsidy, in whatever form. The conventional wisdom is that public subsidy robs the incentive from individuals to work and to improve themselves.”
“The better you are able to market and position your products and services, the better it is for you to cream off more fat for your bottom line. Everyone can manufacture a PC, it is only a question of unit cost production to stay competitive. But not everyone can create a Dell or a Compaq brand name that sells around the world. In fact, most Dell computers are manufactured and shipped out to China; but who makes the big profits? The Chinese are fast recognising the importance of the game and will soon play catch up. We, in Singapore, still have the advantage of a name that the world trusts. We should capitalise on it or run the risk of being marginalised and lose the advantage that we have. Sir, I note the affirmation of our Government that manufacturing will continue to form an important underpinning of our economy. I would support the affirmation, provided that the manufacturing activities that we support would allow us to take advantage of our comparative advantage in relation to China and the other emerging economies. I would question whether or not we are better off leaving manufacturing to the others in most instances. The logic of the globalisation argument, as we are all aware, lies in the fact that labour and capital in an increasingly open world economy would always gravitate towards places that are most cost effective through sheer market forces. It could well be that, in many of our traditional industries, it may not be more efficient for Singapore to keep them. And I would be so bold as to predict that, in the next 10 years, many of our contract manufacturing facilities, including those that are presently found in the electronics sector, will eventually be relocated to China and other places.”
“Just think, if he did not have such an opportunity, he would probably be left selling his clothes in some run-down plaza in Orchard Road and the world would have passed him by without noticing him. And of course, would his clothes sell for the prices that he is now selling? Who would be the bigger loser in the long run? Singapore or the boy? We must pay more attention to brand building and brand management. The question is: how? Sir, in my previous speeches, I had made some suggestions on approaches. The first would be to strategically acquire or acquire substantial stakes to enable board representation in companies with very strong global brand names. In doing so, we not only acquire global companies that would help contribute to our total revenue but, if managed, would allow Singaporeans the ability to have a deeper and better understanding about the ways to international branding and marketing. Secondly, I note from the ERC Report that the proposal was made in respect of the setting up of an IP academy. While I welcome the establishment of such an academy, I am just concerned that, first, the approach taken by the academy may just be too academic and may not deal with the practical difficulties of managing intellectual properties. Secondly, the academy may just be another institution that is divorced from the reality of industry to be effective. Given the broad reach of the subject of intellectual property, I do hope that the academy would also devote much attention to the subject of brand building and brand management which, I would like to emphasise yet again, has not been given enough serious policy consideration that it deserves. At the risk of being simplistic, the world of business is very much about branding and selling.”
“Nike and Double Flying Wheel, which do you think will sell if they are both priced the same? Nike is not in the business of manufacturing. They are quite happy to leave this to others. They are in the business of branding and selling and creating in the minds of the consumers a certain desire of wanting to own and use their products. By doing that, they have added much more value to just ordinary shoes. I do not believe, Sir, that a pair of Double Flying Wheel shoes should be any worse off in quality than your Nike. Why do people choose Nike? There are numerous reasons. And this is not a forum for us to go into these reasons. However, I will just dwell on one. I believe it has to do with the American brand name. There is somehow a certain cache in the minds of most consumers that if the product came from America, it must be of a good quality. For the same reason, we see in some advertisements that specific mention is often made of some consumer electronic items being from Japan. Sir, people I have spoken to tell me that Singapore is not America or Japan, and that it would be impossible for a boy from the backwaters to make it big in the city. I used to think that was the case. However, over the years, we come across numerous examples of how a small and provincial company, or even an individual, was able to take on the world and the world became his oyster. I cheered recently, when I read of how a local Singaporean boy was able to build a name for himself by selling his line of clothes in competition with the big fashion houses in Paris and New York; and is able to claim Nicole Kidman and the late Princess Diana as his clients. This boy fortunately came from a family who is able to provide financial support for his dreams.”
“In Singapore, we have always prided ourselves in having a brand name that is instantly recognisable and respected the world over. We can always leverage on this to charge a premium for our products and services. And it is this brand name which I believe that will hold the key to our future survival. The way forward for our country is not to take China on in this competition game, but to see how we can lean on our unique qualities of being a well-run, hardworking and honest English-speaking society to ensure our future survival. What do I mean? Sir, please allow me to take a leaf from the humble shoemaker. On a value chain, the common perception is that shoe-making and selling does not quite occupy the same space as bio-medical science or rocket engineering science. Yet, in terms of profitability and size of global reach, there is huge potential in this business. Take Nike, for example. No one would deny that Nike today is a global multinational whose products can be found in almost every nation on earth. Most people would have either heard of the brand or even own a pair of Nike. There are many people out there, including many young boys and girls who would give a limb for a pair of Nike. They are not able to own it because a pair of Nike shoes is just too expensive for many. And those who can afford it will not think twice about paying premium money for it. Yet, we know that Nike outsources the manufacturing of its shoes to the sweatshops in China, Vietnam and Indonesia. The factories that churn out these shoes for Nike have the capability of producing similar type shoes. The main difference is that they cannot put the famous swoosh mark on it, but some other brands, like Double Flying Wheel.”
“Sir, last week I was in Shanghai for a seminar to promote listings on the Singapore Stock Exchange. The seminar was held in a modern international 5-star hotel located at the rather fashionable Bund in Shanghai. More than a hundred interested parties attended, each of whom was carefully screened ahead of time to ensure that they are serious and profitable participants. The hall was packed. Those who attended took earnest notes and looked very serious about going overseas to raise their profile and, perhaps, capital. Perhaps, this reflects the strong vibrancy of the increasingly powerful Chinese economy. This was not only evident in the seminar room, but was clearly visible in the streets, shops and eating-places in the city. However, that was not what struck me. What struck me was a conversation I had with a local accountant who was present at the seminar. He told me that the Chinese recognise that they cannot go on competing on cheap labour and land alone. He recognised that in order for China to continue powering away, they must strive to move up the value chain and build on local brand names that are recognised internationally. Far from just wanting to be the back-lane sweatshops for some other people's inventions, they have strong aspirations to be the Toyotas, IBMs and Panasonics of the world. My conversation with the Chinese accountant made me realise how fast and how aggressive the Chinese are in trying to scale the ladder of economic development to become a developed nation, rivalling the US in every aspect. And I shudder to think of what this would all mean to Singapore, its economy and the future of its people. The truth of the matter is surely that the gap of comparative advantage that Singapore has over competing and emerging economies is fast eroding.”
“Mdm Deputy Speaker, I would like to go back to the question of the sanctity of contract which, unfortunately, Rais Yatim does not seem to have a basic understanding of. Can the Minister comment on the Malaysian accusation that Singapore has failed to abide by the agreement which was made at independence, offering the right of the Malaysian military to maintain facilities in Singapore? And related to that question, I understand that there was an issue on revised rental. Is there no contradiction when Singapore raised the rental of land for KD Malaya to reflect market rates while objecting to the revision of the price of water to reflect to market rate?”
“Will the Minister be able to tell this House which countries have actually opted for this scheme which allows babies to be legally dropped? Assoc. Prof. Dr Yaacob Ibrahim: Sir, baby drops are currently available in United States and Germany. And in the United States, they are legalised in the States of Texas, New Jersey, New York, Connecticut and Indiana. In Germany, they legalised baby drops in the year 2000. Despite having such baby drops in America, it has continued to be a controversial issue among the media and people in the social service agencies. 2.00 pm”
“To succeed, we must be mindful that, as in our fight against the Communists, we have to win the hearts and minds of those involved. For our Muslim compatriots, moderation in the practice of their faith must continue to remain the cornerstone of their belief, if we want to maintain racial and religious harmony in Singapore. For the non-Muslims, nursing unfounded prejudices and engaging in discriminatory practices is a recipe for disaster. Let us not forget that the flag which represents this country uses the red colour to signify the universal brotherhood of man. It should not matter that we are Muslims, Christians, Buddhists, Hindus or even free-thinkers. What matters most is that we are Singaporeans dedicated as a people towards building a country that we can all be proud of. The day we forget this principle would be the day when we go down the slippery slope of strife and racial tension. If that happens, Singapore will just be another sad statistic of a dream shattered. The cost is high, if we do not succeed in this battle. We must therefore strengthen our resolve to do whatever it takes, and to take whatever to do, to vanquish terrorism and all its attendant evil. We have no choice on this. Sir, I support the motion.”
“This has resulted in low participation rate for the secular communal activities among the Muslims at our grassroots organisations. Just look at the participation rate among the Muslims on the activities organised by community centres in Singapore today. I dare say that, without the benefit of a proper study, the number of Muslims participating in these activities can be improved, and the low number certainly is not welcomed. This withdrawal, coupled with the recent events, certainly provide much room for unhealthy prejudices and misgivings among Singaporeans. For social cohesion to strengthen, Muslims in Singapore should not be seen to be setting themselves apart from the rest of society. Instead, they should be seen to be actively engaging the wider society in various activities in order to build more bridges so that whatever prejudices the others may have will disappear. Firm friendships and bonds must be engendered that go beyond the market and workplace. Token visits to each other's places of worship as an outer sign of promoting racial harmony should be expanded to include active interaction and exchanges. As loyal Singaporeans, we should make it a point to develop long-lasting and deep friendships with people who are not of the same colour of skin or of the same creed. Only then will we be able to disabuse ourselves and perhaps others of whatever prejudices that may have previously festered in our minds. Sir, this debate is not only about combating terrorism and the Jemaah Islamiyah in particular. I do not deny that these issues are important. This debate is also about the larger context within which the battle against terrorism is fought. This battle goes beyond the hunt for and the arrest of key JI or even Al-Qaeda suspects.”
“Muslim leaders in Singapore, whether they are politicians or religious leaders, operate within the constraints of a multi-racial society. It may not be possible for them at all times to impose on the larger society the specific demands of their faith. The issues of wearing the tudung in schools and the restriction of sale of alcohol are but some examples. The perceived inability to advance their specific demands arguably may compromise their moral authority and legitimate standing, in the eyes of the followers, to talk about matters of the faith. If this happens, the message from the moderate leaders to the Muslims to be moderate may not enjoy the same support and standing as one would have hoped for. The feared outcome is that despite the message for moderation, there may well be Muslims who will continue to nurse a silent respect for the Muslim terrorists who are prepared to die for their cause, thus lending a fertile ground for other Muslim teachers to teach otherwise. Obviously, in this battle, the State cannot be seen to have an active part in defining what moderate Islam is or should be, and neither the religious teachers who are expected to lead the way be seen to be agents of the State. Thirdly, social cohesion, even in the context of moderate Islam, cannot be strengthened if, as we have seen in recent years, the mosques continue to increasingly serve as a focal point for the Muslims in Singapore. As an MP on the ground, I cannot help but notice that many Muslims are increasingly retreating into the comfort zones of the mosques for their religious and other needs as well. I can only attribute this to the recent resurgence in Islam in Singapore, and this has inspired many to turn to the mosques.”
“When we speak of moderate Islam, one question which arises is: who defines what is moderate Islam? And will the people, on whose shoulders lie the responsibility of defining moderate Islam, enjoy the legitimacy of authority within the target audience, or are they seen as just an extension of the regime that does not enjoy their trust and confidence? The Muslims in Singapore, as indeed Muslims all over the world, are subject to competing influences and doctrines. Just the other day, we read in the papers of how a fiery cleric was asked to leave London because of the inflammatory content of his sermon. Charismatic clerics, like this one, can pose a danger to society simply from their ability to influence masses through the power of their oratorical skills. If you have heard one of these fiery clerics preach, you would have known how persuasive and influential these preachers can be. Likewise, in Singapore, MUIS is concerned about the type of preachers who get invited to address the local congregation. We, too, recognise how much damage a radical and persuasive cleric can do to our social fabric. In the Internet age, we live in a borderless world. No amount of restriction and restraint is going to prevent radical Islam from spreading among and influencing the local people. Ultimately, whether the people who preach moderation will prevail will depend on their legitimacy in the eyes of the faithful. To the extent that these moderate leaders command the following and respect of the Muslims, there should not be any problem in holding the radicals at bay. However, the ability of the moderate leaders in a cosmopolitan society in holding the Muslims together will come under increasing pressure as the wave of fundamentalism continues to sweep across the Southeast Asian region.”
“Over the years, we recognise that the social and political stability in Singapore can only come about if all ethnic groups moved together in reaping from the benefits of the progress in this country. Indeed, one underlying objective for establishing Mendaki is to ensure that the Malay Muslims in Singapore are not left behind as the country prospers. After more than 35 years of independence, one can confidently say that the gaps between the Malay Muslims and the other ethnic groups are closing. However, more can be done. There is still the perception that we are still some way off in all ethnic groups being on par on the economic terms. Sir, unfortunately, the disparity among the various ethnic groups tends to sharpen in focus in times when the economy moves into prolonged recession as our economy seems to be heading. The next few years will prove to be equally challenging as we struggle to recover from our present round of sluggish economic performance. Until then, there will be many who will be unemployed. Such conditions tend to reinforce the "them and us" mentality. If we are not careful, this may serve to deepen the fault lines in our society. Certainly, it does not help that some irresponsible parents could not have chosen a worse time to bring up the tudung issue. When the economic tide is down, the jetsam and the flotsam suddenly become all the more obvious for all to see. Such conditions provide the fodder with which to fuel the fire of extremist exploitation. If the people, by and large, are led to believe that their present plight is due not so much to structural economic problems but to the result of unfair Government policy, we have a problem on hand that the arrest of a few key trouble-makers is not going to resolve. This brings me to my second point.”
“It is for this reason and for the sake of our social cohesion that we issue a call to our Muslim compatriots to be moderate in their faith. Sir, whilst nobody would deny the unassailable logic of the need to be moderate, there are several issues associated with the call that should perhaps be discussed further. First, the battle against terrorism is not confined simply to just arresting a few key suspects and dismantling the JI network. It goes beyond that. As with our battle against Communism, it is really about the battle for the hearts and minds of the people. A fertile ground for the spread of extremist ideas would always exist where social conditions permit. Communism thrives and spreads against a backdrop of abject poverty. The need for moderation is a function of the extent to which the affected social class perceives itself as being marginalised and disadvantaged. In other words, the greater the perception and reality that they are not beneficiaries of any progress or trickle of wealth that comes through the system, the greater is the likelihood of those affected, rejecting the legitimacy of the established regime and its leadership, and the need for moderation in their conduct. The bombings in the Philippines and Indonesia grew as much out of conditions of social desperation as it did of political and religious convictions. Let me put it another way. If the Philippines and Indonesia were in the same economic league as Australia and Japan, would the same extent of bombing incidents have taken place? In Singapore, we cannot say that our Muslim compatriots are a deprived group. However, the same cannot be said at the same time that there are no disparities in the socio-economic conditions among the Malay Muslims that there is no reason for us to be concerned.”
“In Malaysia, PAS, as an Islamic-based political party, has been gaining much political grounds in recent elections; and this despite their open espousal of eventually transforming Malaysia into an Islamic state based on the Syariah laws. Similarly, in Indonesia, Islamic-based political organisations, such as the NU, can often turn the political tide in an electoral contest. The influence of these organisations in Indonesia has grown quite dramatically in recent years and is a force to be reckoned with. Even in Singapore, the force of Islamic fundamentalism has not avoided us. That we see some Muslims in Singapore pushing their bounds with the State on their dress code in schools is but a variant of the mix between religion and politics. It is no accident that, in the last 20 years at least, we see more and more Muslims becoming more conservative in the doctrine and the practice of their faith. I know of many colleagues in my office who, over the years, have insisted on taking on the strict Islamic code of dressing. We also note that there is an increasing number of Muslim parents who are choosing to send their children to the madrasahs. Sir, in case I am misunderstood, I am not against any form of fundamentalism or conservatism in religious practice. In fact, I support it as the purist approach helps to keep a perspective on the original founding principles of the faith. What I am against is the insistence on one's right to practise and observe his beliefs even if it means the others may feel that their personal or common public spaces may be encroached or imposed upon. Additionally, I am against the practice of a faith in a manner that passes judgment on all others that they are infidels and are destined for the eternal hell.”
“And we taught a whole generation of Singaporeans to believe that Communism is bad and is the very antithesis of freedom and wealth. Indeed, Communism has proven to be a bankrupt ideology. However, in the current fight against terrorism, we are faced with a very different enemy - people who practise terrorism in the name of religion. Sir, they are like cancers in our body that cannot be gotten rid of. We can only treat it. It may go into remission and one day, it may just rear its ugly head again. The problem here is the political and religious mix of Islam. Radical Islam has its roots in the Middle East conflict. The creation of the state of Israel in the post-war period, and the subsequent flood of predominantly Muslim Palestinian refugees into Jordan and elsewhere has been an underlying source of conflict and tension in the Middle East. That the Americans should be seen to cast their lot with the Israelis in this conflict throughout does not help with the perception that the Palestinians have been given an unfair deck of cards. Throughout this period, the Islamic revolution in Iran, together with the successful overthrow of the Soviet-backed regime in Afghanistan by the Talebans, served to provide new inspiration for the growth of fundamentalism in Islam. This was, in no small part, helped by the growing influence of Wahabism, which is another form of fundamentalist Islam. The over-arching reach of fundamentalist Islam worldwide cannot be ignored. In Southeast Asia, the force of Islam in the political realm cannot be ignored. For many states, particularly Malaysia and Indonesia, no serious political contender can hope to gain national prominence without paying close attention to the Muslim ground.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, thank you for allowing me to join in the debate on the motion which I rise in support of. Sir, indeed the battle against terrorism and JI in particular, is not one that many, including our Muslim compatriots here and in the region, will deny. The recurring bombings, calculated by these extremist elements to bring fear and terror to our civilised world, have once again brought this region into a state of war; albeit a war of a different sort. We are, today, faced with one of the toughest challenges yet since the days when we had to fight against the Communist insurgency. Like the fight against the Communists, the war on terror cannot be fought against known elements alone. For every Hambali or Bashir that we put into prison, there will be hundreds or even thousands of other similarly minded extremists who will be willing to rise in their place. Let us not under-estimate the extremity of hatred or feelings that these radicals have against others and its effect on their actions. What we have here is a very potent mix of religious and political convictions that so fill these terrorists that death, the very ultimate sacrifice of all, no longer serves as a sobering influence on conduct. In fact, for them, it is a glory to die. And, obviously, neither will it make a difference that innocent civilians, and we are talking here of children, and of loving fathers and mothers who feed these children, suffer from their harmful and despicable actions. Sir, perhaps the challenge we are faced with now is even greater than the challenge we faced from the Communist terrorists. Communism is a political ideology. We could deal with it in surgical fashion. We could ban Communism. We could isolate Communist guerillas by confining people in new villages.”