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 15 of 20.
“They have harped on the fact that this Bill will discourage local donors from making a donation because particulars of their donations would have to be disclosed to the Government agency. Underlying that statement is the assumption that because they have made a donation, prosecutions, or in their term, persecutions would necessarily follow. If I may just ask the opposition Members whether they are able to cite instances where such has happened. And indeed, in previous years, we have found a more liberal climate and environment where people are more prepared to speak up against Government policies. This is a given. And in this kind of climate, it would be quite difficult to see how this would gel with the general climate of fear that the opposition Members have painted that the members of the public are suffering under. The opposition Members have also made a second assumption, and that is, the politicians are able to discern in respect of the monies that were given, and still be able to stand up for the principle that they should not be subject to the influence of money in the way in which they make decisions. I believe this to be very naive. No established society can run away from the fact that money does influence and the greater the sum of money, the greater the extent of the influence. I doubt if we can say sincerely that all politicians, if subject to the influence of money, would not be influenced in the way in which they decide.”
“Up until this point in time, as I have said earlier, there is an absence of substantial spending on political campaigns and advertising. This has helped to keep the cost of running for a political office low. However, it would be difficult in trying to win the hearts and minds of the electorate not to rely on the mass communication media in the future to reach out to the constituents. If this happens, the need for funding would obviously increase. On principle, there is nothing wrong with getting the public to donate to political parties. What is at issue is the extent to which donors have the ability to influence policies through donations. One way to overcome this concern is to create a greater atmosphere of transparency in the whole process. I note that the Bill only requires accounts to be filed with the Registrar for donations above a certain level. There is nothing in the Bill which requires public disclosure of all donations. It is important that if you want to have a transparent system that such disclosures be made to the public. Making the system and process transparent would also have a way of checking the conduct of political parties and candidates in its dealings with donors. Additionally, by making such disclosures, voters can also make informed choices in an election. Sir, just some final words about what the opposition has said. They have lamented and griped about how the Bill is yet another example by the Government to stifle the opposition. They have stated that the Bill does not proscribe local donations. There is nothing to stop local donors from giving money to opposition members.”
“In sum, it is not a foolproof and water-tight provision and it would be possible under certain circumstances for foreign parties to indirectly make a contribution through a permissible donor in Singapore. Additionally, if the purpose of the Bill is to maintain public confidence in the political system by preventing money politics, I do not see why distinction has been made between a foreign donor, and for that matter, a local donor who has substantial sums of money and can equally be in a position to influence Government policies through monetary contributions. Allowing that person to have an influence on policies through financial resources would strike at the very heart of our system of democracy which seeks to represent the interest of all Singaporeans and not just the moneyed few. It is not inconceivable that with the booming economy, there would be many local companies and individuals with hoards of cash. It would generally be conceivable that in an environment that is more liberal, some would consider putting money through the political system. At the moment, there is nothing to stop rich local individuals from donating money to political associations and candidates. Fortunately, this party has always maintained the highest level of integrity. We have never allowed money to influence our decisions. However, since institutions exist in perpetuity and man does not, it is vital that we institutionalise our values by regulating all manner of donations and not just confine the present Bill to foreign donations alone. Fourthly, this Bill, at another level, should not be seen as one of regulating the influence of foreign parties on local policies. Against this backdrop, there is a larger issue of money politics.”
“Arguably, it can be said that if a person who transfers property to a permissible donor with the direction that the latter be asked to make a gift of that property to a political party or a candidate, clause 2(5) would be triggered and in any event, clause 23 would equally apply in respect of such arrangements. However, Sir, it is possible to get around restrictions in a number of ways. For instance, a foreign donor can give these gifts to a permissible donor absolutely such that the permissible donor is not the trustee of these gifts. Once it is determined that these gifts are not held in trust by the permissible donor, the money can then be channelled to the political party or candidate with whom the permissible donor and the foreign party are equally sympathetic to. Thirdly, one does not have to, as a foreign donor, transfer property to the permissible donor in order to make such donations. Where a foreign donor has strong business influence over a Singapore-controlled company, it would be possible for the Singapore company to make donations under the influence of the party or the foreign party. Any donation made can be compensated in the future through some generous contractual means between the Singapore-controlled company and the foreign party. In citing this as an example, I am mindful that there are other provisions in the Bill that prevent or restrict the circumvention of such restrictions by other means. Clause 23, for instance, makes it illegal for a person who facilitates such transactions. But as we all know, it is quite possible, if one is aware of the restrictions in clause 23, to even circumvent these restrictions.”
“The Bill further defines, inter alia, a Singapore-controlled company to mean a company incorporated in Singapore and the majority of whose directors and members are citizens of Singapore. While a direct donation by a foreigner is not possible, it would be relatively quite easy for a foreigner who seeks to circumvent the restrictions of the Bill by channelling a donation through a permissible donor. As I said earlier, the definition of a Singapore-controlled company basically defines the company as one that is incorporated in Singapore, where the majority of directors and members are citizens of Singapore. It would be possible in certain situations where such conditions are complied with, where you have minority shareholders who are foreigners who are able, in their own ways, to exert influence on the majority shareholders or even on the Board of such companies. In such instances, while these companies still qualify as Singapore-controlled companies, I am not sure whether or not the company itself may not be subject to the control of a foreign party. If the Minister can clarify this point, it would alleviate our concern on this area. Secondly, I note that under clause 2(5), it provides that any donation received by a candidate or a political association by way of a donation via a trustee in his capacity as such shall be regarded as a donation from a person who is not a permissible donor. The question is: who is a trustee? A trustee is not defined in the Bill. One can look to the common law for its meaning.”
“Sir, I thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak on the Bill which I rise in support of. Sir, it is important that in any country, public confidence and the integrity of the political system must be maintained at all times. Members of the public must have no reason to believe that political parties, policies and indeed any politician have been influenced by large donors. As a sovereign and independent country, with a Government that is democratically elected, the legitimacy of the Government would depend on the trust that people have. They must not doubt that the leaders in power decide policies that work in the long-term interest of the country. Where the perception exists that leaders of the Government or politicians take instructions from people who donate large sums of money, public trust in Government would surely be undermined and with it, its effective governance. I therefore welcome the introduction of the Bill. Having said that, while I support the Bill, as a matter of general principle, there are a number of areas which the Bill will require clarification and further consideration. I shall dwell on some of these. First, the Bill distinguishes between foreign and local donations. In the case of foreign donation, the Bill provides generally that every political association, party, or candidate must not accept a donation if it is offered by a person who is not a permissible donor. The Bill defines a permissible donor, inter alia, as either an individual, a Singaporean who is at least 21 years of age or a Singapore-controlled company which carries on business wholly or mainly in Singapore.”
“Sir, when the CPF liberalises the transfer of funds as deposits in DBS Bank, will the DPM please confirm whether this scheme will be made available to other banks as well in Singapore? BG Lee Hsien Loong: Sir, I explained in my main statement that the scheme will be available to all qualifying banks and financial institutions.”
“By all accounts, there is no reason to believe that PCF does not adequately prepare the child for primary education, although I cannot quite say that they prepare the child to write book reviews at primary 1 too. The Government believes that they are doing a good job. At my PCF centre, we track the progress of our children at primary 1 as of this year. I have no reason to believe that the children are not doing fine. The PCF even has its own training institute to prepare and train kindergarten teachers. PCF centres are generally well-managed, and I would say that they are even better-equipped than some of the privately run kindergartens in Singapore. Many PCF centres undergo constant upgrading and renovation. Unfortunately, Sir, PCF suffers from the effects of snob appeal. Many up-only mobile parents do not think that the PCF is good enough for their children. I suspect this prejudice may have to do with the fact that the PCF is rooted in the HDB heartland or maybe because the PCF is not charging exorbitant sums to have that gilt-edge or maybe it is true that the PCF does not teach the children to write book reviews. One has to be realistic. At the end of the day, one has to ask the question whether pre-school education is to prepare a child to undertake primary education or is it to ensure that he or she is ahead of his peers at the commencement of school. If we honestly ask ourselves, the answer is obvious. Even if the Government clearly sets the expectations of desired outcomes in preparing a child for school, there will be many, many kiasu parents who want to play the one-upmanship game. When it comes to this, I am sure that there are many centres who will continue to respond to their demands.”
“The Government's guidelines should cover not only teaching methodology and curriculum, but also the standard of administration, recruitment and training of teachers. In the final analysis, I am not too confident that even if the Government were to set clear guidelines on what the child is expected to know from pre-school education, there would not be differing abilities among children in primary 1. Parents often contribute to the intense competition by wanting to be ahead of their peers in schools. The common response of parents from recent interviews states that primary 1 standards are tough and for that reason, their children are over-prepared for primary school. I am afraid I do not follow the logic of that reasoning. If primary 1 standard is tough, how does over-preparing help? Should not the approach be to mentally prepare the child to deal with the tough syllabus ahead by cultivating a more enquiring mind? Setting expectations of the abilities of children on entering primary school is not the same as requiring them to cover the primary 1 syllabus in kindergarten. Unfortunately, that is the expectation of a fair number of parents. Somehow, there is a sense of one-upmanship for parents whose children are able to do book reviews at primary 1. Is this ability really necessary and expected of a child at that level, or is it to give the child or the parents a certain sense of superior ability over the rest? At this moment, I would like to say something of the work of the PCF. We know that the PCF is presently the largest provider of pre-school education in Singapore. Since its inception, the PCF has provided Singaporeans with affordable pre-school education. Many generations of Singaporeans benefited greatly from it.”
“Sir, a recent report in the Straits Times showed that there is a disparity in the standards of pre-school education in Singapore. This disparity is most evident in the extent to which children have been prepared for formal education in schools. The report indicated that some children have already covered a major part of their primary 1 syllabus by the time they entered school. On the other hand, some children are just beginning to get down to the basics of their English Language at primary 1, even though they have attended pre-school education. Quite naturally, some concerns arose in relation to the divergence of standards amongst pre-schoolers in Singapore. The Education Ministry said that they were looking into this area by specifying clearer indications on the desired outcomes of pre-school education here. For the moment, I am given to understand that our Government's position has been to leave pre-school education to the private sector, and not to take over this task. As a result of leaving it to the private sector, standards for pre-school education vary, not just to the extent of the ability of the child on entering primary school, but also the quality of pre-school education and the teachers. Besides, the fees also differ from kindergarten to kindergarten. Despite the differences in standard, I accept that pre-school education should, at the moment, continue to remain with the private sector. There is no reason why the Government should now step in to take over that responsibility. Besides, there is no real evidence that kindergartens are generally not doing an adequate job of it. Sir, there is, however, something to be said of the role of Government in setting clearer guidelines and standards in this area.”
“Sir, we often read in the Straits Times of delinquent school children. While discipline is an age-old problem, it seems from recent reports that disciplinary problems are on the rise. At the constituency level, I often receive complaints from residents of students who misbehave themselves outside school. It seems that students and perhaps even some schools operate on the principle that what the students do outside the school is not the concern of the school and should not be within the school's control. As a result, we receive reports of students loitering at the void decks and engaging in such anti-social activities like smoking, littering and vandalism. To be fair, some schools have resorted to ensuring that their students do not engage in such activities by sending members of their staff on patrol in the neighbourhood. I am not sure if all schools have such a practice. On the other hand, it seems that the schools can only intervene in a limited manner, as beyond that I am not sure whether all schools have the practice of checking on the behaviour and conduct of their students. Certainly, when children misbehave themselves, it gives the school a rather bad name. Needless to say, it is imperative that we continue to ensure that our students remain disciplined, as this may impact on our population in the future. Sir, I know that the Ministry has a system in place called the behavioural tracking and analysis system that tracks the number of delinquent cases in schools. I would like to ask the Minister whether or not disciplinary problems have been on the rise and what additional measures, if any, the Ministry is going to take in dealing with the problem.”
“I would like to thank the Senior Parliamentary Secretary for her answer. Would the Senior Parliamentary Secretary please tell us how the Ministry is able to determine that the majority of such marriages are happy?”
“For example, one well-known local columnist mentioned in her column that she could have lost her chance in life. In the past, we had the SDU, the community centres and even the universities trying ways and means to create opportunities for young people to be paired up, to develop a courtship, with the hope of leading to marriage. But the results have not been encouraging. Among those who are 40 years old and above, 16% are not married. This is a high figure. Perhaps in the past we had not done enough. In this respect, we have to redouble our efforts and the Ministry has to spend more money and organise more activities. The Ministry of Education has to work on the school children. As for cases of infertility, we have now all sorts of scientific methods, such as the test-tube babies and surrogate mothers, etc. to help the infertile couples. However, notwithstanding all these advanced technologies, the cost is still exorbitant. Only those who are from the well-to-do families can afford such methods. This is a very important problem. The Government should see how it can help to cut cost or subsidise the needy, so that even ordinary citizens can avail themselves of all these medical technologies to give birth to their own children. For those who are willing to have children but are not prepared to have them at a young age, some do not have the confidence to be father and mother, they need plenty of encouragement.”
“The problem is that before the measures taken could have been effectively solved, the problem happened in the past, new problems have emerged and resulted in the awkward situation that we are now in. In the past, we gave a lot of incentives to encourage our people to have more babies. We gave tax concessions, priority for HDB flats, longer maternity leave, etc. But these measures were unable to reap the desired results. Come to think of it, if we had not done all these, the situation could well be worse now. In my view, this problem should not be left solely to the Ministry of Community Development to solve. It has to be resolved by a high-level Inter-Ministerial Committee. This is a very complicated matter because every individual in our society has his or her own problems. The needs are different, the aspirations in life are different. We have to resolve it according to their needs. I would classify the reasons for people not having more children into the following six categories: (1) Can give birth and willing to give birth, but no opportunity to give birth - non-marriage; (2) Willing to give birth but cannot give birth - infertile; (3) Can give birth, but unwilling to give birth - unwilling; (4) Can give birth and willing to give birth, but unwilling to give birth early in life - unwilling to give birth early; (5) Can give birth, willing to give birth but unwilling to have many children - limited birth; and (6) Can give birth, willing to give birth, and willing to have more children but received no encouragement - refused birth. There is no simple solution to all these problems. For those who would like to have children, they may not be able to give birth. Some of them do not want to get married. Some want to get married but do not have the opportunity.”
“We are forecasting some 5-7% annual growth rate. However, if our population is not growing enough in the next 30 years, this vision of a 5-7% annual growth rate cannot be sustained. Just now, Dr Vasoo asked Dr Ong who is going to defend us in time of war. Even with the most sophisticated weapons, if we do not have enough people, who shall operate these weapons to defend us? If we cannot replace ourselves, our population will shrink and we may have problems in our national defence in the future. A few days ago, our Minister for National Development painted a picture of how Singapore is going to become a vibrant city, that is, by the year 2040. Our society will be able to accommodate some 5.5 million people. We want to have a population of 5.5 million in 2040, but our people are simply not giving birth to enough babies to make up this number. Then, perhaps some 30% of the population will have to be foreign immigrants and not descendants of our present population. This will result in great changes to our social structure. Now we are talking about how to enhance our social cohesiveness, how to preserve our roots and how to maintain our traditions and social values. If we have to depend on the large inflow of immigrants and their number become significant in our society, then all these values we talk about will, therefore, no longer be relevant. More importantly, the political scene at that time may be quite different from what we may imagine it to be. This is a very serious problem. We have to resolve the matter and find thorough solutions to the problem before it becomes worse. This is not a new problem.”
“This was certainly not the intention of this House and should not be seen by others as such. Perhaps the Women's Charter should be looked into again to see how such abuses can be avoided. Assoc. Prof. Low Seow Chay(In Mandarin): According to the records, there is a clear decline in our birth rate in Singapore. In 1988, the average birth rate was 1.96 child per family. In 1999, it has reduced to 1.48 per family. This clear decline of birth rate is a very serious trend. We are already approaching Japan's low birth rate of 1.42 per family. We have to do something seriously and urgently to address the problem. In the 1980s, the problem then was that there were some highly educated people who were not married. Now, in the 1990s the problem is further extended. Even among the non-graduates, there are many who are not getting married. According to statistics, about 15% of our people above the age of 40 are single. Our society has also faced the problem of people getting married very late and had their first child late. The average age of having the first child increases to 28.5 last year from the 27.5 in 1990. The situation now is that we are unable to replace ourselves. This would imply that in future we would face the problem of an ageing population and it will affect us socially and politically. As it is, we are expecting that by 2030 every four economically active persons will have to support one senior citizen above the age of 65. So our economic burden will be very heavy and it will certainly affect our quality of life. More importantly, we may not be able to look after our aged relatives and we may have to depend on foreign maids to look after them. On the other hand, our economic prospects for the 21st century are quite optimistic.”
“He thought he had found marital bliss. This was not to be. I learned that his wife was not really keen on helping him to manage his business. Soon she left him and filed for divorce, even though, as he claimed, he had been very nice to her. She claimed a substantial portion of his assets, and even got his car seized to satisfy the order of court. On top of it all, he tells me that she started cohabiting with a man in the same flat that she paid for out of the monthly maintenance sum that he gives her. This man has seen me many times and pleads for justice. I did not hear the full story. It may be that she genuinely wanted to start a new life with another man, or it may be that she is the devious scheming lady who took advantage of my constituent. If the latter were true, it would indeed be a tragedy for him. 6.00 pm This episode raises a basic question of whether the State has any responsibility towards Singaporeans of similar circumstances that I have described. I know that it would not be possible for the Government to keep a look-out for every Singaporean who is gullible or weak. Neither can it be said that the Government has no duty in a situation like this. Instinctively, our sense of justice tells us that what has happened to Singaporeans who married scheming spouses who took them for a ride, is not right. It is not easy to deal with this problem. However, given the immense trauma that broken marriages bring about, I would like to ask the Minister to consider getting proper marriage counsellors to help Singaporeans come to a carefully thought out decision. Additionally, the Women's Charter is primarily meant to protect the rights of women. However, the Women's Charter should not be abused by others for their own benefit.”
“Sir, marriages to foreigners have been a subject that has received much media publicity and interest. Not too long ago, we read in the papers of a widely publicised divorce between a lady from Shanghai and the son of a family that runs a successful shipping business. That case generated much interest because of the substantial amount of money which this lady received following the divorce. In the minds of many Singaporeans, I am sure, is of the view that this lady from China had a windfall as, but for the marriage, she would probably not have acquired even a fraction of the assets that were given to her. This case has also left many Singaporeans wondering whether this lady actually married the man for his money. Sir, I am not passing judgment here, as I do not think I am in a position to. However, this anecdote does highlight one potential problem of Singaporeans marrying foreigners. Objectively speaking, one would often ask how many of such marriages are really out of feelings for one another and how many are contracted by the foreign party as a means to escape the harsh realities of the home environment, and that there was not any serious intention of settling down with the party concerned. Sir, let me tell you yet another story. A constituent came to see me one day. He walks with a limp and is handicapped and I learned subsequently that he is handicapped because of a gunshot injury that he received in the course of his duty as a policeman. He was compensated for his injury. Upon his discharge from the force, he managed to set up stall as a canteen operator to support himself. However, life was lonely for him. Being unable to marry a local lady, this man resorted to looking for a bride from China. He found one from a big city and married her.”
“What I believe our parliamentary colleagues are asking for is that a mechanism be set out which comprises independent parties who can help ensure that the funds appropriated by the agency are properly spent. Indeed, it did not help to inspire much confidence in members of the public when the Bill allowed for the appointment of an auditor and not the Auditor-General, who is an independent official of the State. We know that there are fixed financial procedures that are in place to ensure that the integrity of public administration is not compromised. However, I am sure, Sir, that you will agree with me that unless we institutionalise checks on our systems, lapses may occur. We note the recent report of the Auditor-General of the numerous instances of non-compliance with Government procurement procedures. This happened in a situation where we have two contracting parties who are in very close relationship to one another. Without an independent body to watch over the work of the DSTA, we cannot be sure that lapses in financial procedures may not occur in the future. Sir, it is in the light of our concern that I would urge the Minister to consider appointing the Auditor-General and members of the public, including MPs, who are seen to be independent bodies, to sit on the relevant committees to ensure that funds which are dispensed by the Minister and which are not subject to parliamentary scrutiny, are properly utilised.”
“Sir, in the recent debate on the Defence Science and Technology Agency Bill, my parliamentary colleague raised the question of the Agency's accountability to Parliament. In the debate, it was noted that under clause 19 of the Bill, the Minister dispenses money given by Parliament to DSTA although Parliament provides the money. The Bill only requires that the annual report be given to the Minister for Defence and he in turn will give the report to a Committee to be appointed by the Prime Minister. It does not appear that the money appropriated by DSTA is a matter that is subject to public scrutiny through Parliament. Some concern was raised as to the issue of accountability on the use of funds. Sir, I understand that the work of DSTA has to be shrouded to some extent by secrecy as by its defence-related work, and by its very nature, it has to be secret. DPM has in his reply confirmed this. I agree that the fact that DSTA is now a statutory board does not remove any requirement of secrecy and the same has to be maintained for many of the detailed activities of the DSTA. I can well appreciate the argument why matters of financial provisions of DSTA should not be a subject of public debate. However, I would like to mention that there is a distinction to be made between public accountability on the one hand, and private accountability to a group of people who commands the trust and confidence of the members of the public to play their part in ensuring that the relevant agency is doing their work properly. In this debate, we are not saying that the Agency should subject its agenda or its programme to public scrutiny.”
“Sir, under this cut, I had originally intended to speak on new security challenges for the SAF. I note in the Minister's reply that the SAF is committed to meeting the new security challenges and I am much comforted by the assurance given by the Minister. I shall therefore not be making any further speech in this area. Can I have your permission to take the next cut?”
“The Auditor commented that this was a serious break-down in controls as the funds in the bank could have been siphoned off for unauthorised use. Would the Minister kindly explain how these accounts came to be opened and whether steps have been taken to prevent a repeat of such breaches. Like my colleague before me, I would like to emphasise that Mindef enjoys a high level of confidence among the members of the public. These instances cited by the Auditor-General must be addressed by the Government if the confidence of the public is to be maintained for the future. 4.15 pm”
“Sir, like my colleagues before me, I do have some concerns on the matters expressed in the Auditor-General's report. I would like to add my comment on the false declaration. I perhaps understand that the idea was to make it easier to facilitate payment to the contractor. In this case, it was fortunate that the certificate of completion was given not because of any attempt to cheat the Government, but to help the contractor with the payment of the goods. Although malice was not intended, it nevertheless shows up a weakness in the system. Rather than counselling the parties involved, I would like to ask the Minister whether further improvements can be made to the whole process. Perhaps, a system of double signatures be put in place or an alternative scheme to ensure that similar breaches will not take place in the future. On the second concern raised by the Auditor-General, it was noted that contracts were made with Mindef-related companies resulting in numerous instances of non-compliance with the Government procurement procedures. It appears that Mindef officers who were appointed as company directors, were involved in decisions leading to award of contracts by the Government. Sir, the instance cited by the Auditor-General is an indication of how defence contract between two related parties in a cosy relationship can lead to an oversight of Government procurement procedures. I would urge the Minister to be on a vigilant safeguard to ensure that such breaches are not repeated again in the future. We also note that in the case of transfer of funds, some monies were transferred to a bank account which was opened without the approval of the Accountant-General as is required by law and standing instructions.”
“I would like to ask the Minister, Sir, whether the Government would pursue this area of bilateral and multi-lateral defence cooperation as actively as we have been able to build our defence capabilities.”
“For instance, Singapore has very strong defence ties with Malaysia and Indonesia. Sir, we must recognise that bilateral and multi-lateral defence cooperations are essentially confidence building measures that help countries in the region resolve disputes through peaceful means and also to seek regional security cooperation to achieve common strategic interests. By providing a platform for alliance, the bilateral ties and multi-lateral arrangements allow the respective countries to develop cooperative programmes to complement rather than to compete with each other. In order to achieve this, there must be a certain amount of inter-operability of the armed forces. To this end, the parties would need to cooperate with one another better as alliance partners. It is obvious therefore that by promoting bilateral and multi-lateral arrangements with foreign countries, we are providing a framework towards better cooperation and understanding at the armed forces level. Hopefully, this would pave the way for resolving differences by peaceful settlement rather than to resort to war as an alternative. Sir, we note that the multi-lateral security dialogues and cooperation of defence establishments in the region remain a relatively undeveloped area. With various forums, we have varying degrees of success. For instance, our ties with the Malaysians have been relegated to the backwaters for now. We should continue with pursuing closer cooperation. Such ties and cooperation would pave the way towards a reduction of suspicion of one another, which will be the case, if we had no cooperation.”
“Sir, the security framework of Singapore includes not only the Singapore Armed Forces but also bilateral and multi-lateral arrangements with countries in the region and possibly strategic partners in the world. In defence spending, one would say that the SAF has over the years built up substantial capability, and this capability has been broadly recognised by many as one that is seriously credible. As one would have it, we have built up a credible SAF in the hope that our soldiers would never have to fire a shot against another in anger. In order to minimise this possibility, it is important that we recognise the goal of bilateral and multi-lateral cooperation with other countries. Over the years, we have developed our broader security framework well. For instance, at a multi-lateral level, we have continuously strengthened and worked with such arrangements as the Five Power Defence Arrangements (FPDA). The FPDA is the longest standing multi-lateral arrangement and has provided for the defence of Singapore and Malaysia since 1971. One does not deny that FPDA has contributed quite substantially to the region's security architecture and the region's business stability. Another example of our efforts at promoting the international framework to strengthen security interest is the ASEAN Regional Forum. This vehicle promotes regional peace and stability. At the moment, although the ASEAN Regional Forum is not akin to that which is available in Europe, it has nonetheless started out on the right premise which commits the parties to the appropriate dialogues and discussions to resolve outstanding security issues. Apart from multi-lateral arrangements, Singapore has been engaged in bilateral ties with our neighbours.”
“Sir, I am afraid the Senior Parliamentary Secretary has missed my point. I am not asking the Government to be watching over every property purchased in Singapore. What I asked for is a framework legislation that will require greater disclosure and strengthening of the legislation to allow enforcement of rights in Singapore. I hope the Senior Parliamentary Secretary can respond to my query.”
“I understand that the Government's position has always been based on the principle of caveat emptor. However, if the law does not provide a framework where sufficient information is given and where promoters do suffer from a real prospect of being liable for such promotions, it would be quite difficult for investors in foreign properties to make informed choices or to enforce their rights. 1.00 pm Sir, in 1998 and also in 1999, I made a similar comment, and the Finance Minister had informed me then that the Government would consider an Estate Agents Bill to regulate the sale and promotion of foreign properties. I would appreciate it if the Minister could inform this House when the Government intends to introduce such a Bill and to give a rough indication how such activities would be regulated.”
“Sir, I have previously raised in this House the issue of the dangers of buying foreign properties. These properties are usually promoted in Singapore by developers and it has never failed to amaze me that many members of the public can part with large sums of money, purely on the basis of mock-up models and beautifully designed brochures. I distinctively remember telling myself then, when these foreign properties were first promoted in Singapore, that the buyers may run into problems with the properties as this is an area which is very poorly regulated. Unfortunately, my misgivings have proven right. We have seen many disappointed buyers venting their frustrations in the press or at the sales offices on how they have been short-changed, either in the form of shoddy construction or uncompleted buildings. Examples of such incidents are numerous. But to be fair, not all foreign property developers are out to deceive local purchasers. There are, unfortunately, enough of them out there to cause some concern. As you are aware, if anyone were to attempt to sell any security interest in Singapore, the law requires substantial disclosure of information by the promoters and lodged with the authority before promotion of such security interest may be allowed. The information memorandum would typically contain information of the company, its history, business, principal officers and finance and information on matters which are material. The idea, principally, is to allow prospective investors to make an informed choice. Unfortunately, such requirements are not required for promoters of foreign properties where financial exposure can be just as substantial as investment in shares and other securities. It does seem, Sir, to be a bit of anomaly.”
“Sir, from the number of crows that we are seeing, and it is increasing with each passing year, I wonder if the Ministry could set a benchmark figure and give a definite timetable as to how they are going to control the growth of the crow population. Could the Senior Minister of State give an indication of the plans?”
“The Americans understood the benefits of the market early and have since the 19th century enacted such legislation as the Sherman Act and the Clayton Act and other legislation. Many European countries, including Australia, have also adopted similar legislation. As Singapore becomes a mature economy, it is perhaps timely that the Government should look to comprehensive anti-trust laws to check against the excesses of firms that dominate the market place. The advantage of these policies is obvious. Recently, we have seen that as a result of competition, overseas telephone charges began to fall dramatically. As another example, when StarHub introduced free Internet services in a bid to attract subscribers. Almost overnight, another rival Internet service provider responded by offering free services as well. The move by the ISP to save customer accounts is not surprising. Sadly, it is not seen by many as a sincere move on its part to provide best service for its customers. Sir, I understand that the IDA plays the role of regulator in checking, amongst other things, the competition among telecommunication companies. However, there is no watchdog body like IDA with respect to the other parts of the industry at the market place. One question that I would like to ask the Minister therefore is whether the Government would seriously consider introducing legislation like the anti-trust laws which are applicable in the United States and elsewhere.”
“Sir, competition and the free market represent an important ideological underpinning of our society. It is a trite statement to say that competition allows for greater variety and therefore freedom of choice for the consumers in the market place. Without competition, a wide array of goods and services available to the consumer would not have been possible. Until recently, we are confronted with an alternative choice to the free market - the command economy. We have seen that command economies produce excesses that result in great inefficiencies in the market place. Someone once joked that the East Germans under the communist regime, could only choose between a red Trabant or a white Trabant, a three piston car with polluting exhausts. I will not be surprised if that were true. Yet, Sir, free competition without regulation also produces excesses. Starting from the premise that not all firms are of equal ability, extreme competition would feed on the predatory instincts of businesses seeking to survive in the market place. Just as in the natural world, only the strongest will survive and the weaker ones will perish into oblivion. What happens is perhaps a growing dominance of the market place by a few major producers of goods and services. In the hands of these few major producers or even single producer of goods and services, the consumer is left very much at their mercy because of their extensive power over the price which they charge for their goods and services. Sir, it is for this reason that many countries in the West have passed laws that regulate against the formation of monopolies or cartels and anti-competitive practices. Such entities are, by its tendency, an antithesis to this idea of freedom of choice for the consumer.”
“What this means is that the law specifies special penalties on such officers as opposed to leaving it to the discretion of the judge as a matter of sentencing policy. This is important as it sends a clear signal to members of the public on the seriousness with which we treat such breaches. Sir, police officers are not ordinary civil servants. Together with members of the Home Team, they are entrusted by the members of the public to protect life and property and to uphold the law. The Home Team has a very high and onerous duty. A breach of the trust that the public placed on them is very serious indeed. Accordingly, the punishment must also be considerably higher than the rest of society. With more severe penalties, it would perhaps add as another deterrent to discourage police officers from even thinking of stepping in the direction of errant ways.”
“And indeed, those tempted to follow the footsteps of the errant officers would know that far from providing any protection against detection and punishment, the Home Team and in particular the Police Force, is ever more determined to keep its own house in order. The statistics given by the Straits Times as to the exact number of errant officers who were caught and prosecuted in recent years have shown a rising trend. Statistics, however, Sir, must be read in context. The figures must be seen in the light of the total composition of the Home Team. Compared to previous years, the Police Force is now 7,500 strong. If out of the 7,500 police officers, only 35 have been prosecuted as of September 1999, the figure seems quite minuscule indeed. We must bear in mind that there is an overwhelming number of officers from the Home Team who maintain the highest standard of conduct and decorum. To pass poor judgment on the Home Team would be manifestly unfair to the others who have served the country faithfully. 4.30 pm One question is whether those who were caught and prosecuted only represent the tip of the iceberg. Sir, I do not think so. Since last year, we note that the police have put in place a series of measures to ensure that the integrity of the Home Team is maintained. These measures include job rotation, zero tolerance for corruption, psychological screening and emotional and financial help for police officers in need. Over and above such measures put in place by the Police Force, I would like to ask the Minister whether the Government would consider it necessary to prescribe heavier penalties in law for police officers who have broken the trust of the public by engaging in corrupt practices.”
“Sir, the recent spate of high profile prosecution of corrupt officers from the Singapore Police Force, the Civil Defence and the Singapore Immigration Department (collectively called the "Home Team") has caused much concern and dismay to Singaporeans. The prosecutions would appear to have had the effect of undermining public confidence in the integrity of the Home Team. Needless to say, Singaporeans take great pride in the fact that our society is relatively free from corruption. The fact that these cases have now come out to light is a matter of concern indeed. Sir, there are many Singaporeans who continue to express these concerns, even though a recent report from a survey commissioned by the Police Force and published in the Straits Times revealed that most Singaporeans believe that the Singapore Police Force is doing a good job in keeping the country safe and that the Police are respectable, approachable, well-trained, disciplined and capable. Such reaction is only natural, as the public has rightly come to expect the highest level of integrity and honesty from the people whom they have placed their trust and confidence in to look after their safety and security. However, even though their concern is natural, it is not the only way to react to the recent publicity. On the other hand, the publicity may be seen from a different perspective. One way of looking at this is that the prosecution of corrupt officers shows that we do not cover up such cases. In fact, Singaporeans should take comfort in the knowledge that the Government goes all out to prosecute errant officers of whatever rank.”
“Thank you, Sir. Just some points of clarification for the Senior Minister of State. The Senior Minister of State said that, some years ago, the Environment Ministry allocated the hawker stalls to the poor and needy and from past experience, many of these stalls had failed in their businesses. I would like to ask the SMS whether or not in those cases guidance had been given to these people to operate these stalls and to help them along, or were they just given a stall and were expected to make a success of these stalls. Secondly, I am not saying that the policy should be changed in its entirety. What I am saying is that perhaps some stalls could be set aside to be allocated to those poor and needy families who can be trained to run these businesses properly. And my last point is that yes, SMS has said that there are stalls available for rental to the poorer families if they tender for it. Could I also ask the Ministry to make this information readily available at least to the Members of Parliament so that they can inform the residents of such vacancies as and when these cases come to them?”
“It is, of course, important for strategic reasons that we should vary the sources of energy that we have and so we have actually signed deals with Indonesia, for example, to use natural gas. Actually, I think that we are sometimes wrong when we say that we have no resources and people would say that our resource is manpower but we cannot have people running and keeping the power stations' turbines turning. So, we have got to think of realistic resources. And one realistic resource is sunshine. We have lots of sunshine each year. I think it is important for us to harness this energy to give us our needs in electricity. 5.00 pm However, I do understand that solar power energy is difficult to convert and the technology is still not very advanced and it requires huge amounts of money and lots of space for the solar panels. I would just like to ask the Ministry if they could give the House an update on some of the efforts that can be made in this area. Perhaps we could think of tax incentives or grants to the universities here to do research into solar panels, so that eventually we could find some technology which we can use for our power needs.”
“For my constituency alone, there were 500 applications for four vacancies in a school canteen when a new school was opened recently. While the school tried to allocate the stalls on the basis of financial need, there were many other equally needy families who had to be turned away. In other words, the fact that there are so many applications for such stalls from a sizeable number of people with financial need would suggest that there is a crying need for more of such stalls to be made available to them. We have always advocated the principle that we should not only just give our people fish but we should teach them to fish so that they can help themselves. I would like to ask the Minister whether the Government would reconsider its policy of not issuing hawker stall licences and to consider setting aside more stalls for the needy. Perhaps as a suggestion, the Government should do the following. First, to have a certain number of hawker stalls or market stalls set aside for the poor and needy families while the rest can be tendered out. Secondly, to set basic criteria that the families must meet in order to qualify. Thirdly, to have information and advice on hand to teach and help these families to run the business. Lastly, to provide some soft loans as start-up capital if necessary. We want to make Singapore the best home for our people. We do not want this statement to ring hollow for the poorer Singaporeans. We must be seen to be doing more for them. By doing this, I think the Government would come across even more strongly in show that they really care. Assoc. Prof. Toh See Kiat: Sir, it is received wisdom that Singapore has no resources and therefore in our power needs, we have to rely on fossil fuels like oil, coal and even natural gas.”
“Sir, it is my understanding that the Environment Ministry has since the late 80s, stopped issuing new hawker stall licences to applicants. Additionally, new markets and eating centres developed by the HDB are now tendered out en-bloc to private contractors who in turn rent these stalls to private operators at a commercial rate. The operators will typically be those who are well-established in the trade, or are connected to the party who won the bid. What happens is that common people who are interested in renting these stalls but who do not have the necessary business experience or financial ability, or for that matter connection, have a hard time trying to get a stall at these centres. Unfortunately, the people who need to set up small businesses to make a living for the family are usually not the ones with the financial ability or the business experience. They would invariably be people coming from the poorer section of our community. In the course of my work in the meet-the-people sessions, I have come across, and I am sure my colleagues do too, many requests for canteen stalls in schools. For many applicants, getting a stall not only provides them with an income but also allows them a certain flexibility in time management. These stalls are usually rented out at nominal rates and would typically provide a modest income for the stall operators to get by. Getting a stall in a school would mean great financial relief to those in need. These would include cases where there is only one parent in a family to support young children. Unfortunately, as things go, there are many more applications for such stalls than they are available in school canteens.”
“Unlike Mr Chiam, and I do not think the solution is to lease the island from the Indonesian Government because, apart from leasing the island, you have to deal with the long-term problem of people inhabiting the island for long periods of time. And what to do when the island finally reverts to the Indonesian authorities. I would like to ask the Minister whether the Indonesian government has given our Government better assurance of protection of life and property and, if so, what details have been decided upon.”
“Sir, let me touch on the recent situation in Bintan in respect of Singapore-Indonesia relationship. The recent riots in Bintan is a setback for Indonesia in its bid to attract more foreign investors into the country to play its part in economic recovery. It is unfortunate that foreign parties with investment in that island got caught up in what appears to be a domestic issue, that is, the people's unhappiness with the compensation given by a local party for the loss of their land. Some quarters have pointed to the shady outside hands being involved as part of the overall plan to destabilise President Abdurrahman Wahid's regime. The truth may, however, never be known. The riots raised serious concerns over the ability of the Government to provide safety and security for the foreign investors. The Indonesian Government has asked us for assistance in procuring foreign investments for the country. Unfortunately, the recent riots in Bintan have failed to inspire much confidence in investors. If our Government intends to promote Singaporeans' investment in Indonesia in general, and in Riau in particular, there is a corresponding duty, I believe, on the part of our Government to seek more solid assurance from the Indonesian Government that law and safety to both life and property will not be placed at risk through riots and mayhem. Sir, I believe that our policy has always been one of non-interference with the way others govern and manage their internal problems. However, in this instance, I believe there is some expectation from foreign investors on the part of the Indonesian Government to do more to protect investors.”
“This relationship suggests that Singapore must always play the part of the humble supplicant seeking approval for its conduct from the elder brother at all times. Sir, despite our repeated explanations, I am saddened that we still have people like Mr Tahir expressing such perverse views about our intentions. Such opinions unfortunately arise at least from a lack of balanced information going to the masses. I certainly hope indeed that the perception and attitude of Mr Tahir is not shared by his fellow Malaysians. Mr Tahir must recognise and accept that Singapore is an independent sovereign country. We are not beholden to anyone, neither do we have to be servile to anyone in our dealings. If that is the expectation of Mr Tahir, I am sad to say he will be disappointed indeed. My question, Sir, is whether the Ministry of Foreign Affairs is doing more to put clearly across to the Malaysians so that we will be better understood.”
“Sir, like my colleague before me, I am equally disturbed by Mr Malik Tahir's letter to the Business Times recently and his commentary on the state of relations with Malaysia. In his letter, Mr Tahir sought to explain why there is, according to him, a high level of hatred among Malay-Malaysians towards Singapore. I find the explanation given by Mr Tahir somewhat amusing, if not bizarre. His explanations, simply stated, are based on perception of wrongdoing on the part of Singapore and its relationship. What are some of these reasons? First, he said we published pictures of Anwar in our newspapers and this seemed like an unfriendly act, as if these pictures were not published in their local newspapers. Secondly, Mr Tahir said that we sabotaged Malaysian economy by short-selling, as if he did not realise that this is an endemic problem with many stock exchanges around the world. Thirdly, he said that our failure to control high interest rates resulted in a flight of capital from the country. Mr Tahir does not seem to know that our MAS does not control interest rates here. Sir, Mr Tahir's tone in his letter is somewhat for the belligerent. He made at least two references to war in his letter. There was also a cavalier attitude about this message, and I quote: "Singapore has chosen through this route of subtle annoyance of Malay Malaysians (regardless of whether it is in response to Malaysia's initial acts) and we Malay Malaysian panglimas accept the challenge." In a subsequent letter, Mr Tahir actually thought that Singapore-Malaysian relations should be premised on the principle of abang-adik relationship, that is, Malaysia is the abang and Singapore is the adik.”
“Sir, the Finance Minister announced last year that the Government intends to pursue company law reform and this is in line with the efforts to make us more competitive. Towards this end, several committees have been set up to look into various issues covering various areas, such as the legislative framework, corporate governance and accounting practices. Sir, I support the Government's initiative in this regard as a reform to our Companies Act is timely. I have raised the issue of the reform before several times in this House. While we do not want to pre-empt the deliberations of the various committees, of which I am a member of one, I would like to urge the Government and the Minister, in particular, to consider company law reform in its wider context. In particular, I hope the Ministry will consider the question of the role of company legislation. Should company law be designed merely to enhance shareholders' value, or should it be seen as a stakeholder in our society and, together with it, carry certain responsibilities and obligations towards its employees, members of the public, or even the environment. If we accept that the company is a stakeholder in our society, then consequential considerations follow. For instance, there could be obligations placed on the directors to consider the interest of the environment. Additionally, if it is decided that companies have obligations towards its employees, then provisions could be made to have employees represented on the board. Sir, this reform allows us the opportunity to look at such issues comprehensively and I certainly do hope that the Government will make full use of this opportunity.”
“We know that the cardinal principle in any investment is caveat emptor. However, the question which we must ask ourselves is whether the Government's duty is merely to provide a broad market framework and to leave investors to make their own better judgement. At the moment, the regulatory philosophy has shifted from a merit-based regime to one that is based on disclosure. In other words, in its present approach, so long as the company meets the listing requirements, chances are that the company's application to be admitted to the official list will be approved. Sir, I believe that the disclosure-based regulatory regime is more appropriate for markets where the investing public is sophisticated. The same, however, may not apply where the investors are not as savvy. If this is so, I believe that there is a greater duty on the Government to play a greater role in helping to protect the interest of investors. The balance between a merit-based and a disclosure-based regulatory regime lies closer to the former than the latter. At the end of the day, the Government cannot just rely on the fact that the investors have been warned. If the market crashed in a catastrophic manner, some amount of backlash will follow. I mean, just look at CLOB. As Mr Low has said earlier, there are many who still believe the Government is responsible for the problems of having the CLOB shares today. So there is this feeling that there is a certain amount of residual responsibility that the people will expect of the Government on the matter. Therefore, I beg to differ from my colleague, Mr Inderjit Singh. In some ways, I would therefore urge the Minister to examine the present policy to see if greater protection can be afforded to members of the public.”
“At the recent sitting of Parliament, my colleague, Dr Wang Kai Yuen, moved an adjournment motion wherein he was concerned that the bubble created by the Internet fever may result in the ordinary investors getting seriously hurt if the market should nosedive with a serious correction. Our DPM Lee replied by saying that not all dot.com companies would be successful. In the market which is run by a regulatory philosophy that is based on disclosure rather than merit, what is obvious is that the responsibility for the choice of share purchase must surely rest with the investor. Our DPM advised that when one invests in the market, one has to do it prudently. Sir, what concerns me is the extent to which the public has been so overwhelmed by the excitement over investing in dot.com companies that they have almost thrown caution to the wind. Right now, in Hong Kong, the dot.com fever has moved to frenzy. Following the successful launch of Tom.com, Hong Kongers are now caught on by the Internet fever. At this moment, investors in Hong Kong are hoping to be able to make a punt on IT shares in the hope that, when allotted, they can sell these shares for a handsome gain. Never mind if these investors have not read the prospectus. Never mind if there are enough disclosures of risk factors to scare any prudent investors away from the offer. As long as there is money to be made, the investors would be there no matter what the risk. Sir, the truth is that there are concerns over the present euphoria in the Internet stocks. Many will concede that the Internet stocks today are over-valued. One magazine reported that nearly three quarters of the Internet-related initial public offerings in America since mid-1995 now trade below the issued price.”
“For instance, if we recognise that there is a likelihood of a substantial social dislocation to arise from the greater use of e-commerce, should we not do more to ensure that those at greatest risk are given more to prepare them for the changes ahead? Are the exhortations of training and retraining of workers sufficient to deal with these concerns? Or should we, as the Government, do more? Should we, for instance, allow older workers double deduction of tax relief if they are able to demonstrate they are taking up additional courses to prepare them for the new economy? Sir, these are just some of the broad issues and I hope that the Minister will be able to take up these queries in the course of the debate. Finally, Sir, I support the financial policy of the Government for the new financial year.”
“These questions may span across the entire spectrum of the subject matter of the Government. For instance, what kind of rules do we want to have and how should these rules be enforced in the information technology age? How do we begin to deal with technology whose process cannot be confined effectively within a territorial boundary and thus be subject to the jurisdiction of the relevant authority? Should Singapore actively promote international agencies to help regulate and police the conduct of e-commerce and the Internet? With the explosion of e-commerce, how can our Government play a more significant part in helping Internet start-up companies take on businesses elsewhere with a first mover advantage? Sir, the American government has in fact given a big push to e-commerce in two ways. If I may just highlight them. Firstly, the government permits the patenting of business processes. Presently, e-commerce houses in the US with sound business models can look forward to some form of intellectual property protection. Such means of protection, no doubt, would greatly lend comfort to the young technopreneurs with bright ideas. Unfortunately, in Singapore, we have yet to extend our recognition to such processes as they do in the United States. Secondly, the US government has helped by imposing a moratorium on new taxes on anything bought over the Internet. Web purchases are also generally exempt from sales tax. I am not sure whether we have made provisions for such exceptions. Looking at our Government's Budget Statement, while we note the potential competition that globalisation of the world economy is going to bring upon us, we have yet to adopt a cohesive and consistent approach to deal with the matter in a more comprehensive way.”
“Recently, Minister George Yeo was asked in a press interview on his views on censorship. Implicit in the question was how Government was able to reconcile between having laws that ban pornography and that which allows pornographic materials to be readily available on the Net, as a matter of practice. The Minister's reply, I thought, was practical. If I may paraphrase the Minister, the Minister said that essentially it is not possible for us to monitor and enforce pornographic laws against every incidence of breach. What the Government should do is to use laws to proscribe such action in the hope that Singaporeans would know that such form of conduct is unacceptable and should not be encouraged. Instinctively, it is hoped that Singaporeans will not engage in such forms of conduct because they know that it would be most embarrassing for them if they are found out. Such informal norms may be sufficient to exert its social control on individuals. In other words, if I read him correctly, Minister Yeo is saying that it may be better for such rules to be internalised rather than to seek to enforce it in a formal way. Sir, I have taken the trouble to delve deeply into this subject matter as I feel that an event, such as the Internet explosion, which is going to affect us in the most significant way should play a major part in setting the tone for our debate in this budget. If we accept that the Internet in general, and e-commerce in particular, are going to revolutionise the society in a fundamental way, the way in which the society thinks and behaves, fundamental questions about the way we organise ourselves today and the way we are going to organise ourselves for the future should be asked.”
“Social order, as we know it, comes out of a centralised, rational, bureaucratic hierarchy that is very much associated with industrial revolution. Max Weber, in fact, has argued that the rational bureaucracy, with its structured rules and hierarchy, is the very essence of the modern life as we know it. However, with the revolution that is brought on by information technology, governments and authority should reconsider the way in which people are organised. Some have argued quite forcefully that in the new information technology age, it would be difficult for governments and corporations to rely exclusively on formal, bureaucratic rules to organise people over whom they have authority. Instead, governments and corporations will well have to decentralise and devolve power, and to rely on the people whom they have nominal authority to be self-organising. To be effective, self-regulation must depend on the internalising rules of conduct which are consistent with what the government or corporation is trying to achieve. It is therefore on the basis of such internalised informal norms that one expects to form the basis of social control for the future. Sir, such changes of social order requires a paradigm shift in the minds of the policymakers. It did not come as a surprise to some that when SingNet recently allowed investigations to be carried out on account holders on the question of vulnerability of their computers to hacking, there was equally an outcry by members of the public that this was an unethical act by the Internet service provider. It was seen by many as an invasion of privacy. Therefore, any attempt to regulate conduct in a formal way is bound to be met with a fair measure of resistance on the part of the users.”