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 16 of 20.
“Similarly, if we accept that the Internet represents the "Third Wave" of change to human kind, we should be prepared for some form of social dislocation within our society. As it stands, information technology allows for a higher level of automation. Smarter machines, such as robots, are increasingly able to replace human operators in the area of qualitative decision-making. Almost every aspect of human endeavour is capable of being replicated by machines. Additionally, as a country, we are faced with a population where a substantial number of adults above 40 do not possess educational qualification beyond Primary Six. It would appear that if there is any fundamental change to the structure of our economy, which must invariably come about, the people who are least qualified to handle such changes would be at a greater risk of losing their jobs. Some call this structural unemployment, that is, unemployment brought about when the economy restructures itself into a different plane of wealth creation. How should the Government take care of the well-being of these employees? Looking at the phenomenal rate at which e-commerce expanded in recent years, the prospect of massive structural unemployment hitting us in the near future is real indeed. Sir, Francis Fukuyama in his book, "The Great Disruption", said that the social order once disrupted tends to get remade again. He explains that we can expect this to happen because human beings are essentially social creatures, whose most basic instinct and drives lead them to create moral values or rules that bind themselves together in communities. Human beings are also rational creatures whose rationality would lead them to find ways of cooperating with one another spontaneously.”
“The most obvious and immediate advantage of e-commerce is that Singapore businesses need not necessarily confine themselves to the local market. With the Internet, the world is their market, and if astutely thought through, e-commerce as an alternative business model can radically expand their business horizon in more ways than they can imagine. Sir, allow me to give an example. I recently had a conversation with an economist in a research and information agency. This is a local firm that provides information and analysis principally to financial institutions. The economist tells me that he is very excited about e-commerce on the Internet. It gives him a far wider audience than what Singapore has to offer. Quite naturally, his company has a dotcom spin. He tells me that if he can gather 1,000 subscribers on his Web page, he would break even, and anything beyond that would be pure profit for him. When the world is your market place, Sir, 1,000 subscribers seem like an insignificant figure indeed. At yet another level, we must recognise and accept the way in which the Internet revolution is likely to cause social dislocation. Throughout history, any revolution, whether it has been brought about by technology or otherwise, often results in some form of adjustment and changes to society. When industrial revolution took place, people moved in a massive way from the farming communities to urban centres because of new techniques of industrial production that had enabled higher output and thus gave the people a better quality of life. New jobs were created and old jobs were made redundant. Those who could adapt to the changes were able to ride on the new wave of revolution.”
“com, a box would pop up in your computer which tells you that you could get it cheaper elsewhere. The competition that commercial firms face from Internet would mean that adaptation and change in the way in which businesses are carried out must take place if such firms are to stay relevant or, as some would put it, e-relevant, and perhaps even to survive. One immediate example would be the travel agents. Traditionally, to book a holiday, one would go down to the travel agent's office to sort out the airline ticketing, hotel accommodation, tours, and so on. The travel agent gets a middleman commission and that is the nature of his business. Today, it would be possible to do all of these things through the Internet without having to go to the travel agent. Does it mean that the travel agent will go the way of the dodo bird? Not necessarily. If travel agents could, and for many they have, get around the business of adding a dotcom capability to their businesses, they could well stay relevant and even profitable for the future. Increasingly, the line taken by many management consultants is that big businesses that fail to grapple with the consequences of e-commerce are putting their company at risk. Sir, on the flip side, e-commerce on the Internet has tremendous opportunities to offer to businesses. In 1999, global e-commerce was worth a little over US$150 billion. Around 80% of the transactions was carried out between one form of business and another. Indeed, the B2B Web exchanges are expanding at a hectic pace. The Economist reported that in America, e-tailing revenues tripled last year; in Europe and Japan, they rose even faster.”
“Any attempt to regulate the conduct of these chat rooms or even seek to pry behind the veneer of anonymity will be met with almost complete resentment. Sir, because the Internet is borderless, we are faced with the issue of whether as a country we should go beyond our territorial boundaries to regulate the flow of information coming into Singapore. The challenge is pressing, indeed, if there are bigots out there sending all manner of misinformation which is calculated to undermine the racial and political harmony which exists in our country. In the age of the Internet, we are confronted, at another level, with a global economy that has radically increased the intensity of competition. With the free flow of goods and services and even capital, no business in any part of the world, whether or not that business enjoys any state given monopoly rights, can be shielded from intense competition. In a recent publication of the Economist, it was reported that what is truly revolutionary about the Internet is its ability to generate different pricing mechanisms and, in particular, to allow price and product comparisons to be made and various kinds of auctions and exchanges to take place. The Internet provides a perfect medium for aggregating buyers and sellers from all over the world, and also offers an excellent way of comparing prices and collecting information. Up until the revolution of the Internet, the process of aggregating product and price information would have been a rather tedious affair indeed. And the technology in this area is moving fast. At the moment, there exists in the market software that would automatically inform the surfer of the best prices that are available elsewhere. For instance, with the software, if you are about to buy a book from Amazon.”
“The ability of the Internet to penetrate and reach, with little or no difficulty, any connected home or office located anywhere in the world suggests that any legislation to control or regulate its use is at best a token statement of acceptable conduct. As, indeed, while we have laws on pornography, the ease with which any child can have access to such materials on the Net is often seen as a mockery of what we try to do. In the cyberspace, space and time no longer present themselves as barriers to communication. As a result, the intensity and frequency with which people are engaged in communicating among themselves give rise to a sense of community founded on a global dimension. Sir, we have become a global community characterised by a free flow of information and exchange of ideas. Out of this exchange, e-commerce emerged. A whole new dimension and manner of doing business now exists, which was never before possible. Suddenly, the market became larger and the competition keener. The Internet has brought about a greater flow of information, goods and capital across boundaries. Sir, a society that is organised around information technology places greater emphasis on the values of equality and freedom. At the workplace, a whole new office culture has evolved. People go to work in casual clothes, sport pony tails, call each other on a first name basis and also relate to each other more casually. On the Internet, the fact that one is able to assume a different identity through the faceless e-mail addresses means a greater freedom of expression. It is no surprise, therefore, that some of the most heated and candid expressions take place in cyberspace. This is a virtue that Net surfers value on the Internet.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I want to thank you for allowing me to join in the debate at this juncture. Sir, like many of my colleagues before me, I would like to focus on the Internet only because of the importance of the Internet in our lives today. The Finance Minister in his Budget Statement touched on the significant way in which the Internet has transformed the global economy and the nature of the competition in the new millennium. I cannot agree more. What we are seeing in the world today is a radical and fundamental shift in the economic underpinnings of our society. Mankind has moved from its hunter-gatherer beginnings to the industrial revolution of the 17th century, and now for the third time, into the new era of information technology. Some analysts call this the "Third Wave". This shift is most evident in advanced economies where over the last quarter of the century, services have displaced manufacturing as the basis of generating wealth. What it means, Sir, is that instead of working in a factory on a line production, the new age worker will find himself in a service-oriented line, such as process control, software writing, or financial services. Increasingly, instead of relying on pure sweat and physical labour, man is turning to mental endeavour as a means of sustenance. Production of goods and services, therefore, tends towards greater use of automation and information technology. In many ways, one sees this as a manifestation of the knowledge-based economy that we spoke about not too long ago. This shift in the post-industrial society to a computer-driven knowledge-based economy has significant implications for us. At one level, the force of the Internet has made territorial boundaries and local jurisdictions almost meaningless statements in a way.”
“Sir, while I am aware that the police force is constrained by limited human resources, would the Minister consider greater use of alternative approaches such as surveillance cameras in the more secluded places to ensure safety and to give greater comfort and confidence to the people using such secluded places? Assoc. Prof. Ho Peng Kee: Yes, certainly. When I said CSSP, I have cited park patrols only as one example. Other examples can be considered, such as surveillance cameras and lighting up certain areas of the park which need to be lighted up. I think that if we are proactive, more can be done. What I am saying is that certainly police takes this case in hand and the message that is being sent, and the importance of police patrols. The presence of park patrols is also important. At the same time, all of us can also do our part, as users of the park, to be mindful of possible dangers and risks and, also working with grassroots leaders on the ground, take whatever steps that can be helpful. I thank Mr Sin for this suggestion, as he himself has done in Tampines, about the use of surveillance cameras in appropriate settings.”
“But I would also at the same time like to add that hands-on experience is of limited application if it is not tied up with theory which is acquired in the classroom. I think with maturity of experience in practice, going back to the classroom and re-examining some of the propositions in law and having a deeper understanding of the legal theories would help make us better lawyers. In this regard, I stand by my earlier suggestions that there is a place for such an institute to be formed under the auspices of the Law Faculty.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, thank you for allowing me to clarify the point which I made earlier. In my speech earlier, I said that, for Singapore lawyers to practise here, the opportunities are not that many. My learned colleague has replied by saying that there are plenty of opportunities. I do not deny that at this present moment, the opportunities for tie-up and therefore to learn areas of Tier 1 work, which we otherwise do not have, are there. Presently, the opportunities are there for Singapore law firms to acquire Tier 1 expertise through continuing participation with their foreign counterparts and their regional work itself. What I am saying is that to formalise this arrangement by an amendment to the legislation under the Legal Profession Act may not be necessary if that was our only concern. The second point which Mr Shanmugam said is in respect of small firms. I agree that the mandate of the Committee does not encompass the effects of allowing foreign competition on small and medium-size practices. One would however need to consider the issue of excesses in competition that would result from increasing competition in Tier 2 and Tier 3 work which results from allowing foreign firms to practise Singapore law. We all know that excesses in competition may not necessarily be good for the consumers. One of the concerns arising from this competition and allowing foreign law firms to practise Singapore law is the increase in costs for the consumers. With rising costs, I am not sure whether or not this would have an impact on the competitiveness of our financial services sector. As regards the third point about my suggestion that the faculty set up an institute of financial services, I do not deny that hands-on experience is important.”
“It is unlikely that the solicitor is ever going to have sufficient assets to pay for his mistakes. It seems strange to me that fund managers who give wrong advice and cause people to suffer losses in their investments should be able to hide behind the veil of incorporation. Lawyers, on the other hand, are expected to face consequences on their own. Sir, I believe this is an anomaly. It is archaic and should be rectified. Sir, all said, subject to my earlier comments, I support the Bill.”
“The new arrangement means that a lawyer's liability need no longer be unlimited in respect of his partners' deeds. Presently lawyers, as you may have heard earlier, act in partnerships and are liable for one another. Sir, while I welcome the amendment, I would say that the amendment, however, does not go far enough. Presumably, retaining the personal liability of the solicitor at law, despite the formation of law corporation, is meant to ensure that the solicitor continues to give his full attention to his work. This provision seems to assume that the removal of the liability of the solicitor under a corporation would mean that a solicitor would not give his full attention and this may increase the possibility of negligence on his part. I am not sure whether this assumption is borne by any empirical evidence. Does it mean that the solicitor will be careless in his work simply because he no longer suffers from being liable in an unlimited manner? If the concerns are with the care and diligence with which a solicitor handles his work, and the protection of the clients, these issues can be dealt with in several ways. For instance, a solicitor can be struck off the Rolls for negligence, in which case the price he pays will be a loss of livelihood through legal practice. Alternatively, the laws could be amended to ensure that there is adequate insurance coverage in such matters. The extent of the insurance coverage may be made known to the clients in advance so that if a client chooses to deal with the solicitor on a matter in excess of the amount covered by the insurance, he deals with his solicitor at his own peril. Additionally, where most of these transactions run into astronomical sums, making a solicitor liable will not help recompense the victim in any way.”
“Yet, while the quality of the entrants to the law faculty and the profession has improved, it does not necessarily mean by the same token that these graduates will in the course of their career acquire the cutting edge technology in the legal profession which Singapore needs for the future. Acquiring these skills through hands-on experience and through formal alliances and joint venture is part of the solution. Perhaps the authority should seriously consider setting up an institute of financial services within the law faculty of the NUS that is dedicated to the teaching and research of Tier 1 work. This institute could perhaps be dedicated to acquiring the necessary legal software and know-how and disseminating the technology to practitioners who are currently in the profession dealing with these sorts of matters. The focus of the institute should be more on the practical approach to the law, including drafting and negotiation. And I might add that in the curricula, they should include subjects from the other disciplines as well, such as business administration, economics and accounting. By acquiring an overall expertise in not just law alone but in the other disciplines, I think we will go a long way in the training of our lawyers to acquire Tier 1 expertise. There is a great gap at present in our legal education at this moment with respect to such requirements, and I would urge the Government to seriously consider such an initiative. Sir, I was greatly encouraged by another amendment which allows the formation of limited liability corporation. It is a fact that as lawyers, unlimited liability hangs over us like a sword of Damocles. This adds greatly to the stresses and anxieties that a solicitor has had to face.”
“Hopefully the involvement of off-shore firms in local practice will increase substantially the competitiveness of our financial services sector and help promote Singapore as a regional financial hub. Singapore firms have evolved in its own way because it has been a relatively sheltered profession all these years. We do not deny that legal services in Singapore have improved over the years. In terms of the way law firms are managed and run, I would admit that the current local legal services are still lacking in some ways when compared to the offshore firms. In this regard, there are many areas that Singapore law firms can usefully learn from their counterparts. Joint ventures and formal alliances will give Singapore firms the ability to bring themselves up to the standards and demands of an international practice. Intensive interaction with these law firms will give Singapore lawyers the opportunity to provide legal services at a standard which is comparable with those of the West. Sir, it is right that the Act sets out certain safeguards in respect of formal alliances and joint ventures. One must bear in mind that in a joint venture the possibility of a stronger party dominating the weaker one is very real. Here unless such ventures are regulated, we cannot be sure how Singapore law firms may not be overwhelmed by their stronger foreign counterparts. I believe that to focus the changes to the legal profession on formal alliances and joint venture entirely may be to miss the point altogether. What is crucial and necessary to enhance Singapore's competitiveness for the future really lies in the quality of the lawyers that we produce. The Committee recognised that the quality of lawyers in recent years has generally speaking improved substantially.”
“Unless Singapore lawyers are equally equipped or qualified to practise New York or English law, there is a strong likelihood that the joint venture or formal alliances in form and substance may result in a situation where Tier 1 work will continue to be dominated by foreign lawyers and Tier 2 and Tier 3 work will continue to be handled by local lawyers with foreign lawyers competing on Singapore law as well. What it does mean is that while there is no assurance that Tier 1 technology will be transferred to the local lawyer, greater competition will result from giving foreign lawyers the opportunity to practise local law. Sir, it is unfortunate that the Committee did not consider in depth the consequences that follow from allowing foreign law firms to practise Singapore law. How will the small firms adapt to the greater competition that will result? The Committee believes that formal alliance or joint venture will provide a convenient and efficient mode of delivery for legal service in cross-border financial transactions and the upgrade of legal expertise of Singapore lawyers through the transfer of expertise presumably in Tier 1 work from foreign lawyers to Singapore lawyers which hitherto has yet to materialise. I would support the amendment to the Legal Profession Act not because I believe that the joint venture would necessarily transfer substantial Tier 1 expertise to Singapore lawyers, but because I believe that by allowing foreign lawyers to practise Singapore law, it would intensify the extent of competition with respect to Tier 2 and perhaps Tier 3 work, and hopefully result in an overall improvement in the quality of legal services in Singapore.”
“However, as it stands at the moment, unless and until Singapore develops substantially as an international financial centre where the international community has developed much confidence in the use of Singapore law, it is unrealistic to expect Singapore legal capabilities to develop on its own in this direction. The current arrangement involving a division of labour between offshore and local firms in respect of foreign and local law seems to have worked very well to meet the needs of the present requirements of the financial sector in this country in respect of Tier 1 work. One would therefore be very hard put to see how acquiring Tier 1 expertise by Singapore lawyers is likely to improve Singapore's competitiveness as an international centre if in respect of these transactions, the governing laws continue to be US and UK laws. It is non sequitur, Sir, that because Singapore lawyers have acquired expertise in Tier 1 work, international investors and financial institutions are likely to apply Singapore law as the governing law of the transaction. Sir, if as the Committee has concluded, the weakness of the local legal services lies in the lack of capability in Tier 1 work, formal alliance and joint ventures, which depending on the nature of the tie-up, allow for the practice of Singapore law by foreign lawyers is unlikely to help us acquire Tier 1 capability if Singapore law is unlikely to be used in Tier 1 work for the foreseeable future. As it stands, the Committee is of the view that our legal expertise in Tier 2 work is adequate for our needs. Giving foreign law firms and foreign lawyers a licence to practise Singapore law does not necessarily assure us that local lawyers will have the hands-on experience for Tier 1 work.”
“Moreover, because Tier 1 work typically involves substantial capital funding, it is unlikely that local financial institutions are willing to bear the bulk of the risk without syndicating such risk, often internationally. Where there are foreign elements in cross-border transactions, and I am referring to the foreign banking and financial institutions, as it stands at the moment, one finds it hard to see how we can avoid the application of New York and English laws in these transactions. This is also particularly compounded by the fact that the Monetary Authority of Singapore has a stringent policy against using Singapore currency for offshore lending. The Committee also concluded that in respect of the legal services for Tier 2 and Tier 3 work, Singapore lawyers are sufficiently equipped and would have the legal expertise to undertake these transactions. The finding of the Committee also confirmed the opinion of the large majority of offshore lawyers that Singapore lawyers have the adequate skills for current onshore financing and also for a limited range of cross-border financial transactions. It is also a known fact that in respect of Tier 1 work, Singapore law firms do not have the necessary legal expertise. But then again, until Singapore law becomes the applicable law in these transactions, it is unrealistic to expect Singapore lawyers to acquire any expertise in Tier 1 work. Sir, having said that, it does not mean that we should not, as part of our evolutionary process of our legal profession, begin to acquire such expertise.”
“Sir, the recommendation of the Committee to intensify collaboration between offshore and Singapore firms to provide convenient and efficient legal services for cross-border financial transactions is one strategy which the Committee has recommended to help Singapore breach the gap in capabilities for Tier 1 work. The Committee recognised that in contrast to New York and English law which is used for Tier 1 work, Singapore law is used largely for onshore and cross-border financial transactions which are typically Tier 2 and Tier 3 work. Currently, these onshore and cross-border financial transactions constitute only a small percentage of the total value of financial transactions in the region. Singapore law services play an insignificant role in enhancing Singapore's competitiveness as an international financial centre. The Committee concluded that competition in Singapore law services alone does not contribute to Singapore's competitiveness as a financial centre. What it does mean is that as far as international financial transactions are concerned, parties still prefer the application of New York and English law as the governing laws, especially for financial transactions funded in US dollars which is the standard currency of international finance. Offshore firms in Singapore do play a part in meeting the demands for legal services in respect of regional transactions that apply non-Singapore laws. It follows that unless and until home-grown Singapore financial institutions expand their capacity for regional lending, the choice of governing law will continue to be New York and English laws. In this regard, it does not appear that, at least in respect of Tier 1 work, Singapore law is likely to have a significant role in the foreseeable future.”
“In their findings, the Committee envisaged that the volume of onshore and offshore and cross-border financial transactions is likely to increase in the coming years. With the expansion in the volume of financial services, it would therefore be crucial that the legal services in Singapore have the capability to support such an expansion. As a matter of finding, the Committee concluded that Singapore law firms have the capability to undertake Tier 2 and Tier 3 work. On the other hand, the Committee also concluded that local firms do not have the adequate capability to advise on Tier 1 work. For the benefit of my colleagues here, let me just explain the different definitions with respect to the different tiers that were referred to by the Committee. By definition, Tier 2 work refers to the legal software required for conventional financial services, such as the issue and trading of capital markets instruments, onshore and offshore financing such as syndicated and multi-currency loans, and mergers and acquisitions. Tier 3 work refers to the legal software required for Singapore law opinion on Tier 2 offshore financial products, domestic property, consumer financing and unsecured loans. On the other hand, Tier 1 work refers to the software required for the cutting edge financial products, such as project finance of infrastructure involving power, roads, water and telecommunication, international capital markets, asset securitisation and structured finance. In the area of the legal capability for Tier 1 work, we do not deny that offshore firms, in particular those coming from the UK and US jurisdictions have it.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, thank you for allowing me to speak on the amendments to the Legal Profession Act which I support. Before proceeding further, allow me to declare my interest as a practising solicitor who will be affected, whether directly or indirectly, by the outcome of the amendments. Sir, I believe the present amendments have no doubt been initiated by the recommendations of the Legal Services Review Committee. In its report to the Government dated June 1999, the Committee made a number of significant proposals that I believe form the basis of the amendments that are before us today. Following from the recommendations of the Financial Sector Review Group on the liberalisation of the financial sector, the Legal Services Review Committee has also recommended that the legal services sector should likewise be liberalised. Towards this end, the Committee has recommended that the Government allow an unrestricted number of foreign alliances and a restricted number of joint ventures between local and offshore firms. The recommendations for strategic tie-up come with a string of other recommendations; such as keeping tabs on the talent pool of Singapore lawyers working abroad and relocating in-house counsel of the global banking and financial institutions to Singapore. In order to effectively debate on the present Bill, it is therefore necessary for us to examine in detail the underlying premises of the Legal Service Committee's recommendations. I have no doubt that the Legal Services Committee has put in substantial amount of effort in seeking to tap on a wide range of opinions to see how Singapore's long term competitiveness in the financial services can be better served by a restructuring of the legal services industry.”
“I think central to the debate on civil society is a certain perception that a civil society must entail certain values. These values are to some extent a reflection of the kind of values that is often associated with the more liberal society of the West; where there is greater freedom of speech, greater civic participation, and a more liberal media. These are the sorts of issues that one would normally associate with a civil society. Having said that, and this is consistent with the kind of debate that has emerged in recent months, the sort of ideas that go into a debate for civil society need not necessarily dovetail with the kind of interests that the HDB heartlanders may have. And to that extent, therefore, it may not necessarily be the same kind of agenda that the two interest groups are pursuing.”
“However, where there is indeed a constructive attempt being made to improve legislation or policies, the Government must be seen to be taking this effort more seriously. Finally, I would like to extend my deepest appreciation to the President for delivering the keynote Speech of the Government. No doubt, the Speech is meant to chart the course of the Government in the coming years. It has also provided us a valuable opportunity to take stock of where we are coming from and where we are heading. For the above reasons, Sir, I support the motion.”
“In some cases, we have had assurances from the Government that subsequent amendments to the Act will take into account the feedback. However, in some other cases, it did not appear that the feedback was taken seriously. Our focus on the development of people in this debate touches on the issue of the kind of civil society we want to create in Singapore. My learned colleague, the Member for Bishan-Toa Payoh GRC, has asked pertinent questions in this debate. He asked whether the people of Singapore are prepared to take responsibility for their decisions and how the Government can send clear signals on the terms of participation from the citizens. Sir, there are many forces at work in society. While some may like to argue for more political space within Singapore, I agree with my colleague that others may not feel as comfortable for the kind of space that is asked for, and we would be quite happy with the status quo. To those who clamour for Singapore to be a better civil society, there is a certain presumption that this is what the rest of Singaporeans want. The truth of the matter is that your HDB heartlander may not be so interested in these issues so long as the integrity of the Government of Singapore is not in doubt and the people continue to enjoy a standard and quality of life that is unparalleled anywhere in the world. What makes this vocal minority think that they have a better right to impose their views on the silent majority? We must recognise that the responsibility of the Government rests in balancing the various forces at work. We must also remember that a duly elected government has the mandate of the people to do so. Sir, we accept that it is not always possible for the Government to agree to every issue.”
“However, every Singaporean has a given right to share in the country's success. Equally, those who contribute more on taxes must not begrudge the various schemes aimed at improving the lot of the not so fortunate. After all, we must remember that it is our duty to look after the less fortunate in our society. Sir, we speak of an active citizenship under the Singapore 21 vision that envisages more avenues for citizens to participate in the nation's affairs, in order to tap on the widest range of views. My colleague, Mr Thomas, has also touched on this issue earlier. We want to be able to get citizens to participate in the building of Singapore, and to get them to contribute ideas so that they can understand what is at stake. In law, we have this maxim that justice must not only be done, but must be seen to be done. This principle applies equally well in our desire to want participation of our people in the policy-making process. We have the Feedback Unit and the regular dialogue sessions with our grassroots leaders. Many people have often wondered how much of the feedback that is given has been taken into consideration in the formulation of policies. No doubt, there is certain feedback which has translated itself into changes in policies and legislation. On the other hand, there has also been numerous feedback that has been perceived to have been ignored. Perhaps more can be done in this regard to convince the people that their views are taken seriously. As a simple illustration, there are many Bills in this Parliament that have been passed which have had the participation of many concerned Members. Yet, despite the input of the Members, the Bills nonetheless are immediately passed after the Second Reading.”
“We divide people into the Normal and Express stream students, the gifted and non-gifted students, the EM1 and EM2 students, the overseas scholars and local scholars; or for that matter, the scholar class as opposed to the non-scholar class; and more recently, the distinction between foreign talents and local talents, and, of course, the cosmopolitans and the heartlanders. If one thinks about it, it is essentially these categories of distinction that divide people into being more capable as opposed to being less capable. How will this division, Sir, help with the bonding process that we are all trying so hard to create? While the reality of inequality in life is a fact that we must all recognise and live with, it is another to be typecast and to be constantly told, whether directly or indirectly, that one is less capable than the other. I can understand and appreciate the circumstances in which these distinctions have emerged. However, we must be mindful that in harping on this subject, we may lead to a situation of a deep divide within our society. This would surely put a strain on our social cohesion rather than reinforce it. We should perhaps give more emphasis to the principle that for those who are more capable, the rewards will be there for them, and more is expected of them to serve our society. For those who are not as capable, they will always be a part of Singapore, and be made to feel that they are just as wanted and appreciated for what they have contributed towards the making of this country. Here, I like the idea that we should have more emphasis on bonding between the successful Singaporeans and those who have not done as well. We must not envy or begrudge those who have succeeded.”
“At this moment, we recognise that there is some tension between leaving employment entirely to market forces and having employment regulated to a greater extent by legislation. The truth of the matter is that there are many older workers who have been retrenched, and having spent time acquiring new skills, are still having difficulty finding jobs. Will the Government be prepared to consider, aside from the present scheme of helping them find jobs through an exchange run by the Manpower Ministry, more initiatives in getting these retrenched older workers back to the workforce? The Singaporean as a member of a wider community The President's Speech touches on the fact that it is not enough for Singaporeans to be individually talented. Our drive towards making Singapore a better society depends very much on getting Singaporeans to vote together and having a common sense of commitment to Singapore and to one another. Here we speak of the Singapore "heartware". We recognise that social bonding and cohesion is an essential ingredient for the long-term survival of Singapore. In order for Singaporeans to have one heartbeat for Singapore, it is important that we continue to emphasise to all Singaporeans that they, irrespective of colour, creed, age or gender, will always have a place in this country. Our policy statements must therefore be sensitive to not creating artificial distinctions within society that unnecessarily stratify people according to categories.”
“As we progress to the new millennium, we must be prepared to move away from our mindset and be prepared to change and perhaps give up some of our own values. The values that have served us well may not necessarily be the same values that will serve our interests for the future. The question is, are we prepared to change with time, and change more radically, if necessary? Thirdly, it is right that we should speak of lifelong learning and of continual training of our workers to prepare them for the demands of changing technology in the new millennium. Continual training will constantly upgrade our workers' productivity and skills and, in turn, allow them to earn a higher margin of wages and improve their quality and standard of living. As we restructure our economy by emphasising on higher valued-added products in manufacturing and services, it is important that our workers continue to be retrained and re-tooled themselves to prepare them for the challenges ahead. The process of training and retraining is especially important for workers who have been retrenched in the industry. For those who have been retrenched, we send them for courses and training in order that they, after having found new skills, can then be re-employed in the industry, thus allowing them the opportunity to continue with their work. Unfortunately, Sir, for many of these older workers, a lack of skills that is solved by education and training, is only part of the problem. For many, their age and the relatively higher salary that they command make them unemployable. What can we do to ensure that these workers who have gone for training are given employment?”
“Sir, my question is, if we want to recognise the potential value of every Singaporean and want to encourage them to develop every talent that they have further, we should not just confine our recognition of success to just academic achievements, the sports and the arts. The issue in this is not whether we should widen the scope of success to recognise such skills, but rather in extending our recognition of what constitutes success, are we encouraging Singaporeans to constantly devote themselves to their interests and undertakings in order to excel in what they do. Sir, excellence is a relative term and must be seen in the context of what is achieved. For example, in our new definition of success, do we give recognition to the handicapped child who surmounted his handicap to complete his education in a normal manner, even though his academic achievements may not be as remarkable as the top achiever? By all accounts, one would surely not deny the child's efforts are an enduring testimony of endeavour and courage. And for this reason, it should be sufficient for our purposes to qualify the child to be held up as a model of excellence and success. Secondly, as part of the people development programme, we recognise that we must go beyond using knowledge created by others by creating new knowledge ourselves. This approach has deep implication in the way our society develops. To create new knowledge, one must expect Singaporeans to be inquisitive and creative. To be creative and to expand the frontier of knowledge, one must be prepared to question basic assumptions and, if need be, to slaughter some sacred cows. It is only by being able to accept changes to our basic assumptions that society can find progress.”
“The Singaporean as an individual It is heartening to know that our Government is not sparing any effort in preparing the next generation of Singaporeans for the knowledge-based economy. Towards this end, I note the Education Ministry is adopting a new approach in education that is ability driven and tailored to the needs of every child. It is also heartening to note that the Government is trying to redefine the meaning of success to include a wider range of skills such as the arts and sports. We all know that every child is created differently. Some are more artistically inclined while others are more at home with scientific research and mathematical calculations. It is unfortunate that in the early days of our development, we had no choice but to place a high priority and a premium on those skills that are better able to help us contribute to the development of our economy. Accordingly, we had to produce the engineers, the scientists and the bureaucrats to meet the needs of our country. The arts and the sports, in the order of things, were given relatively less emphasis. Those with abilities in the arts and the sports may not have been given as much recognition as they deserve. As a consequence, we have either lost these sons and daughters to faraway places or we have not provided a conducive environment for them to develop their talents further. Hopefully, with the new emphasis, we should be able to address the difference in recognition. Those who are artistically inclined and those with sporting talents can now have much hope in getting their hard work and success more widely recognised.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of the motion standing in the name of the Member for Bishan-Toa Payoh GRC. As we move into the new millennium, it is apt that we should develop a vision for Singapore that focuses on developing our people. For the past 34 years, we have focused our resources ostensibly more on the development of the physical infrastructure. We have built up one of the finest road systems, ports, airports, housing estates, and information technology infrastructure, to name a few. Indeed, any foreigner coming to Singapore will not fail to notice the tremendous progress that this country has made since independence. Once the house is put in order, one would suppose the more challenging issue is how do we turn this house into a home. For us in Parliament, I believe our bigger challenge in the new millennium is to build a greater sense of belonging and of being rooted amongst Singaporeans for Singapore. As indeed we begin to ask this question, the starting point I believe for the discussion lies in the question of how we strengthen the sense of belonging to this place. The key really lies in the strengthening of community bonds. For this reason, we understand that the Singapore 21 vision is meant to develop our people into a more cohesive society for the future. One can possibly redefine the strategy into two broad areas. The first is a focus on the individual Singaporean, and the second being, the Singaporean as a member of a wider community. I believe that the outcome of our work in these two areas will to some extent have an impact on the people's sense of being rooted in and belonging to Singapore.”
“I would take the second question first. I think the substance of Mr Mandela's answer is essentially that democracy is to be defined by each country based on its own national circumstance and it is not for him to provide a universal definition. In response to the first question on the definition of parliamentary democracy, I do not think this is the appropriate occasion for us to engage in an extensive debate on what parliamentary democracy is beyond reaffirming what I have stated earlier, that the process of parliamentary democracy is important and that in this country, we must recognise that we have a free and fair election and that the people are given the right to choose, and that is important.”
“For the above reasons, Sir, I support the motion.”
“Each time, this House has risen to the occasion to decide how our political system should develop in this country. We have never failed in our duty. That we are able to achieve the democratic milestones is largely attributable to the brave men and women of this House who have never failed to debate fearlessly, whatever their conscience dictated. We must not forget that the challenge was even greater in the early years. Singapore as a young nation then was lifted from the womb of turbulent and troubled times which saw the communists and communalists creating mayhem and riots on the streets. The core of politics then was indeed a call to do battle with these elements. All too often, these brave men and women had to endure verbal abuse and at times, the threat of physical abuse to do what they thought was right. For every brave and dedicated Member, Singapore owes them an immense debt of gratitude. In my past two years here in this House, I have never had the occasion to doubt that any of my backbench colleagues here would be afraid to ask questions or to seek answers to anything which they thought was not right. And to the credit of our Government, they have never failed to provide answers no matter how unpleasant the subject matter is, if only because they know they owe a duty and a responsibility to account to the people. Ours is truly a system of accountability which all Singaporeans must jealously guard. We owe a duty not only to the people of Singapore but also to all those brave men and women before us in this House to continue with the fine tradition which began earlier. As we walk through the portals of the new Chamber, let us continue to carry the torch of honest devotion and dedication to the protection and promotion of the interests of the people of Singapore.”
“If the Member truly thinks he can represent the interests of the people, then let him take it to the people to decide. If he thinks that the popularity of the Opposition is rising, then why is it that his percentage of votes at his constituency is declining with the passing years? The changing of electoral boundaries is a prerogative of the Government of the day. In fact, it came from western democracy. If the PAP Government was not performing or if the PAP Government was dishonest and was out to cheat the people, then no amount of electoral boundary changing is going to prevent the people from voting the PAP out of Parliament. So, Mr Chiam, do not blame the PAP for the dismal and lamentable performance of the Opposition parties. Over the years, this House has never failed in its duty to develop our political system. In the manner described by Mr Mandela, we have evolved our own parliamentary democracy which is unique and which reflects truly what the people of Singapore want. This House has, indeed through the years, seen the milestones of constitutional change which strengthened democracy in Singapore. We have ensured minority representation in this Chamber through the GRC system. We have established the Presidential Council for Minority Rights to ensure that we are not faced with the greater evil of the majority trampling on the rights of the minority. We have guarded against the potential weakness of a dominant one party parliament by providing for the NCMPs and the NMPs. We have ensured that a profligate government will not squander the people's resources, by subterfuge or otherwise, by putting in place the institution of the Elected President. Sir, these developments make Singapore unique in the democratic world.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I want to thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak in support of the Prime Minister's motion. Sir, two years ago, when the then President of the Republic of South Africa, Mr Nelson Mandela, visited Singapore, he was asked a question whether he thought Singapore was a democratic country. Mr Mandela, without hesitation said, and I paraphrase him, that there is no universal definition of democracy. The people of each country must decide their own destiny and how they want to shape their own political institutions. Mr Mandela's words are apposite for today's motion. Singapore has evolved its own form of parliamentary democracy and we stand today at the threshold of a new beginning in the new Chamber to recognise the contribution of this House to this unique development. No doubt when this House first sat in 1965, the Members were imbued with much enthusiasm and anxiety to make Singapore a bastion of democracy. Singaporeans then, as they do now, embraced the democratic ideals of the popular vote, free and fair elections and, above all, the constitutionality of government. While we know that democracy must express itself through the popular vote and fair elections, we too know that beyond these basic principles, we must determine how our democracy must necessarily evolve. Sir, I beg to differ from the Member for Potong Pasir and the NCMP in what they said earlier in this House. The two Members said that we are not a parliamentary democracy because there are not enough Opposition Members in this House. The simple question is: is it our fault that the Opposition Members are not elected? Is it then the responsibility of the ruling party to nurture the Opposition party?”
“Sir, would the Government consider creating a separate career path for these scholars who have signed up with the Civil Service as part of career development rather than to spend part of their service in the public service and then move on to the private sector subsequently? BG Lee Hsien Loong: I think this may be difficult because when somebody joins the public service, the expectation is that he will spend most of his career in the public sector. He does not have to be in the same department, but can be in many Ministries, even in statutory boards. And if we interpret it broadly, he can even be in some GLCs. But if a person wants to spend most of his career in the private sector, then he joins a bank, a multinational corporation, or a law firm. I think it is very hard to have an arrangement where you are half in and half out. You will have to have a home where you are based and, in the case of scholars, the home is the public sector.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to go back to the question of the President's health. If the condition of the President's health is crucial to the consideration of support given by the Cabinet to a candidate, why was not the present candidate, who is 75 years old and is known to have had a bypass, required to submit a medical report, even if he is not required by the Constitution to do so? Instead, we require the same of President Ong.”
“For example, Normal (Technical) course students study Computer Applications, a course which is not available to other secondary school pupils. The Normal (Technical) course was started in 1994 largely to cater to these students who otherwise would not have attended secondary school. Students who do complete the Normal (Technical) course can proceed on to post-secondary technical skills training at the Institute of Technical Education (ITE). The ITE Centres and courses underwent a major revamp which was completed in 1992. About 74% of all Normal (Technical) course students proceed to ITE. As I mentioned earlier, many more move on to the polytechnics. Upon graduation from ITE and the polytechnics, they can take up highly rewarding careers in technical and business fields, and help meet Singapore's needs for technically-skilled manpower.”
“Since Primary 4 Streaming was introduced in 1991, the percentage of dropouts at the primary level has decreased from 1.9% of a Primary 1 cohort in 1990 to 0.4% in 1998. There is flexibility in the streaming system. For those who may develop a little slower, there are "bridges and ladders" in place. For example, Normal (Technical) pupils who demonstrate the aptitude for academic studies have the opportunity to cross over to the Normal (Academic) course or even the Express course. Each year, about 5% of Normal (Technical) pupils cross over to Normal (Academic) stream. Outstanding graduates from ITE also have the opportunity to pursue a polytechnic education, and aspire for more challenging and rewarding technical careers. In 1998, about 550 students gained admission to the Polytechnics for full-time education, based on their ITE qualifications. Between 1994 and 1998, the percentage of pupils streamed into EM3 was fairly stable, averaging about 9% of all Primary 4 pupils. In absolute terms, the number of pupils streamed into EM3 increased from 3,648 in 1994 to 4,587 in 1998, due to an increase in the Primary 4 enrolment. Pupils streamed into EM3 at Primary 5 continue their studies in their own schools; they are not channelled to other schools. EM3 pupils are well-prepared for vocational development at each stage of the education system. From the first batch of EM3 students, about 100 completed their `O' levels through the Normal (Academic) course and were admitted directly into the Polytechnics earlier this year. Most would, however, typically proceed on to do the Normal (Technical) course in secondary schools, which builds upon their EM3 curriculum through a technically-inclined and practice-oriented curriculum.”
“Would the Minister agree that the policy of the Government is to have more children if you can afford it? Surely, according priority to these children would be a step in the right direction. RAdm Teo Chee Hean: Mr Speaker, Sir, that is of course a suggestion which is possible, but we have no current plans to review our position. The position is a reasonable one in which all the children who go to school have the same amount of priority. EM3 LANGUAGE STREAM STUDENTS (Educational and vocational development) 5. Mdm Claire Chiang See Ngoh asked the Minister for Education (a) what was the trend regarding the number of EM3 language stream students for the years 1994 to 1998; (b) what schools these students were channelled to; (c) how many of these students enrolled into polytechnics; and (d) what steps his Ministry will take to enhance their educational and vocational development. The Senior Minister of State for Education (Mr Peter Chen) (for the Minister for Education): Mr Speaker, Sir, before I provide the information asked for by Mdm Chiang, I think we should remind ourselves, first of all, why we have the EM3 stream. Different pupils have different talents and abilities. We have to recognise this in order to help each child progress at a pace he is comfortable with, so that he may develop to his fullest potential. The EM3 stream is designed for pupils who are less academically-inclined. They are just different. For these pupils, we tailor a curriculum which is different from that of the EM1 and EM2 streams, so that they acquire the language and numeracy skills to prepare them for further technical or other training. By customising the educational programmes we deliver, we have helped more children complete 10 years of general education.”
“If the people are indeed very, very unhappy because they feel they have been shortchanged by the resignation of their MP, then obviously, there is an avenue for them to register their unhappiness at the next election. We are half-way through the present term of this office and it is only approximately another 21/2 years before we are required by law to go into another general election. Rather than calling for a fresh election, we should focus our mind on how we can serve the residents better during this period. I have spoken to many Whampoa residents and they feel that a fresh election is not what they want at this moment. I think it will be rather presumptuous on the part of the Opposition Members to assume that this is really what the residents of Whampoa want. What matters to them is whether the present MPs can really attend to their needs. I have no doubt that my colleagues, including the appointed second advisor, would be up to the task at this moment in serving the residents. It makes us wonder, therefore, whether the NCMP's call for a by-election is really to serve his purpose and his political party's purpose or to serve the residents' purpose. Bear in mind the huge expenses involved in calling for a by-election when there is no legal obligation to do so, let me repeat, when there is no legal obligation to do so. It would be just another occasion to show that Mr Jeyaretnam is absolutely callous about the way public monies are spent, since it is quite obvious to us that his call for a by-election is to serve the interest of his party, and not of the residents of Jalan Besar GRC. For that reason, Sir, I beg that the motion not be approved.”
“Just because a member of the team resigns his seat, it does not necessarily follow that the people would have withdrawn their support for the remaining Members of Parliament in the GRC. Mr Jeyaretnam must understand that the existing team for Jalan Besar stood for election and won the election for what the PAP stands for and not because Mr Choo Wee Khiang was popular so that without his representation, the mandate of the people would be withdrawn in the process. Sir, such an argument against the call for a by-election is not extreme and there are parallel examples found elsewhere. For instance, taking a leaf from corporations, if a member of the Board of Directors, having been elected to the Board by the shareholders and who, before the expiry of the term, resigns his Board seat, there is no obligation on the part of the Board to go back to the shareholders for a fresh election. The management of the company goes on so long as the Board feels that they are not hindered or incapacitated in any way by the absence of the member of the Board. In the case of Jalan Besar GRC, what is most critical in the minds of the residents at this moment is whether or not their interest, will just be as well-served by the remaining representatives within the GRC. If the level of service and commitment to the residents continues to remain as it was before the MP resigned his seat, there is therefore really no reason for calling for a fresh election. The point is how much better served will the people be by calling for a fresh election. What it means, however, is that the three existing MPs for Jalan Besar GRC would have to work much harder in order to meet the demands of the constituents or otherwise they would have a poor showing at the next general election.”
“Sir, one would imagine that when the MPs from Jalan Besar GRC went to the people at the last election for an endorsement of their candidacy , the people of Whampoa voted categorically that they wanted the present team to represent them. When the Whampoa residents voted for their Members of Parliament in the GRC, they did not, in the way in which the election was conducted, specifically vote for any particular MP to represent their ward. The endorsement was placed on all four Members of Parliament to be their representatives and it is on that basis that the candidates were returned. Mr Jeyaretnam obviously has not got his laws right. He seems to think that in a GRC, it is a just convenient arrangement where you tie all these individual constituencies together and therefore each Member of Parliament is specifically voted by the constituents in his particular ward. But bear in mind, in the Parliamentary Elections Act, when the people vote within a GRC, they voted for an entire team and not for any specific individual. It would therefore be ludicrous for anyone to suggest that since the mandate was given to four MPs to act as representatives in Parliament, the absence of one would necessarily mean that the rest have lost their electoral mandate. Such an argument, if carried to its extreme conclusion, would also mean that at any time if Mr Jeyaretnam steps down as Secretary-General of the Workers' Party, Mr Low Thia Khiang would have to resign his seat as Member of Parliament for Hougang since it can be argued that some Hougang residents may have voted him because of the leadership provided by Mr Jeyaretnam.”
“The issue was specifically dealt with after we became independent in 1965. During that time, our Government has specifically amended the provisions of our law to require an election to be held within a period of time after the seat was vacated. Mr Jeyaretnam so much as conceded that that has since been amended after the election. Obviously, I could be wrong and Mr Jeyaretnam could be right. But the point is, if Mr Jeyaretnam still thinks that there is a legal obligation to hold an election at the moment in Jalan Besar GRC, then he should apply for a writ of mandamus to compel the Government to do so. He is capable of doing it and nobody is ever going to deny him the right to petition to Court to issue such a writ. However, Mr Jeyaretnam obviously knows that there is no legal obligation to hold an election at this moment for Jalan Besar GRC. Although there is no legal obligation to hold an election at this moment, Mr Jeyaretnam is perhaps saying that, as opposed to a legal obligation, there is a moral obligation to hold an election instead, and that obviously is the other thrust of his argument. If so, we should perhaps examine closely whether or not such an obligation exists. By moral obligation, Sir, what one supposes it to mean the expectation based on the values and beliefs of the people comprising the society at large. By this, one would ask whether or not it is the expectation placed on Parliament and indeed the Government by the people of Whampoa at this moment to hold a fresh election and to seek a new mandate from the people of Whampoa to act as their representatives in Parliament.”
“He thinks the PAP is out of sync with the aspirations of our people. Perhaps, at this moment, one wonders whether the issues he raises in this House clearly reflect the aspirations of the common man he claims to represent. Sir, as a lawyer, Mr Jeyaretnam would have realised that under the Constitution and relevant laws, there is no legal obligation on the part of the Government to call for an election after an MP resigns his seat in Parliament. The essence of such a legal requirement in the Constitution applies both to single-seat constituencies and to Group Representation Constituencies as well. Mr Jeyaretnam cites Article 49 of the Constitution in which he used to support his case. If I may just read Article 49 of the Constitution, it simply states: "Whenever the seat of a Member, not being a non-constituency Member, has become vacant for any reason other than a dissolution of Parliament, the vacancy shall be filled by election in the manner provided by or under any law relating to Parliamentary elections." This Article in the Constitution is therefore largely qualified as opposed to what Mr Jeyaretnam appears to have suggested, that there is a legal obligation on the part of our Government to call an election as long as there is a vacancy in this House. Of course, the NCMP has created a mischief by alluding to a duty, that there is a legal obligation which is obviously not true. If it is an election to be called in the manner prescribed by law, the law is the statute that we have before us, and that is the Parliamentary Elections Act. As a lawyer, I am sure Mr Jeyaretnam knows the Parliamentary Elections Act does not prescribe any particular time limit within which to call for an election. That, Sir, is clearly the prerogative of the ruling Government.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I want to thank you for giving me this opportunity to rise to speak against the motion standing in the name of the Non-Constituency Member of Parliament. The NCMP, Mr Jeyaretnam, has once again called for a by-election to be held in Jalan Besar GRC on account of the resignation of our erstwhile colleague, Mr Choo Wee Khiang. Mr Jeyaretnam seems confident that if a by-election were to be called at this time, he will be able to give the PAP a beating, something which he has tried to do in the last election but failed dismally. Even in this House, Mr Jeyaretnam's tirade against the Government and the Party sounds like an old gramophone record, which he plays over and over again. He begins by suggesting that there is a lack of a tradition of Parliamentary democracy, the lack of freedom of expression for the Opposition and an inability to allow the Opposition to express themselves in a forum such as this. Let me ask the NCMP to account for his presence here in Parliament today. He is a loser in the last election, as I have said previously. But for the grace of this present Government, he is able to sit in this Parliament together with the rest of the duly elected Members and make his points known in an august body such as this. How can Mr Jeyaretnam then say that we are short in the standards of representation expected in a democracy, as he has described?”
“Singapore, unfortunately, does not have a history long and deep enough for it to have a cultural DNA that Singaporeans, no matter where they are, can pass from one generation to another. Beyond the first generation of living overseas, children born of Singaporean parents would no longer have any attachment to Singapore unless they spend some time at home. If we are prepared to accept a diaspora of Singaporeans, then I would encourage and urge our Government to give some attention to see how we can keep this heartbeat going for Singaporeans overseas. Sir, our gathering here today marks a milestone in our national history which signifies renewal as well as change. We alone hold in our mortal hands the power to abolish all forms of ill-will and distrust among fellow Singaporeans, and all manner of differences in the name of a much better future we want to create for ourselves and our children. These commitments spring forth from the beliefs for which our forebears fought so hard to establish. We dare not forget today that we are heirs of the first revolution. The revolution brought on by our pioneers has given us life in Singapore as we know it. Let us go forth from this time and place to tell our friends and our foes alike that we intend to keep the heart beating strongly for Singapore and for many more generations of Singaporeans to come. Let every nation know whether they wish us well or ill that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, to assure the survival and success of Singapore. This much, we must pledge. ADJOURNMENT OF DEBATE Resolved, "That the debate be now adjourned." - [Mr Wong Kan Seng]. Mr Deputy Speaker: Debate to be continued on what day, RAdm Teo? RAdm Teo Chee Hean: Tomorrow, Sir.”
“We want Singaporeans to develop a stronger sense of belonging and commitment to this country, whether they live in Singapore or overseas. We must embrace this common vision of what this country stands for, what its values are and whether it is worth returning if one needs to. At the end of the day, there must be a conviction that this country is a country worth fighting and dying for. I agree that all of us can actually play a part in shaping this country. The more successful Singaporeans must carry the additional duty for other Singaporeans to help them embrace this common vision. This vision of Singapore as a place we call home. Sir, I was at a constituency dinner recently. The function was organised for the purpose of bringing together senior citizens from old folks homes to Tampines Central for dinner. And I can assure Members of this House that we did not charge them $300 for coming to Tampines. Anyway, the elderly citizens who are residents of these homes are there because they have no one to turn to. They are essentially abandoned by their children. Although they are abandoned by their children, there was no lack of love that was shown for them by the many volunteers who were there to help. I could see how these residents tenderly looked after and gently escorted the old folks whenever they needed to leave the table. These are all volunteers who give their time freely for community service. And it is impressions like these that essentially warm my heart and make me realise the true meaning of calling Singapore home, a place where we all feel as one big family in this country. For Singaporeans living overseas, we must endeavour to keep the heart beating beyond the first generation.”
“For us in Singapore, it is very important that the perception of opportunities remains among Singaporeans. Singapore should be a place where opportunities continue to abound. Otherwise, it would be very difficult indeed to maintain the strong heartbeat for Singapore that we want all Singaporeans to have. Home is where the heart is, and home is also where opportunities are made available. Where the members feel they do not belong, it is no longer home, and where there is no home, there is no heartbeat. Many of us speak passionately about Singapore and its future. I can understand this as Singapore is the only home we know. Like it or not, our destinies as a people are tied together. We have to make a success of this nation. There is no alternative. I agree with the call of the Government that we must continue to keep the heart beating strongly for Singapore. As our people go overseas to work or to study or even migrate, the diaspora of Singaporeans around the world does not matter for us as long as wherever they are, whatever they do, these people can continue to know and remember their place of origin. Turtles go to the beaches of Trengganu, I am told, to lay eggs once a year. And after the eggs are hatched, they will scramble to the sea and travel all over the world. But wherever they are, the turtles always know their place of origin and will make the journey back faithfully to lay their eggs, to perpetuate themselves for posterity. Equally, the Jews and the Chinese are spread all over the world. They will always have a deep remembrance of their place of origin. It is this association and connection with their place of origin that has built up the bonds and the ties that will hold the people together in a crisis.”
“Sir, if we are not able to carefully sift between the foreign talent and those who merely want to come here to seek out opportunities for work, we may sadly end up in a situation where Singaporeans may find themselves out of a job simply because foreigners have displaced them by having the right assets, even if they may not be true talents. On foreign talents, most Singaporeans would readily accept the position if a foreign CEO was brought in to run a local company. However, one must realise that a foreign CEO who is asked to take charge of a company must have capable officers to help him fulfil his mandate. A foreign CEO, who is brought in to run an organisation, would more likely than not be forced to replace the middle management with his own appointees as well, since he needs to perform to prove his worth to the organisation. The CEO's appointees may not necessarily be local employees. In fact, they will, in all likelihood, be foreigners whom he is familiar with. These managers who come in would equally be encouraged to find their own team members who can help them achieve their mandate. And so the displacement may just go down the corporate chain. The question is, how can we ensure that in the process of seeking these foreign talents to create opportunities for us, we, by our own actions, are not unwittingly displacing Singaporeans who are equally able and capable of doing these jobs? In trying to create a vision where we provide opportunities for all, the Government must be clear as to who these foreign talents are, the type of opportunities these foreign talents can create for Singaporeans and the assurance that these are true opportunities and not lost opportunities.”
“If foreign talent merely means taking on board someone with a post-graduate degree, with some relevant working experience in some ritzy merchant banking house or manufacturing concern, I am not sure if these people would qualify as true talents who can make a positive contribution to our country. The issue, as some Singaporeans have seen it, is one of acquiring the relevant experience and expertise that Singapore needs to propel the country into the 21st century. If to acquire the experience and expertise would mean going overseas to study and gaining the necessary working experience before returning home as a talent, then we may be sending a different message to our people that it is not good enough to go to our local universities and start their working career here. This could well be an unintended effect of what we want to achieve in the long run, and would put the local graduates in a disadvantaged position, vis-a-vis those who went overseas to study and to work. The irony deepens even further if as a result of his inability to qualify for a university in Singapore, the person chooses to study overseas and make a success of it, acquires the relevant experience and comes back as a talent. We may well ask how different is this person from the local boy who spends his time faithfully in Singapore. Unless we have a proper yardstick to define who a foreign talent is, we may all be deceiving ourselves if we merely employed someone with some qualification and treat him as a talent when our own people can do the job just as well.”