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 19 of 20.
“Mr Speaker, Sir, when we relocate the CIQ to Woodlands tomorrow, does it mean that we are withdrawing the recognition of extra-territorial rights on the part of the Malaysian Government to operate their CIQ facilities in Singapore? If we do withdraw the recognition of these rights, does it therefore mean that they are operating illegally in Singapore? And if they are operating illegally in Singapore, what action will the Government be taking in respect of the illegal operations?”
“The Minister has said many times that the measures are actually meant to stimulate business and our economy. But surely at this time when many people are losing their jobs, would the Government not consider some sympathy towards the people who have lost their jobs and that measures be introduced to ease the pain of the cost of living in Singapore?”
“Sir, the Nominated Member has also asked us to consider to review the electoral arrangement to bring about a proportional representation by 10% in this House itself. This is not something which, I think, makes sense or is supported. If we talk about 10% proportional representation in the House, on what basis are you deciding as to who has the right to make the representation in this House? As we all know it, in the nature of our system, there are many avenues within this House that provide ample opportunities for people outside to make their representations and make their views known. The fact that we have NMPs and an NCMP in this House and the fact that we have avenues for people to participate in the policy process itself suggest that there are avenues within the House that allow people to participate in the policy process. So, therefore, while I understand the call on the part of the Nominated Member to actually open up the process of consultation in policy making, I do not think that we should go that far in the way that he has suggested, and I would call upon the Member to essentially look at the position that he has advanced more carefully. I think in the nature of things, in the nature that we understand it, there are sufficient safeguards for us to consider the opposing views, if there are, in the way in which policies are made and considered in this country. Sir, on that note, I basically do not support the motion to the extent that he has asked us to support the call for consultation of the Opposition and to expand the proportional representation in this House to include other interest groups as well.”
“Legislators must recognise this. The way to the middle ground and politics is not through adversarial approach because it is not a competition of ideologies but a consultative, consensus and conciliation approach or what we call consensus approach. Sir, to that extent, therefore, I support the call of the Nominated Member that we should move towards a position in our political arena that is more consensus seeking rather than adversarial in approach. Sir, having said that, endorsing consensus politics does not in itself mean an end to competition. The choice of the people can be made on the basis of personalities, on the basis of how we want to approach the objects that are defined as the interests of the country. To that extent, therefore, we should ask ourselves how this approach to politics applies in Singapore. In moving his motion, the Nominated Member actually called for the Government to consult the Opposition Members in the way we formulate policies. I find this rather strange and surprising because in the nature of our political process where we are required to go to the people to seek a mandate of the people. Democracy is necessarily a question of choice. At the end of five years or so, we go back to the people with our record, our platform, and our agenda to persuade the people that we offer the best slate of leaders and programmes for our people to choose. Asking us to consult the Opposition Members as regards policy formulation is like asking the opposing team in a football field how you play the game. In the nature of our politics, I think it will be quite unusual indeed. It is something which does not make sense for us at this moment. And I do not think we have arrived at a position where we need to consult the Opposition in respect of policies.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I had originally wanted to support the motion raised by our hon. Nominated Member. But having heard the speech of our hon. Member, I can only say that while I agree with the principle of the motion, I cannot support the conclusion which he wants this House to adopt. Let me just keep this response rather brief in order that we can deal with the issues on hand. Sir, the question that we have to ask ourselves is: can there be a less adversarial approach to politics? To answer this question, I think we need to ask an even more fundamental question about the role of this House in the legislative process. Do we see legislators in this House as performing primarily the role of a critic to scrutinise and embarrass Government? Or do we see the role of this House as one that seeks to improve the legislative process so that the interests of the people can be better served? Sir, you will note that the collapse of communism in the 80s has brought about an increasing convergence of political ideologies. Communism and socialism, as we know it, are no longer fashionable. Few would deny that the market economy, founded on a model of democracy that seeks to equitably share wealth of a country, is a dominant political ideology in the world today. While there are differences as to how one may find expression to these values, it will be difficult for the masses to find favour with anyone who says that he believes in a command economy and in a dictatorial regime which does not account to the people. The left and the right it seems are moving towards the middle ground. In this climate, it would be very difficult for parties to take extreme positions. No party seeking the mandate of the people can move away from this middle ground and seek to win the right to rule.”
“Sir, besides reducing the curriculum load of a child in school, I would like to ask the Minister whether the Education Ministry is at the same time looking at other ways of reducing stress in our children.”
“All too often, we lose sight of our objectives and we miss the wood for the trees. Sir, I believe in educational excellence. However, educational excellence does not always have to be synonymous with the high stress levels of the children. Indeed, I am not sure whether we can link stress and educational performance in schools. By stressing our children to excel in school, which in this case is measured by the performance output of the child, we are indeed paying a very high price in the process. We rob our children of their childhood, of the joys of living life to the full and of the life of sweet memories of childhood, as we all know it. In the end we produce children who are so preoccupied with performance and results that we end up with children who are very self-centered. 1.45 pm I am pleased to note from yesterday's announcement that the Education Ministry has decided to cut down the curriculum load of students by 10-20%. This decision is indeed consistent with the idea of getting our children to focus more on thinking skills and less on knowledge acquisition. The lighter load will presumably free up a child's time for other forms of constructive pursuits. Sir, while I welcome the idea of a reduced curriculum, I am not sure whether this has the effect of substantially reducing the stress level of children. Reducing the curriculum could also mean, for the anxious parents, that the child will have more time, relatively speaking, to spend on the reduced curriculum. In other words, the child could well be spending the same number of hours on fewer topics, with the result that the stress level may not necessarily be reduced correspondingly.”
“It is my understanding that most children are not able to cope with the learning of two languages effectively. On the average, a child either masters one language well or acquire an average ability in two languages. Only a minority of children have the exceptional ability to master both languages well. The outcome then is that for most students, they spend a disproportionate amount of time learning the second language. It becomes, as they say, the albatross which the children have to wear around their necks for many years, in primary and secondary schools. And, indeed, for many, the sad outcome has been that these students who struggle with the second language would have done well in the PSLE examinations if the second language had not pulled down their grade average. Sir, in a 1985 study on stress and school children, Dr Alvin Thomas confirmed that three sources of stress come from homework, parents and peers. In that study, Dr Thomas said that 50% of students sampled indicated they were under stress from homework overload. 24% of the students sampled said they suffer from depressant effect of homework. Understandably, the child tries to measure up to expectations, either a self-induced expectation or expectation set by others. For those who rise to the occasion, well, they get a pat on the back and they move on. Those who do not, suffer from a sense of failure. This affects the sense of self-esteem, and perhaps explains why we see more outlandishly dressed delinquent children smoking and hanging out at public places. Sometimes I wonder whether a child is stressed for its own sake or for the sake of the parent's pride and the school's position in the ranking system. The priorities must be clear, and perspective must be balanced.”
“Sir, the Members' speeches yesterday, to a certain extent, echo the sentiment that our children in school suffer from very high levels of stress. Stress may be seen in two senses: first of all, as a mental state, wherein a person who is under stress feels a sense of tension and unease; secondly, as an agent or source which serves as a stimulus against which the body is forced to react in a certain way to the demand. The first example of the kind of stress that I have talked about would be one which results in a feeling of distress, eg, having failed in examination. In the second instance, stress, as an agent or as a source, would, for example, be examination, parental expectation of a child's performance in school or peer pressure. These forms of stress can, in turn, lead to stress being a sense of mental state. Sir, we implicitly recognise that a child's misery really begins from the time he takes cognizance of his surrounding environment. As anxious parents concerned with giving a child a head start in life, we bombard the child with all forms of books and learning aids and toys the minute the child is able to utter his first sound. When a child is barely able to walk, anxious parents will rush him off to all manner of classes, from junior gymnastics to speech and drama, and, yes, even creative writing when a child has even hardly mastered basic words. In schools, we recognise that the child faces much pressure. This pressure is especially intense from schools seeking to maintain or achieve a reputation as a school of standing. Sir, additionally, as we have heard earlier, our policy on second language has also contributed much to the stressful environment that the child has to labour under.”
“Sir, the Medical Endowment Fund or Medifund is an endowment fund set up in 1993. The initial contribution of $200 million was made by the Government, after which an additional $100 million was added to the endowment fund by the Government for each of the following three financial years, bringing the total endowment fund to $500 million. The purpose of the Medifund, Sir, is to assist needy Singaporeans to pay for medical care. I believe Medifund is the most obvious expression of the promise by the Government that no Singaporean will be deprived of healthcare for lack of financial means. Sir, I note from the latest annual report of the Ministry of Health that there were about 58,000 applications for Medifund assistance and of which 99.4% were approved. The total amount of Medifund help given amounted to $12.4 million. Unless I am wrong, most of the applications for Medifund assistance came through screenings carried out by hospital social workers. If true, some measure of screening would already have been carried out by the medical social worker and the figure of 0.6% of the applicants who were unsuccessful may be higher. My question to the Minister is whether medical social workers at hospitals screen potential applications before they apply for Medifund assistance. If so, whether there were many potential applicants who were turned away at that stage, with the result that there could be a higher figure than the 0.6% as listed in the annual report. My second question, Sir, is whether the Ministry will consider making the process of applying for Medifund assistance more transparent so that applicants can know in advance what criteria apply and whether there are avenues available for an appeal to be made in the event that he or she is unsuccessful.”
“Sir, a point of clarification before the Minister answers the question. I think the earlier remark made was that we recruited 160 doctors in our recruitment drive overseas, of whom a substantial number were Singaporeans. Will the Minister please clarify on the number of Singaporeans who qualified as doctors from overseas? How many of them actually failed to gain admission to our local university in the first place?”
“I have every confidence that the Indonesian people will overcome this difficulty and forge ahead. Sir, I would like to ask the Minister whether the Government is contemplating further measures to help the Indonesians at this moment.”
“Sir, the recent financial crisis has taught a number of lessons. In an increasingly interdependent world, what affects our neighbours may have an impact on us. Singaporeans must realise this. We should not just confine ourselves to the well-being of our country without, at the same time, being concerned for what is happening in the other countries in the region. Because the countries in the region are so closely tied together, we must recognise that regional well-being is as important as national welfare. In a region that is caught up with the turmoil of events, investors' confidence would, to some extent, be affected. This lack of confidence may at some point of time affect us locally. Unless we do our part to restore regional confidence, we are not essentially helping ourselves because regional confidence is closely linked to our economic well-being as well. Indonesia's problems must be resolved by Indonesians themselves. However, we must understand that the impact of their sovereign decisions would be largely felt by all in the region, not just financially and economically but socially as well. We can only hope that in the name of national resilience, the Indonesians will work quickly towards strengthening their internal unity and solving their problems. We must recognise that at this moment in time, there is a need for regional solidarity within ASEAN. As a small country, we must do our part in helping our neighbours as much as we can. We certainly hope that confidence can return soon to Indonesia and to this region after the election and once reforms have been implemented according to plans. There is truly an urgency for Indonesians to reunite and to get back to work to put their economy together, so as to boost internal and external confidence for recovery.”
“Sir, in the Budget debate last year, much attention was paid to Singapore-Malaysia relations. If Members will recall, that was a very difficult and trying period in our relations with the Malaysians. However, leaders of the two countries recognise that Singapore and Malaysia have their destinies closely intertwined. At the end of the day, we recognise that in the final analysis, the future well-being of the two countries is to a large extent dependent on each other. One year has since passed and much has taken place. Events in recent months have affected both countries although not by the same extent. Invariably, we recognise that closer cooperation between Singapore and Malaysia need not always be a win-lose situation. But in many cases, we only win one. I am happy to note that over last year, relations between Singapore and Malaysia have improved substantially. The Prime Ministers of both countries have met and in a joint communique announced that they are looking at possibilities of closer business cooperation. And I am also happy to note that the Malaysians have assured us that they will not cut our water supply at the end of the present term of the Agreements. Sir, I would like to ask the Minister to give this House an update of the bilateral ties between Singapore and Malaysia.”
“Sir, it seems strange to me that the law should provide one standard of protection for one type of investors and another standard or an absence thereof for another type of investor. I would like to ask the Minister whether the Government would consider bringing the regulatory standards for such investment promotions to be in line with or surpass that which presently apply to the offer of shares to members of the public. I am aware that the Government is looking at regulating time-share schemes. I wonder if the Minister can at the same time hasten the review.”
“While a promoter who invites members of the public to subscribe for shares in his company is required, among other things, to file a prospectus giving a detailed account about the company, its accounts and its directors, the same standard of disclosure is not applied to property developers. Presently, foreign developers promoting properties overseas in Singapore do not come under the same regime of regulation as would a promoter of shares. As far as I am aware, the property developer, once he registers his business, is practically free to launch his project and sells such developments to members of the public. If a foreign promoter seeks the assistance of a local property agent, the Inland Revenue Authority places the responsibility on the property agent to check the credentials of the developer. Even then such checks may be publicly qualified and it then becomes caveat emptor for the buyer. What happens then is that the foreign developers of different shades of honesty sell projects in Singapore. Unwary Singapore buyers who have not done their due diligence may well end up buying a property which is a lemon of an investment, and with limited recourse against the promoter who probably by then has either disappeared or is insolvent. We have seen such failures in recent months with respect to property projects in China. Singaporeans who have invested in some of these developments have been sent on a wild goose chase to recover their investments. Property purchasers are just one example. In recent years, some other forms of investments have surfaced, which raise basic questions of adequacy of regulations under our present system of laws. I refer to time-share schemes, investments in ostrich farms and other soft commodities.”
“Sir, the Companies Act presently seeks to protect members of the public by requiring any public invitation to apply for shares or similar instruments to be distributed together with the prospectus, a copy of which has to be registered with the Registrar. The prospectus referred to in the Act is a statement containing very detailed disclosures about the company. These are matters which directors are required by statute to be disclosed. These disclosures range, for instance, from a description of the directors of the company, its property transactions to the interest of the directors in a property that the company may have an interest in. Sir, it is not my intention to go into a complete description of the requirements of a prospectus under the Companies Act. Suffice it to note that doing a due diligence with the company directors to ensure the accuracy of the statements in the prospectus is a tedious and time consuming exercise. However, the effort put to the exercise provides the investors some assurance that the statements are reasonably accurate and it helps the investors to make informed decisions about their investments. For the directors who make false statements or statements which they do not have any basis to believe in, they face the prospect of criminal prosecution. This is sufficient deterrent to most directors who may contemplate such acts. Sir, unfortunately, the standard of protection which the law affords to members of the public does not appear to be uniform. In the interest of time, let me just cite one example.”
“Keeping the organisation young does have its price. I would like to touch on two broad areas. First, officers in the SAF would have to vacate their appointments at a relatively young age in order to allow younger officers to take over. In many cases, the retiring officers are still young and are capable of carrying on. For them, because they are still economically active, they are compelled to look for second careers and starting life afresh there. I know the SAF has a programme of preparing its officers and men for a second career in advance. In this regard, much credit must go to MINDEF in making the effort to look after the well-being of its employees. While the soldiers are being returned to civilian life through these courses, I wonder how many of these soldiers have been successful in reintegrating themselves in society. Will the Minister please tell this House how many ex-servicemen have been able to find jobs, for example, in the private sector, what kind of jobs these are, and whether any study has been done on the morale of these retiring soldiers? My second concern arises from the fact that the early retirement officers will lead to the question of relative experience of those who come to succeed them. One would agree that no matter how bright a soldier is, intelligence is no substitute for experience. What assurance can the Minister give to this House that in appointing young officers to senior command positions in place of the retiring officers, the output from the offices that these officers occupy will not be compromised for lack of experience?”
“Sir, the SAF, like any organisation, requires good and capable men to manage and to lead. Without these men having the most sophisticated weapons that are at the cutting edge of technology would not have served any purpose. Accordingly and, quite rightly, the SAF has never spared any effort in paying competitive salaries in order to get men and perhaps, in this day and age, women into service. As a result of the intensive recruitment exercises conducted over the years, the SAF has had a fair amount of success in getting men and women of the right quality to make a career out of serving the organisation. In the last two decades, we have seen the transformation of the SAF into a credible and effective armed force capable of defending the security interest of Singapore. Whether it is the navy, air force or the army, there is very little doubt that these military services are very highly regarded, not just by our own people as we have heard earlier, but also by those who have had the opportunity to work with them. This transformation is in no small way attributable to the men and women who have made sacrifices to bring the SAF to where it is today. Sir, I understand that it is the policy of the SAF to keep its organisation young. Accordingly, very often, in the SAF, we see officers who are put in very senior command positions. These men have been challenged by the very high demands that these appointments require. It is not unusual to find men in their early 30s occupying senior staff positions in the SAF. With younger officers, the organisation will reduce the risk of being encrusted in complacence. Younger officers with more energy and perhaps with fresher ideas would provide the impetus for advancing the organisation forward.”
“MINDEF also contributes actively to the Ministry of Education's national education programme and conducts its own national education programme for school children aimed at creating a greater awareness of defence and security issues. I can assure Mr Rai that the Ministry of Defence and Ministry of Education are well coordinated on this matter. Now that the Ministry of Education is developing a comprehensive and extensive national education programme for young Singaporeans reaching all the way from primary schools to the tertiary institutions, MINDEF has adjusted its focus slightly to provide national education in a cohesive and systematic manner for all SAF servicemen and women which complements and reinforces the national education programme in schools. The SAF's programme covers many levels from basic military training to specialist and officer cadet schools. The national education packages stress the importance of national service and the roles our servicemen play in providing for the security of our country. MINDEF also conducts national education courses and seminars for middle echelon officers and specialists both for regulars and national servicemen during in-camp training on specific issues as well as to remind them of the important role they play in defence. I would like to assure Members of this House that MINDEF is fully committed to ensuring that servicemen and Singaporeans at large, especially the men and women who serve in the defence of our country, understand why we cannot take our security for granted and why each and every one of them has an important role to play in ensuring the security of our nation. 3.45 pm”
“For example, emphasis is placed on the use of simulators. High-end simulators can provide extremely realistic and safe training. It reduces the need for live firing and is not constrained by the lack of space. Examples of simulators developed for SAF training are the air combat manoeuvring instrumentation system, the air defence complete engagement simulator, naval tactical simulators, flight simulators and the tank and training systems. The SAF will continue to look for innovative training methods using high technology to make up for the shortfall of training areas in Singapore. Sir, Mr Shriniwas Rai and Dr Ong spoke about national education and reminding our citizens about the importance of defence. I could not agree more with Dr Ong and Mr Shriniwas Rai that it is very important for all Singaporeans to take defence seriously. MINDEF introduced the concept of total defence in 1984. Since then, MINDEF has, in conjunction with relevant Ministries and other agencies, implemented various programmes to enhance public awareness of the importance of total defence. These programmes reach out to all Singaporeans. Most recently, the Total Defence Heroes exhibition at Fort Canning which commemorated Total Defence Day on 15th February was aimed at increasing the awareness of Singaporeans about the roles that they can play in Total Defence. In the SAF, we have for many years had national education programmes which reach out to NSmen, regulars and non-uniformed personnel. These programmes serve to strengthen the servicemen's commitment to Singapore and to explain the need for a defence capability.”
“All officers and specialists are required to pass training safety regulation tests as part of their training. The SAF also regularly conducts Safety Education and Awareness seminars for all our officers and servicemen to remind them of the importance of safety. Safety officers are appointed whenever major exercises or live firings are conducted. Commanders are also required before each exercise or training to review the risks associated with the exercise or training and take steps to minimise these risks. Like the more established armed forces, the SAF also has safety agencies whose primary aim is to audit all SAF training activities at every level to ensure that all the necessary safety training measures are implemented fully. These safety agencies also investigate all training incidents, including those that do not result in any bodily harm. We have also established an electronics training safety bulletin where every serviceman can access and share the latest in safety developments. Sir, the SAF recognises that any training accident is one accident too many. No effort is therefore spared to ensure that our servicemen can train safely. Dr Ong asked about the use of technology in training. Sir, less than one-tenth of the Singapore land area is used for SAF training and MINDEF recognises that the area available for SAF training will shrink with time as we face competing demands for land to meet our housing and economic needs. A two-pronged approach is adopted to deal with this. Firstly, we look for training areas overseas and today, the SAF conducts large scale training in several countries. The SAF will continue to look for suitable training areas overseas. Second, the SAF uses technology to make up for the shortfall on land and air space.”
“We conduct regular readiness checks and exercises. Also when the SAF has been called upon to carry out missions at short notice, it has performed well. This is a test to the high operational readiness of the SAF. Recently, the SAF was called upon to evacuate Singaporeans caught in the midst of factional fighting in Cambodia in July 1997 and to carry out a month-long search and recovery mission in Palembang, Indonesia, in December 1997. If we delve further back into history, many Singaporeans will remember the role that our commandos played in ensuring the successful resolution of the SQ 117 hijack in 1991, or our air force executing the dramatic cable car rescue in 1983. The Government will continue to ensure that the SAF is operationally ready to deal with any contingency. Sir, Dr Ong, Mr Sin Boon Ann and Mr Hawazi Daipi have asked about safety training in the SAF. The SAF has taken great pains to ensure that whilst we train hard and well, no compromise is made to the safety of our servicemen. Nothing is more important than the safety of our troops. Training safety in the SAF is overseen by a high-level committee chaired by the Chief of Defence Forces. The Committee meets regularly to review safety efforts undertaken by the SAF. We have in place a safety management system that systematically seeks to minimise all conceivable risks to our servicemen. For a start, there are detailed safety procedures for every activity our soldiers undertake. These procedures are well documented and widely disseminated to all our officers and specialists. They are updated whenever valuable lessons are learnt either from our own experiences or from the experiences of other armed forces.”
“Sir, in his Budget speech last year, the Minister gave his assurance that the SAF placed most priority on training safety. To achieve this, would the Minister point out that the SAF has focused on three main areas. Firstly, risk assessment and management. Secondly, close range supervision, and thirdly, safety education. We have no doubt that the SAF takes training safety very seriously and that no effort has been spared in this regard. Sir, if you will recall, these assurances came fresh from the tragic aftermath of the explosion of the artillery shell in New Zealand which killed two of our servicemen. Despite the assurances given by the SAF, accidents still do happen. The public, I believe, has come to accept that this is to be expected in organisations as large as the SAF. Foremost in people's mind is whether there has been any improvement in the safety training record since last year. Will the Minister please supply this House of the training safety record to-date? The Second Minister for Defence (RAdm Teo Chee Hean): Sir, the SAF that we have today is the result of years of investment in people, equipment and doctrine. It is a modern and well-integrated fighting force, operationally ready to deal with any contingencies that involve our national interest. Its operational readiness is maintained through frequent mobilization practices and realistic training. Dr Ong has mentioned two articles, one, Parameters and another, Australian Strategic Policy that have complimented the SAF on its readiness. Those armed forces that we have interacted and trained with have also found that the SAF is a professional and proficient outfit. As I said last year, we do not just depend on magazines, reports and foreign forces to assess our readiness.”
“Having said that, I am confident that the SAF will at the same time recognise that in the face of the softening economy, it would make some adjustments to its programme by consolidating its resources without sacrificing its effectiveness. While supporting an increase in the budget for defence is not, to me, an issue, I believe the people would like to know whether the Ministry would be making adjustments to its defence spending and, if so, what these adjustments are. Additionally, I share the concern of my colleague, Dr Ong Chit Chung, in asking for assurance from the Minister that the money allocated to defence will be well spent.”
“We cannot depend on other people's goodwill or largesse to come to our assistance. On the contrary, we have to stand on our own when it comes to the crunch. Events can quickly take a rapid turn for the worse and we have to be ready for such eventualities. Sir, modern warfares are a contest of technology. Military hardware built on the latest technology determines to a large extent the outcome of any battle. Modern weapons are not cheap. It takes time and money to maintain the SAF at a high standard of operational readiness. There should be no compromises on the state of its men, weapons and machines. Without maintaining this necessary expenditure, the ability of the SAF to perform its role will be seriously compromised. The issue is a very simple one. Would you rather have your son go to battle with a bazooka that is a relic of Second World War or with the latest guided anti tank missile? The choice is obvious. In order to stay effective, the SAF must continue to update its equipment and acquire a new state-of-the-art equipment and, more importantly, be led by capable men even if it means continuing to pour resources in. I note that although this year's defence budget has increased in real terms, the sum total expenditure is still within our cap on defence spending at 6% of our GDP. As our economy continues to grow, the 6% cap on GDP will also continue to grow in absolute numbers. Maintaining defence expenditure at 6% of GDP gives us the assurance that the economy is not over burdened as a result. The SAF has built up its credibility as a fighting force over the last two decades and must continue to do so in the coming years to remain effective.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I have always understood our defence philosophy to be premised on the principle that the best assurance for peace and stability and safety in our country is deterrence. Although we are a small country, we have over the years invested much of our resources in developing the SAF into an effective and credible fighting force. The SAF today is a modern, balanced and well-integrated tri-service armed force that is capable and willing to defend Singapore when called upon. To use an analogy shared by our Prime Minister some time ago, although we may be a small shrimp, we are at least a very poisonous one. Any potential aggressor will have to think twice or many times over when taking us on. And our defence philosophy has served us well since Independence. Sir, I note that in the Budget this year, we have increased our spending on defence. To many, it seems strange that the Government is spending so much on defence when faced with a difficult economic climate ahead. Is it prudent that we should be maintaining our defence expenditure at this level when we should be cutting back and saving our resources? Let me say at the onset that I do not subscribe to the view that we should cut back on defence spending. In fact, I support our proposed expenditure on defence for the coming fiscal year. It is no argument when it comes to security and defence to say that we should be cutting back on defence expenditure in the face of a rough road ahead, especially when the economy can still afford it. Whether in good times or bad times, the issue of our vulnerability as a small state remains. Steady expenditure on defence is to be seen as an insurance premium for security and survival. We have seen how vulnerable small states can be.”
“The consequences may be similar to that which confront the countries in the region today. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, GLCs essentially provide a corporate vehicle for Government to go into business. Accordingly, because the Government is in business, there is an expectation that the forum of accountability of these companies should be wider than just a shareholders' meeting. I share the sentiment expressed by my colleague earlier wherein he said the GLCs perform essential functions within the economy. In these days, we can expect corporatised entities to provide utility services, services to people who are users, who are not necessarily shareholders in a company. And in the context of these people who have to depend on these companies for services, I think there is something to be said about holding these companies to some extent accountable to the consumers. Sir, the Public Accounts Committee feels, and I agree, that it is important to ensure that public money invested in GLCs is well spent and decisions are made under the best circumstances. The call is for greater accountability and through appropriate disclosure, information may be given as to the performance of these companies. I would like to ask the Minister whether the Government, in addition to the measures which we have at the moment, is considering other measures to provide for greater transparency and disclosure in the GLCs. Such a move, Sir, would strengthen the confidence of the public in the management of our GLCs. On that note, I support the financial policy of the Government.”
“Sir, by any measure, the GLCs have contributed in no small way to Singapore's profile as an industrial economy and they have given us a place in the world economy that we would not have otherwise got if we had just allowed the economy develop its own course without the GLCs. However, as the GLCs grow in size and number and the value of the equity holding expands over the years, we must ensure that there is an adequate system in place to provide for the accountability for the conduct of these companies. At the moment, the scope of public accountability of these companies, both in relation to corporate disclosure and governance, is limited. Presently, officers of these corporations are accountable under law to shareholders. They owe a duty principally to the company. However, in the case of ordinary shareholders who own shares in listed companies, participation at shareholders' meeting is often given a miss. Even if they are inclined to do so, the ordinary shareholders do not have the necessary technical expertise to analyse reports and hold directors to account by asking relevant questions. In other words, there is usually very little known beyond the audited accounts about these companies. Control of these companies is often in the hands of the managers. Sir, GLCs by virtue of the status, have very strong bargaining power in business dealings. In a government that is as disciplined as ours, we can be assured that the GLCs are tightly run and managed and that they are not likely to abuse their privileged position. However, we cannot always assume that our system of Government and political culture will remain unchanged. In a weak government, control over the GLCs may not be firm. There will always be a danger of mismanagement without a proper system of control.”
“It is a balance between the need to maintain confidentiality because national interest demands it and the need to keep the people informed so that they can better exercise their right to vote. How the calibration is to be made is dependent on the Government of the day who enjoys the mandate of the people. In the final analysis, there is an increasing expectation these days towards greater transparency and accountability, where possible, rather than to have less of it. How is this applicable to us? Sir, in Singapore, we have come to accept Government-linked companies (GLCs) as playing a strategic role in developing our economy. As the Minister has said at the last sitting, the GLCs have moved into areas which are of strategic interest and where entrepreneurs in Singapore have limited resources to venture into or have no knowledge of. In recent years, GLCs have grown, both in number and size. Today, there are few areas of business the GLCs have not gone into. Their business interests range from telecommunication, banking and finance to aerospace and property development. The market capitalisation of these companies runs into hundreds of millions of dollars and one would not be wrong to say that the performance of these companies is a barometer of the state of the Singapore economy. Sir, GLCs, the way in which they are owned, managed and run, are often distinguished from ordinary companies for a number of reasons. Firstly, these are companies wherein the Government has sizable equity interest in, either directly or indirectly, through such holding companies as Temasek or GSIC. Secondly, a substantial number of officers who run these companies came from the civil service. And thirdly, a good number of these companies have substantial business relations with the Government.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, going regional is to a large extent encouraged and initiated by the Government. To the extent that our businessmen have responded to the call to invest in the region, the Government should actively assist these companies to cope with the present difficulties. Additional tax reliefs for these companies in respect of their regional operations would provide the much needed moral support required at this stage. In the current financial crisis, the systemic weakness of the business and financial institutions has often been blamed as one of the causes. It is often said that the close relationship enjoyed between the private business sector and those closely linked with the establishment is one of the reasons why some economies in the region went into difficulty. Such companies were extremely influential and as a consequence were able to leverage on the connection which they enjoy to procure financial institutions to lend monies on very soft terms and often not adequately securitised. There was often no proper assessment of creditworthiness of the project being funded through the loans. The banks found themselves in a position of not being able to recall the loans when economic weather changed. There was a lack of transparency in the system and it resulted in much institutional weakness and hidden inefficiencies in the affected economies. Sir, through it all, the regional crisis has also paid much credence to a cardinal principle that government should be transparent as far as possible. Transparency begets accountability which in turn controls the conduct of those who are held to account. In every government, the degree of transparency is a matter of calibration.”
“Sir, rightly, therefore, in view of the poor economic outlook for the region and Singapore, in particular, that this year's Budget should be a prudent one. Public expenditure should be trimmed when necessary and Singaporeans should be encouraged where possible to be constantly mindful of the difficult times that loom ahead. While most people would accept the underlying basis of our Budget this year, there are also many who feel that this Budget does not go far enough to adequately prepare them for the conditions ahead. In fact, looking at the present Budget, it was felt that more can and should be done to help the citizens in coping with the rising cost of living brought upon to some extent by the weakening of our currency. There are many who are disappointed that the rebate given is pegged at 5%, and not 10%. It is arguable that the rebate of 10% should be given to taxpayers to cope with the difficult conditions. Even if the majority of Singaporeans do not pay taxes, maintaining a tax rebate at 10% would have sent a strong signal support to the people. Sir, for the majority of Singaporeans who do not pay taxes, which speaks a lot about their annual income, I would urge the Government to consider a greater rebate on the service and conservancy charges and utilities. A greater rebate on the service and conservancy charges and utilities will go a long way in helping these citizens cope with the pressures of rising cost of living in Singapore. For the businessmen who have invested in the region, they are, I am told, disappointed that there is no additional assistance from the Government in the present Budget. The current financial crisis has had a significant impact on the operations.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I rise to speak in support of the motion standing in the name of the Minister for Finance. Sir, without doubt, the region in the last 10 months went through a crisis that proved to be most challenging and perhaps the most unnerving since the Second World War. Never before have we seen such relentless pressures on our economy. The regional currencies lost much value because of the sell down by those who lost confidence. Companies simply went under and unemployment ballooned. The mood soon became despondent for many. This proved to be the right recipe for social unrest. The disaffected and hungry took to the streets in violent anger while governments most affected tried desperately to stem the tide of events. The problems soon shifted from an economic dimension to a political one in some cases, which resulted in the erosion of confidence in government leadership. Sir, Singapore, stable as it may be, by no means escaped from the forces that affected the region. As the Minister has pointed out, the region's financial crisis had a contagion effect and put a damper on the economic outlook for Singapore. The growth prospect for the economy seems less promising as businessmen began to brace themselves for a tough year ahead. Indeed the growth estimate of our GDP for financial year 1998/1999 at approximately 2.5% to 4.5% from our GDP growth of about 7.8% in financial year 1997 projects a cautious mood on our part in assessing the future. In real terms, all major business sectors, with the exception perhaps of some sectors in manufacturing and construction, would see some weakening of the business conditions.”
“Sir, the openness with which the Cost Review Committee has dealt with the rising costs of living, the cooperation given by the Government Ministers and the Ministries, the fact that the CRC has been given full access to all relevant data and the Government's implementation of the recommendations of the CRC show that the Government takes the cost of living issues very seriously, contrary to what Mr Jeyaretnam has suggested. Sir, I agree that we should take the issue of costs seriously in this House. We do not want to be caught in the rat race. But we cannot develop a handout mentality or take the easy approach of complete subsidy or handouts to the people. I think, if you want to be able to provide more for the people, the way forward is to ensure that our people continue to be productive and that the salaries of our people will continue to be commensurate with the productivity output of the employees and workers. And we can do this by being more competitive and by working smarter. The formation of an All-Party Committee for the purpose which Mr Jeyaretnam has outlined will only waste time and resources. I think we are better off focusing our time and energy on suggesting new initiatives in education, in building our transportation system, health care and infrastructure. Sir, for these reasons, I do not support the motion.”
“I noticed that Mr Jeyaretnam had not submitted any question for oral or written answer by the relevant Minister on the subject of cost increases that he says he is concerned with. I find this extremely odd. It only leads me to question his real motive for pressing for an All-Party Committee to look into cost increases. But it is not too late. The window to ask questions is always open. Mr Jeyaretnam knows this better than I since I am a rookie in this House. Each time Parliament sits, there is opportunity for Mr Jeyaretnam to question Ministers and have his concerns raised and heard. He has raised this as a philosophical basis for his concern, and that is, Parliament, and not the Executive, must be accountable to the people. The fact that he is present in this House today shows that he has every opportunity to raise questions of his concern with the relevant Ministries and the relevant Ministers as to these cost increases. What is he here for today if he is not given the opportunity to raise such concerns that he has now raised today? The Government is accountable to the people, I agree, and has never shied away from a reasoned justification of its policies. And I am sure that if Mr Jeyaretnam has good ideas on how increases in productivity can lead to higher wages for the people, the Government will be more than pleased to hear them. The Government has taken the recommendations of the Cost Review Committee very seriously and has taken up, in fact, the recommendations made by the CRC in its reports made in 1992 and 1993.”
“It was in fact spending patterns that had changed. It does not take much to know that a double scoop of ice cream must surely cost more than a single scoop, and more people want double scoop ice cream today. Sir, in 1996, arising from the misleading reports published by the SDP which tried to distort and confuse the price issue for political advantage, the Cost Review Committee was reconvened. The Workers Party was invited to join but it declined. I find it ironic that Mr Jeyaretnam, a WP member, would now seek to move this motion when it was his own party, together with the SDP, which declined to join the reconvened CRC in 1996 even though it was invited to do so. They had deliberately passed up an opportunity to contribute to the efforts to tackle the very problems and concerns of our citizens which he now claims to champion. With or without the presence of the Workers Party, the reconvened Cost Review Committee duly met and came to the same conclusions, and that is, prices had not risen faster than incomes. It is only natural that we all should want a higher standard of living. We all work hard and we feel we deserve it. But a higher standard of living comes only from creating more value-added jobs. When our salaries go up, the cost of goods and services, especially those that contain high labour content, will also rise. The things we buy will cost more. If we work smart, our salaries will rise faster than the cost, and our standard of living will at the same time go up. Sir, the way forward is for us to focus on productivity and innovation. For nine days, at the recent Budget debates, we had made proposals, raised suggestions, pointed out problems to the Ministers.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I rise to speak against the motion raised by the NCMP, Mr Jeyaretnam. Sir, over the last few years the issue of cost of living in Singapore has become a cause of concern for many Singaporeans. In moving this motion, Mr Jeyaretnam has struck a sensitive chord among Singaporeans, especially those in the lower income group. In speaking against the motion, I do not intend to trivialise or be insensitive to the public's concerns over the cost of living. These concerns are real and have to be addressed in a dispassionate and objective manner. Sitting as I have done in the last hour or so and listening to the speech made by the NCMP, I am certainly glad that he is not representing the Government for I think what he suggests is a surefire way of bankrupting this nation and all that we have built in the last 30-over years. Sir, the issue of cost increases is a serious matter certainly. The Government has on its own accord given this matter much consideration. If indeed life is not going to get any better but worse for Singapore, I think this matter is something which we all should take seriously. In 1992, the Prime Minister announced at the National Day rally that he would form a committee to review the concern that many had felt about the rising cost. The committee included representatives from all relevant segments of society, unionists, employers, academics, journalists, and MPs, including the Opposition ones. Mr Jeyaretnam's colleague, Mr Low Thia Khiang, was a member of that committee. In August 1993, the committee published its report. It found that prices had risen in Singapore but it was not price increases which had contributed to the perception that the cost of living had gone up faster than income grew.”
“And if by chance they are able to do so, I believe they will soon be discovered and I do not think they will last beyond one term as NMPs in this House. Sir, as I said before in this House, that the government of the people for the people and by the people is not premised on the foundation of elected representatives alone. A government of the people must be founded on the cornerstone of what is best for the people. To do this, they must listen to the voice of the people in this land, including the people whom the NMPs seek to represent. For the above reasons, I support the Bill.”
“There may be issues which a Government MP may feel strongly about and which he may not be at liberty to raise, because he is obliged to maintain party discipline. On the other hand, an NMP does not suffer from such constraints and, therefore, is not beholden to anyone when raising or abstaining from raising issues which, in some cases, may be embarrassing or damaging to the Government. Fourthly, I believe that there was also a concern raised on the possibility of a back-door entry into Parliament by people who harbour strong communal, religious or racial sentiments. The argument was raised that allowing such people into Parliament is taking the first step down the slippery slope for Singapore. Concern was raised that one would increasingly find that NMPs would act as proxy representatives for the communalists. If such arguments were raised by a Member with such fears, then I think these fears may not be founded, because there are presently adequate safeguards in the system. To begin with, an NMP has to meet certain constitutional requirements set out for an MP. Secondly, there is the Special Select Committee which sits to decide on who the suitable members are. It is much to the credit of the Committee that it is able to keep out extremists from Parliament to date through the NMP Scheme. And I would say that this is an important proof that a good system is in place. In deciding to draw NMPs from the panels of labour, business and industry and the professions, I believe the Government is trying to have a broad based representation as far as possible. It is certainly not the intention of the Government to encourage narrow interest groups to send their proxies to Parliament.”
“On the contrary, NMPs to be chosen by the Special Select Committee have to go through a process of competition, and that competition lies in the comparison of their CVs. And I would say that the process of selection is really no different from a beauty pageant. Secondly, there was also the argument raised that an NMP has little or no knowledge of the conditions of the ground and, therefore, the advice that he proffers in Parliament may be irrelevant or, at worse, harm the interest of the constituents. I have two comments to make on this. First, the Constitution provides that only capable people and people who have proven themselves in various fields are to be considered for appointment as NMPs. Surely it will not be unreasonable to expect an NMP candidate to have the minimum amount of intelligence for making suggestions. It would be unlikely that a recommendation made will be a thoughtless one. Secondly, proposals by NMPs are not binding on the MPs. If an MP considers a proposal to be useful and constructive, the MP is at liberty to adopt the suggestion. However, if in the process of adopting or implementing the suggestion, and the suggestion turns out to be a duff one, then I am sure the MP himself is as responsible for lacking the foresight and perhaps the intellect to adopt the suggestion of the NMP. Thirdly, there was also a suggestion raised that there are enough lawyers and doctors in this House and, therefore, there is no need to have any more of such people in Parliament. The point is not whether there are lawyers or doctors, but whether the lawyers and doctors who are Government MPs in this House operate under the discipline of the Party Whip.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, this House sat on 5th June 1997 to debate, among other things, the motion to introduce NMPs into this Parliament. We are again confronted with the same issues, and this time by the Constitution (Amendment) Bill to raise the number of NMPs from six to nine Members. There were a number of arguments that were canvassed against the introduction of NMPs in this Parliament, and these arguments were canvassed when we sat on 5th June. And I now want to address some of these arguments that were raised in order to fully consider the issues raised in the last sitting of Parliament. Sir, there was an argument raised that allowing NMPs into this Parliament makes a mockery of the efforts of the elected MPs who had fought hard in the last election. A Member was concerned that the Government may be sending the wrong signal to the people of Singapore about having a competitive spirit or the lack of it, since NMPs are allowed to enter into this House without having to contest in an election. Sir, as I have said before, whether or not an NMP fought in the election to get into this House is not an issue. What is an issue really is the question of the ability of the NMPs to raise the quality of debate in this House, and to ensure that the policies introduced by this House are fully considered. There is a danger in a House that is dominated by a single party, that the discipline of the party and the like-mindedness of those associated with it may blind Members to alternative views and options that may well be in the interest of Singapore. It is no argument to say that NMPs never compete to get into this House.”
“In international relations, the UN Security Council enjoys that moral high ground of seeking to do what is right and in the interest of the comity of nations. The Security Council plays a vital part in the mediation and resolution of disputes, sending peace keeping missions to help reduce tensions in troubled areas, keeping opposing forces apart and creating conditions of calm in which peaceful settlement may be sought. Singapore's standing and influence in the world community has never been limited by its physical size. The maintenance of the international world order that is marked by relative peace and stability would serve to promote our country's interest. Such a world order would provide the right environment for the promotion of trade and industry around the world, a necessary condition for Singapore's continued economic growth. I was pleased to learn that Singapore is making a bid to become a non-permanent member of the Security Council. Will the Minister brief this House as to when we are likely to become a member of the Security Council? What is our Government's agenda, if any, when it becomes a member of the Security Council and whether, as a member, it is our intention to contribute security personnel to more dangerous missions than that which we presently undertake for the United Nations?”
“Sir, the founding fathers of the United Nations conceived of an organisation that would deal with the new world order that was brought about by the end of the Second World War. It was a world order that was characterised by the Cold War. Through the years, the UN has been reasonably effective in preventing the world from entering into another war. Now that the Cold War has ended, we are confronted with a question of the proper role of the United Nations. To be sure, the United Nations operates in an environment of constant change. The milieu of the Cold War which marked the early years of the United Nations soon gave way to a new dimension of conflict. It is founded not so much on ideology but on race and religion in most parts. Certainly, the end of the Cold War has brought about a different set of problems. We see more conflicts between states that could range from civil wars to the break up of multi-ethnic states as Yugoslavia. The record of the United Nations in dealing with the conflicts of the world has been patchy. There were breakthroughs no doubt in Cambodia and Namibia. However, there were also setbacks which the UN experienced in Somalia and Rwanda. Whatever the outcome, the world has increasingly looked to the United Nations to maintain peace and stability around the world. For instance, when the Paris Peace Accord in 1990 broke down in Cambodia recently, the ousted First Prime Minister, Prince Ranariddh, made a plaintive plea to the United Nations calling for intervention once again in the problem beleaguered country. In this regard, much focus is placed on the work of the United Nations Security Council.”
“However, I would like to know whether the SAF has since taken or will take further measures to ensure that NSmen get maximum mileage from their time spent in in-camp training.”
“Sir, NSmen spend much of their time and effort for their country when they attend in-camp training. For some of these NSmen who run their own businesses either as proprietors or in partnership with others, the period of in-camp training may well translate itself into lost opportunities or lower profit margins. For employers, the absence of an employee from his workplace because of in-camp training may represent a certain opportunity cost to his operation. Whether it concerns the self-employed or the employee, in-camp training means setting aside precious time for the nation. As an NSman, I have often received feedback from my fellow NSmen that not all of their time spent in-camp is put to good use. The most common complaint being that NSmen spend much of their time waiting. An example would be that if a major exercise is to begin at 9 o'clock in the morning, and in order to ensure that the exercise goes on smoothly, the Unit Commanders will require the soldiers to be ready and waiting, typically between half an hour to an hour, before the commencement of the exercise. This is to ensure that there will be no hitches which may delay the exercise. As a result, the soldiers who dutifully hurry, sometimes wait for a much longer period. When you translate this into the total number of manhours spent waiting for the exercise to begin, one would begin to appreciate the magnitude of wastage in terms of resources. I know the SAF is very concerned that the NSmen spend their time in camp concentrating on their training to ensure that they are competent and capable soldiers. In this regard, I must commend the SAF for making the effort to cut down the amount of time spent by the NSmen in relatively unproductive tasks as area cleaning and administration.”
“The acquisition of these companies will allow us to integrate ourselves further into the world economy. It may also help these companies by using our local knowledge to break into this region. As far as I am aware, our investments thus far have been confined to portfolio share investments in various companies, such as investing in these companies, especially shareholders, rather than to consider a strategic acquisition of target companies or technology transfer to provide the foundation of economic development. In view of my foregoing comments, I would therefore be grateful if the Minister for Finance would enlighten us on whether our Government has a coherent strategy of acquisitions for the purpose which I have just suggested. Mr Speaker, Sir, as we stand at the threshold of the 21st century, we face a global economy that is increasingly integrated and highly competitive. In order for us to stay ahead of competition, we must be prepared, as we have done in the past, to undertake constant reviews of our paradigms. I share the concern of the Minister for Finance for our future economy. However, I am also optimistic that there are opportunities out there to be exploited. So long as we are prepared to see the world as a hunting ground for world class operations, the prospect will be bright indeed for us to rise above our constraints of size, limited resources and a small population base. For this reason, I beg to support the motion.”
“However, I feel that more can be and should be done for Singapore. We can ride on existing businesses and investments elsewhere to take us to the next level of development. Let me explain. We have amassed for ourselves a sizeable amount of reserves. This is no doubt due to the surpluses which we have accumulated over the years. Just for financial year 1997/1998 alone, our budget surplus is in the region of $4 billion. There are many companies, both in the West and the East, that are well established either in certain businesses or in certain cutting edge technology that we are trying to develop. It will be much to our advantage if we can acquire these businesses and in the process use their technology to give us a headstart in some areas, rather than to build the Microsofts, the Glaxco Wellcomes and the ICIs of Singapore from scratch. We can set aside some money in our reserves to acquire these companies. Acquiring these companies will give us a foothold into their business network and technological base. I believe the Malaysian acquisition of the Lotus car manufacturer will provide some synergy for Hicom in the production of Proton cars. In our case, besides developing our own indigenous biomedical base, we can perhaps look at acquiring some of these leading biomedical companies in the world. This will give us a strategic advantage and headstart in this area. To prepare for this, we should perhaps send some of our best and brightest graduates to work for these companies. Their knowledge and experience will no doubt give us a better understanding of the operations of these companies and will help us with our acquisition, as these companies are already established with perhaps a sizeable share in the world market.”
“For the moment, the manufacturing sector, among others, may be held by a weaker Singapore currency. The weaker round of weakening of currencies in the region has no doubt affected the Singapore dollar. For many who see this as a sign of the weakening of the economies in the region, I see this as a positive sign, as a moderate weakening of our currency will help us to compete more effectively internationally. A strong Singapore dollar may not serve our purpose always as it will not help to push our exports overseas. If our strategy is to rely on the manufacturing sector to contribute towards 24% of our GDP, a moderately weaker Singapore dollar will no doubt help to serve the purpose. Mr Speaker, Sir, we recognise that we have to push Singapore to the next level of economic development to make the Singapore dream a reality. We have accordingly restructured our economy by phasing out labour intensive industries and focusing more on high value-added capital intensive industries and financial services. Along similar lines, we have also embarked on a strategy of, I believe, moving to niche areas of specialisation and competence within our economy. For this reason, we have identified areas such as biomedical technology and wafer fabrication for development. Additionally, in recent years, we have been developing a second wing for our economy by encouraging Singaporeans to invest overseas, especially emerging economies like China, Vietnam, Myanmar and India. Today, our regionalisation efforts in these countries have been geared towards real estate related and manufacturing based activities. Mr Speaker, Sir, these are no doubt some economic strategies that will help Singapore stay on course well into the 21st century.”
“I would like to ask the Minister for Finance whether our policies for the manufacturing sector will only be announced after the Government has studied the competitiveness report by the Government appointed Committee. Sir, it is often said that the cost of doing business in Singapore today is high. The cost appears to be mounting and if we do not check our business costs, Singapore may lose its attractiveness as a place to do business in and, in the long term, this may affect our economic well being. Presently, if you look at the component of cost in the manufacturing sector, amongst the two biggest expenditure items are rental and labour. If you look at the recent figures published by the Department of Statistics, the unit business cost of manufacturing for the years 1986 to 1996 has risen by slightly more than 25%. On the other hand, just looking at the rate of return of US investment in Singapore in the non-oil manufacturing area, the figure fell from 35.3% in 1992 to 22.6% in 1995. I do not think I will be faulted for attributing part of the decline to the rise in the unit cost of manufacturing in Singapore. Sir, we should examine specific components of cost increases and see how these can be more effectively managed to make companies in Singapore more competitive in the world economy. The Government is aware and is as much concerned as we are with rising business cost, and I am sure this is an area which the Committee on Competitiveness will look into. In the same vein, I am not sure whether the solution is to cut income tax across the board as this does not sufficiently provide incentive or the challenge for companies to consider how they can be more productive and stay nimble on their feet.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise to speak in support of the motion standing in the name of the Minister for Finance. Sir, by any measure, our economy has done well. Although the economy has slowed down in 1996, after three years of strong growth, nonetheless, we have managed an overall growth of 7.6% for 1996. This, for a maturing economy, is quite commendable. We have been fortunate enough to register strong surpluses in our Budget with each passing year. We were able to accumulate such surpluses because of our sound budgetary policy. We do not spend more than we earn and our ability to earn comes from a combination of sound political leadership, wise economic judgment, a hardworking population, and a very successful industrialisation policy, a policy which since the early years is characterised by emphasis on sound infrastructural investments, and foreign investments in our country. In fact, it is the manufacturing enterprises, made up largely of the MNCs, that give us the impetus to bring us to where we are today. At this moment, manufacturing contributes towards 24% of our GDP. In employment terms, this translates itself to more than 365,000 jobs which the manufacturing industry provides for the people. Mr Speaker, Sir, this year's Budget has been variously termed as a "pro-family" budget, a budget for the financial sector, and a "no-surprises" budget. However, for those in the manufacturing sector, much disappointment has been expressed because there is little in the Budget that they can be happy about. The consolation may well be that this is an interim budget.”