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 2 of 20.
“Its productivity in manufacturing is only 55% to 65% compared to that of the United States. In construction, our productivity is only 34% of Japan. One key reason for this is that construction companies in Singapore tend to employ low wage workers to do the job while firms in other countries may employ fewer such workers but employ higher skilled workers or employ more machinery or automation. Education, or possibly the lack of, it may yet be another reason for the relatively lower level of productivity. According to a Straits Times report published in February this year, up to 60% of the workers in Singapore never made it past secondary education. Krugman's analysis of our economy is not without controversy, particularly when he compared our achievement with that of the Soviet Union. Sir, for now, I do not wish to go into the intricacies of the argument. Suffice it to say that while I do not agree entirely with Mr Krugman, I do agree that it is imperative for the Government to focus more on total factor productivity if Singapore is to continue to grow its economy and to produce the good life for its people. Indeed, I am heartened to note that the Government, together with the Economic Steering Committee, is equally committed to the proposition that priority should be given to the task of nationally raising our level of productivity. Against this broad canvas, Sir, I give my full support for this Bill. We need to put our money where our mouth is by firmly committing ourselves to promoting productivity in this country. This Bill is timely as the nation is set to bring its economy to the next level. There is no choice. We need to be clearly focused on the efficiency of our factors of production if we are to stay ahead of competition in the global economy.”
“Sir, Paul Krugman in an article published in Foreign Affairs in 1994, had argued that Singapore’s steep economic growth model in the early years since independence was largely input driven by increasing capital and labour contribution rather than by total factor productivity. He believes that our growth was driven largely by perspiration than by inspiration; and like the Soviet Union of the 1950s and 1960s, Singapore maintained the expansion of its economic outputs by a massive growth of inputs, such as steep rise in employment, increases in educational levels and massive investment in physical capital. Krugman’s thesis contends that there are limits to growth that are focused on expansion of inputs rather than focusing on growth in output per unit of input. In other words, focusing on inputs alone will at some point result in the law of diminishing return applying to the economy. There is, in essence, a limit on the number of workers, level of training and the development of physical capital that a nation can utilise to raise the level of a country’s output. Growth beyond a certain point must be focused on increasing the output per unit of input if we are to sustain economic growth at levels witnessed by advanced economies over the last 150 years. Krugman, in essence, is arguing that the true measure of performance of the economy is not just on pure expansion of outputs, but rather the efficiency with which the factors of production such as labour and capital has been deployed to generate that growth. If we apply that principle, a different picture emerges in the case of Singapore in the last decade. For the past 10 years, Singapore's productivity growth has averaged 1% per annum.”
“Given the choice, I would urge our Government to do much more than what is currently being proposed in this Bill. With that Sir, I support the proposed amendments. 4.50 pm”
“Can we realistically expect these companies to say no to tobacco advertisements when there is so much money to be made from it? We have difficulty stopping pornographic materials filtering through the Internet, how confident can we be about regulating tobacco advertising on the Internet? It will be a sad day indeed if popular gaming sites or social networking sites are populated and rife with advertisements on tobacco products; and we are not even talking about subliminal advertising that are being used as part of new technology that in essence, involves microsecond flashing of the advertisements to inform the subconscious mind. Does the Government have any policy in this regard in regulating it; or even, is the Government beginning to think about it? The issue on hand is whether the Government is prepared to do more to curb the advertisements and consequent sales of tobacco products in this country. I note that in some countries, cigarettes are not allowed to be displayed in showcases, whether or not there are youths patronising the establishment. Presumably, this restriction works on the principle of it being out of sight and, therefore, out of mind. Such legislation is far reaching. I am not sure if the Government is prepared to go to such an extent. Sir, this Bill is among other things to bring Singapore in line with and to fulfil Singapore’s outstanding obligations under the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. The question is whether it is just enough for us to be up to date or, given the known and harmful effects that tobacco substance abuse has on our society, we should be doing more to educate and prevent the spread of such addictive habits.”
“I have come across, often times, scenes on television screens where the protagonist is often seen holding a cigarette in his hand as part of a scene. It was reported in the Wikipedia that Mark Lee, our favourite local comedian, could be seen smoking the red Marlboro cigarettes in most of Jack Neo's movies. Would this scene constitute tobacco advertisement under the Act? While I am not advocating that we should ban all cigarettes from the movie or TV sets, we should at least have a comprehensive policy on how to deal with such indirect form of advertising. In some jurisdictions, there are warnings after the screenings in the end credits section or the packaging of the CD or DVDs, to warn of the hazards of smoking. In the United States, films with G, PG or PG-13 rating, allow smoking incidents (that means depicting tobacco smoking or related signage or paraphernalia) to appear only when there is a substantial reason for doing so. Sir, I think we can do likewise. Thirdly, there is the risk of tobacco advertising through the Internet. This generation has seen the pervasive use of the Internet as a means of communication and information sourcing. A whole generation of young people is now glued onto the screen surfing the Internet for a wide variety of reasons. It potentially serves as a huge market for sales. I would not be surprised if tobacco companies are also interested in using this medium to promote their products. Presently, I understand that Internet giants like Google and Microsoft have policies that outlaw the promotion of tobacco products on their advertising networks. However, the same cannot be said about all other major Internet service providers whose revenue depends on advertising.”
“Incidentally, I understand that the three of the Marlboro men who appeared in the advertisements, died subsequently from lung cancer. The question really is, where does one draw the line? Should the Government take active steps to stop or regulate such subliminal forms of advertising? Secondly, the social signaling of smoking in the public media. Advertisements are a very powerful form of communication that appeals to the target audience’s sense of being, aspiration and desire. It is meant to connect with the audience and can strongly influence the development and acceptance of a set of socially acceptable values. Sociologists call this social engineering. So we go to the movie houses and see our heroes and heroines, our favorite characters, going about their business with a cigarette half dangling out of their mouths. Think of the pretty slim and young actress smoking away and looking glamorous on the screen. They are our favorite people; and, to us, it must be all right to smoke since they smoke in the movies. A new and recent groundbreaking study linked to the American Journal of Preventive Medicine shows that young adult smokers who are most likely to light up immediately are those who watch smoking in movies. The study is the first of its kind to directly link smoking scenes in movies to actual and immediate smoking behaviour. I remember some years ago coming across an actor by the name of James Dean in the movies. Again, those of us who are old enough will remember the iconic actor holding a cigarette in his hand. I cannot imagine what kind of impression that image must have left on many impressionable youngsters of the time. The same concern also applies to what has been portrayed on television.”
“Such insidious forms of advertisements are a more dangerous form of marketing as it easily targets the young and vulnerable to ensure early brand endorsement. And on this note, I share the similar concerns of my colleagues. Arguably, it would not be difficult for one who is mentally conditioned to move from the "Camel" brand of cargo pants to the "Camel" brand of cigarettes. Would the authorities not be concerned if the same brand of cigarettes started to appear in children's toys in place of "Fisher Price" brand of products? Tobacco brands appear innocently on products and services. However, they present a very powerful form of subliminal appeal and can make their presence felt quietly in many areas of our everyday lives. This is latent advertising. In April this year, it was reported that doctors have urged governments to launch an inquiry into alleged "subliminal" tobacco advertising on Ferrari Formula One cars. It is claimed the red, white and black bar code on Ferrari cars and overalls, is intended to remind viewers of Marlboro cigarettes branding. Similarly, the Observer reported that Philip Morris, the manufacturer of the Marlboro cigarettes, is such a believer in experiential marketing that it funds owners of public establishments to have their interior decorations done up in a manner to convey the strength of the brand. For instance, a patron could be lounging in front of a screen and being bombarded with the Wild West cowboy scenes of Marlboro country, and be entertained by Bernstein’s theme song from the Magnificent Seven playing in the background. Now, one can never fail to feel macho about being associated with the Marlboro brand.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of the amendment Bill. Tobacco consumption is a vile, habit-forming practice that is potentially harmful and deadly. It cuts short the lives of a third to half of its users. According to a World Health Organization report, perhaps 100 million people died prematurely in the last century from tobacco consumption. This figure, in the eyes of many, is of tragic proportion as the deaths are preventable. Unless we do something very significant now, studies have indicated that another one billion people may die in this century if the current trend continues. Against the backdrop of such alarming statistics, I welcome the initiatives by the Government to put together a tighter restriction on advertisement and sale of tobacco products; all of which I agree. Sir, while I wholeheartedly embrace the changes in this Bill, I will say that the changes may not have gone far enough. I say this with three specific references in mind. First, this Bill deals with putting restrictions on any form of direct or indirect tobacco product advertisement as opposed to tobacco brand advertisement. At the moment, neither the Act nor the Bill deals with tobacco brands that find its way into other goods and services. Cigarette companies have sought to promote consumption and sales through association with certain lifestyle, activity or values. Many of us will recall how "Camel" brand of cigarettes has found its way into a line of clothing that at first brush may have nothing to do with cigarettes. Cigarette brand names have also appeared in travel services such as "Peter Stuyvesant Travel & Tours" or "Kent Holidays".”
“Sir, Singapore's two-year stint at the United Nations Security Council marked a high point in our more than three decades of involvement in both regional and global organisations. Now that Singapore's membership at the Security Council is completed, I would like to ask the Minister for an update on its longer term plans and priorities at the United Nations and, in particular, whether Singapore intends to step up its efforts to play the role of a peace-maker in conflict areas as some of the other countries have done. G20 and Singapore's role”
“I may now be reported to the Medical Council. Sir, last year, the Prime Minister opened the Japan Creative Centre jointly with Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama, the first of its kind in Singapore and possibly the region. The Creative Centre is meant to promote Japan's soft power and its design technology. The opening of the Japan Creative Centre signifies yet another milestone in the warm ties that Singapore enjoys with Japan. Indeed, over the years, there has been an increasing convergence of interests between the two countries, particularly in the area of bilateral trade of which both are top investors in each other's country and also in foreign affairs. Like Japan, Singapore aims towards leveraging of high technology to sustain its growth and to us here in Singapore, Japan has always been the model of hard work, discipline and attention to details. There is much that Singapore can learn from Japan. One area I can think of is promotion of Green and Clean energy of which the Japanese have had a headstart over us. In view of the common interest that Singapore shares with Japan, I would like to ask the Minister whether there are other areas that the Government is looking at that we can work more closely with our Japanese counterparts in jointly promoting our mutual interests. For example, one possibility is the promotion of joint investments overseas that would leverage on the best that the two countries can offer. Singapore-Middle East trade and relations”
“Personally, I am satisfied that SAF is up to the mark in dealing with this threat and for which I am sure Singaporeans are most grateful. Nonetheless, we know that security threats are still out here and exist. I would be grateful if Minister can give this House an assessment on the current situation of the threat to our security and if possible to share with this House what are other possible measures the Government is taking to deal with these threats. Humanitarian and peacekeeping missions”
“Sir, Singapore was pleased and was able to breath a sigh of relieve last year when Malaysians finally caught Mas Selamat Kastari, a known terrorist on-the-run. Singaporeans may be happy with the latest development but we know that the capture of Mas Selamat would not put to rest the ever-present threat to security that Singapore is faced with. Indeed Singapore is known to be a prized and high-profile target not just for terrorists from the region, but I believe, Sir, also terrorists from outside it as well. It is often said that the odds are not with us. We have to get it right all the time whereas the terrorist has to get it right only once. Indeed, our assessment of the security threat has led us to deploy forces as far away as the Middle East. We know that Members of the Jemaah Islamiah (JI), a known terrorist group, received training in Afghanistan. I believe that ensuring the peace and stability of Iraq and Afghanistan will help to remove these places from the list of places that potential terrorists such as JI can turn to for help. So far, our contribution has been confined to building and medical assistance. The contribution may be small in comparison to others, it is nonetheless significant for a small country like Singapore. On the homefront, I am grateful to note that the SAF has also stepped up its efforts to protect our vital installations and they were quick to respond to the new intelligence that our vital shipping interests are now under threat of attack, as we have heard and found out in today's papers. The presence of these armed men patrolling the corridors of our airport, for instance, and our vital installations gives the strong assurance to others, how seriously Singapore takes the security challenge.”
“Sir, in recent years, the profile of security environment within the region has changed in a fairly significant manner. This is particularly so since the September 11 attacks in the United States. The radicalisation of certain segments of the Muslim faith coupled with the separatist movements within the region have made Southeast Asia a hot bed for terrorism. From the Philippines to Indonesia and Southern Thailand, security forces have been placed on high alert against possible terrorist bombings or insurgent attacks. Quite apart from these security threats, our region has also been affected by piracy, particularly along the Malacca Straits. While I agree that the action taken by the littoral states have helped to reduce the incidence of piracy in recent years, it nonetheless is still a threat to shipping in the region if we are not careful. Against the broad canvas of security situation that the region is faced with, there is a constant need for ASEAN states to work and cooperate closely to deal with these threats, to an extent that there should be an over-arching framework within which robust, efficient, effective cooperation is managed, whether in the form of information sharing or support in the deployment of security forces. I would therefore like to ask the Minister to give this House, firstly, an update of his assessment of the security environment in the region; secondly, the state of the security architecture in the region and its effectiveness; and, finally, Singapore's present and future contribution to the challenge.”
“Sir, in concluding, notwithstanding my earlier comments, I know that this is a Budget that is aimed at making us more competitive in the global economy. We know that as a small country if we are able to leverage on knowledge as the foundation of our economy and we are able to work smart and productively, I have every confidence that Singapore will continue to be that paradise home where we can live, work and play while leading joyful and meaningful lives. With that, Sir, I support the Minister’s Budget Statement. 4.51 pm”
“Unfortunately, by that time, many would have found that their combined salaries would have exceeded the household income limit that the HDB has imposed on eligible applicants. We agree that qualifying to apply for an HDB flat is not a good enough reason to get married. However, the fact remains that with rising salaries, it would be very easy for the couple to reach the limit very early in their career; and this assumes that a person has found the right person early on. Generally, people recognise the windfall that comes from selling their subsidised flats in the open market. For any sensible and thinking Singaporean, capital gain is indeed a welcomed gift from the Government. Sir, you can well imagine how disappointed these people can be at the thought of not being able to participate in something that is meant to benefit Singaporeans. Indeed, one should not be surprised at the sentiment expressed by these people about being left out. Perhaps, the Government should review the household income ceiling of those who are eligible to apply or, for that matter, substitute it with another set of rules altogether for people in this category. I do know that wherever the line is drawn, there will be those will not benefit as opposed to those who will. However, not doing anything about the present situation now is equally untenable. We must remember that not everyone whose combined income exceeds the household limit can well afford private housing or that they will necessarily have the ability to stump out the cash for the cash portion if they bought an HDB flat from the secondary market. What is worse is with the perception of property prices rising regularly, many are feeling that owning a decent home is increasingly going to be out of their reach soon.”
“The issue of enforcement is a serious one in countries where such laws are lax, particularly in Asia. This Budget does not say anything about helping Singapore intellectual property rights owners to enforce their rights. Hopefully, in next year's Budget, our Government can be more helpful in offering to help these enterprises with intellectual property rights to enforce these rights whether in civil courts here or elsewhere. Thirdly, including all Singaporeans in growth. Sir, it is heartening to note that the Government has not forgotten the need to include all Singaporeans in the country's growth. The measures introduced in this year's Budget are no doubt welcomed. However, I am not sure if participating in Singapore's growth is truly felt by all Singaporeans. I refer in particular to a group of young and successful Singaporeans who are caught in a very unusual situation. Currently, it is our Government's stated intention that we want to root our people in this country through home ownership. We have done this relatively successfully through providing Singaporeans with subsidised homes at affordable prices; and we have also placed a restriction through limiting the household income of those who are eligible to $8,000. This is to ensure that public subsidised housing is reserved for the majority of lower and middle-class Singaporeans. Indeed as a result of our housing policy, we were able to put approximately 80% of our population into public housing estates. Sir, the household income eligibility restriction, unfortunately, has made it very difficult for a certain group of young Singaporeans to acquire public homes directly from the Government. These are those who have worked a few years after graduating before deciding to settle down with their spouses.”
“What we require is a clearer definition of our policy on foreign labour. We can understand the restrictions and the need to improve the productivity in certain sectors such as those in the financial and services industry. Improving productivity in these areas will, I have no doubt, raise the quality of the Singapore worker and his salary, relative to his compatriots in the more developed economies. However, I am not sure if the same can be said about putting similar restrictions in other areas, particularly in export-oriented industries where cost competiveness is of primary importance. Secondly, growing globally competitive companies. Sir, I am glad to note that the Government has recognised the need to grow globally competitive companies. As I have said previously in this House, as a small economy competing in the global economy, one of the ways we can overcome our limitations is to build up our store of proprietary knowledge. Leveraging on proprietary knowledge, whether acquired by transfer or through research and development, will allow Singapore, without any significant natural advantage, to generate a high gross domestic product and with it, the possibility of Singaporeans realising the dreams of living the Swiss quality of life. In this regard, I support the ESC's proposal to encourage more focus on research and development and acquisition of intellectual property rights to enhance our competitiveness. While I applaud the initiative of the Government in this regard, I feel that it should go further. Acquiring the intellectual property right is only part of the equation. Enforcing it is another issue altogether. Ownership and enforcement of rights go hand in hand. It is no use owning rights to property when the owner has difficulty enforcing those rights.”
“As a workforce, they serve the useful purpose of providing the manpower in jobs that are not popular with Singaporeans. They make our exports competitive by keeping our costs low and this in turn helps to keep these industries in Singapore so that there will be other good jobs for Singaporeans. They also provide the buffer for retrenchment in bad times and, in many cases, give Singaporeans some reprieve. Increasing the cost of hiring these workers in the name of improving productivity will unnecessarily run the real risk of raising the operating costs and, thus, making us less competitive. Worse still, if these companies should decide to relocate elsewhere. In choosing to generally force improvements on productivity, we must recognise that our cost of labour and factors of production will necessarily go up, making us more costly relative to other places. We went through this path before in the 80s when we decided to increase the unit cost of labour by pushing through measures to increase productivity through automation. What happened was well documented. Our competitiveness went down and with it, our economic performance. Subsequently, through a mix of imported and local labour, we were able to find the right balance to carry us on the path of strong economic growth. However, it now appears that the pendulum is swinging in the other direction. In response to ground sentiments, it would seem to be a knee-jerk reaction to now impose a carte blanche restriction on foreign labour across the board. This approach may not necessarily serve our interest whether in the near or long term. As it is, in response to the new initiatives, we are beginning to hear the moans of those who are in industries that are heavily dependent on foreign labour.”
“Sir, Singapore’s survival and long term sustainability depends almost exclusively on the ability of its leadership to renew its economic relevance from time to time. Nobody owes Singapore or Singaporeans a living. Unless Singapore is able to refresh itself, its place in the world will be overtaken by other economies that are much larger, endowed with more resources and are much cheaper to operate in. India and China are at the moment snapping at our heels. It is of necessity, therefore, that we re-look at our value proposition periodically to ensure our place in the world. This Budget broadly reflects the Government’s endorsement of the recommendations of the Economic Strategies Committee, set up specifically for such a review. Now, on principle, I support the recommendations of the Committee as the proposals broadly reflect the arguments that I have been advocating in this House over the years, specifically on how we can effectively compete in the global economy. Sir, while I support the proposals and, consequently, the Budget, I, nonetheless, do have some comments which I shall limit to three for now in the interest of time. First, the need to balance increasing productivity and cost competitiveness. Minister Tharman acknowledges the need to increase our productivity to be in line with first world economies. However our Minister also recognises that reducing the foreign labour supply will make it difficult for many industries to remain competitive. At present, there are foreign workers who are hired in industries that require substantial manual labour. These workers are typically organised in large numbers and move about in groups from dormitories to worksites. They are largely isolated from the general population and they keep largely to themselves.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. I just want the Minister's clarification on what steps, if at all, the Ministry is considering in seeking a waiver of diplomatic immunity in regard to Dr Ionescu if indeed he is found culpable in this incident. Also, what assurance has the Romanian Ministry given to our Government as to the full extent to which he will be prosecuted if indeed he is a suspect or found to be suspicious of criminal conduct?”
“I want to thank the Senior Minister of State for a very comprehensive response to our comments. But I was hoping that he would respond to the points that were made earlier about criminalising borrowing and the point about using the instrument of prosecution's discretion in deciding whether or not to prosecute a particular case as a way to mitigate the concerns about borrowers who come from different backgrounds of needs. By making this borrowing a criminal offence, you are sending a very strong message out there and you will certainly deter people who even think about borrowing and doing business with loansharks. Assoc. Prof. Ho Peng Kee: Since we dropped the penny about two-and-a-half years ago, we have been thinking through this issue and monitoring all the feedback. And because it is a complex issue, we have not taken a decision as of now. Some of the points have been raised in this House. I do not think now is the time to fully debate this but the key points have been raised. So let us continue to reflect on this and, more importantly, look at the outcome of all the measures we introduced today. If they have the desired effect, then we may not need to criminalise borrowing, at least in the foreseeable future. Question put, and agreed to. Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House. The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. – [Assoc. Prof. Ho Peng Kee]. Bill considered in Committee. [Mdm Deputy Speaker in the Chair]”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. On the point of competition and ranking of kindergarten, is not this already taking place at the pre-school level where kindergartens are being compared and pressures are on teachers to perform; parents are lining up at the kindergartens to register their children so that they can get into better kindergartens? I am asking this in relation to the response by the Minister about the effects of nationalising pre-school education by the Ministry.”
“We already have various programmes such as the National Arts Council’s Arts for All – Community Engagement Plan and the Arts Education Programme. Together with the increased free outreach performances and excellent programming, these efforts have helped increase attendances at the Esplanade. Gross ticket sales at the Esplanade in FY 2008 were $27 million, as compared to $18 million in FY 2003, following the Centre's first complete year of operations. Correspondingly, the total attendance in FY 2008 was around 1.7 million, compared to around 900,000 in FY 2003. I would like to encourage Mr Fong and other Members of Parliament to continue with their support for the Esplanade and to enjoy the programmes and other arts activities that are put forward to you.”
“It thus continues to receive Government and Tote Board funding. The Esplanade’s revenue comes from ticket sales, sponsorship and other sources, such as rental income. Annually, about half of its operating expenditure is covered by revenue while Government grants make up the balance. With careful planning and prudent financial management, the Esplanade has managed to operate within its revenue and grant quantum, without incurring any deficits since its inception. In FY 2008, Esplanade’s operating expenditure was $63 million, its earned income was $24 million and grants accounted for $40 million. Nonetheless, the economic downturn has severely affected sponsorship income. The Esplanade had lost regular corporate sponsors, particularly financial institutions and multi-national corporations. In addition, several large, long-running commercial productions had also pulled out as promoters became more risk-averse. While Esplanade managed to secure other bookings to cover these cancellations, these did not generate the same amount of revenue. Despite these, the Esplanade has not cut back on programming. Instead, it has adjusted ticket prices downwards and stepped up free programmes to provide respite to audience and opportunities to performers. They have also not committed to big ticket shows which charge premium pricing. The Esplanade has also carved out unconventional spaces such as its rooftop for lease, stepped up mall promotions and given rebates to help its tenants tide over this difficult time. On Singaporeans' interests in arts and ticket sales at the Esplanade, MICA takes a long-term view in providing audiences and raising the level of arts appreciation and engagement among Singaporeans.”
“And, therefore, when the Government thinks about intervening in a competitive marketplace, I think they have got to be very careful about what we should do and how much we should intervene. So, that is why, we are taking the opportunity to relook at this, not because of the assumptions that we have made in the past and the considerations from the past were wrong but because the landscape had over the last three years evolved and changed and the number of exclusive arrangements has grown and we are watching these with some concern. And, therefore, we are taking this opportunity to take a fresh look at it, consult with other people, including those in the private sector, to determine what is the best approach that we can take – balancing the need for commercial arrangements to proceed; balancing our international obligations and taking into account the needs and the interests of consumers. OPERATIONS OF THE ESPLANADE 10. Mr Arthur Fong asked the Acting Minister for Information, Communications and the Arts (a) what is the operating profit/loss of the Esplanade since its inception; (b) how has the poor economy affected the Esplanade and its operations; and (c) whether the various programmes organised by the Ministry have brought about an increase in Singaporeans' interest and translated to an increase in ticket sales at the Esplanade. RAdm [NS] Lui Tuck Yew: Mr Speaker, I would like to thank Mr Arthur Fong for his interest in the Esplanade and its operations. The Esplanade Company Ltd is registered as an Institution of Public Character and is a non-profit organisation, not a profit-driven commercial enterprise. Being an arts centre for everyone, the Esplanade fulfils several key social and national objectives.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, given the great popularity of football matches, I am not sure if a model that is funded by a free-to-air broadcast, sponsored by advertising, could be an alternative that the Government would consider as opposed to an exclusive broadcast of these very popular sports programmes? That way, you can actually have a wider reach and allow more people to have the pleasure of viewing these matches, subsidised by advertising revenue, instead of just on a pay-to-view basis that these cable TVs are now charging. RAdm [NS] Lui Tuck Yew: I think the point would be that, whether you have it on free-to-air TV or pay-per-view, somebody would have to bid for the content and bid at an appropriate price. And whether soccer is more important than anything else that we have to formulate such an arrangement to bid for these content and exclude something else altogether. So, those who are passionate about the arts may say, why not the arts; why not educational programmes and so on? Sir, that is, indeed one of the dilemmas. Hypothetically, we can tell whoever it is – service providers, in this case on a free-to-air – that you can only charge subscribers a certain amount. So, they would bid accordingly. But bear in mind that the content owner is not obligated to sell to us. And the content owner may say that if other countries follow a similar hypothetical practice that they would run into great difficulties and challenges to be able to pay the transfer fees, to be able to pay the players that they are paying in Europe, in particular. So, the content owner may very well say, "I would not sell to Singapore" and we would be at a greater loss, particularly for the consumers who feel that they are prepared to pay the price for the package.”
“Sir, yesterday, in my speech in Parliament, I cited and quoted an e-mail from someone whom I said I did not know and did not verify the contents. Now, on reflection, I thought I should have sought some confirmation from the writer of the e-mail or separately verify the contents of the mail. I believe that the privilege of free speech in this House imposes high standards of diligence on the part of its Members. To the extent that I had fallen short of these standards, I proffer my unreserved apology to those involved.”
“The question that some have asked is whether a formal complaint must be made from someone before the Ministry will act on a matter which it has heard about and which comes under its purview. Displaying annoyance at being dragged into the sorry saga does not help with the confidence recovery process in the aftermath. Sir, we have done extremely well as a country over the years, and I can say with great confidence that we will continue to do well in the years to come. The President’s speech for the new session of Parliament has done much to reinforce that confidence. The question is not whether we will do well, but how much better we will do. I strongly believe that if we are able to pull together and collectively work at overcoming the challenges that lie before us, there will always be a clear blue sky with a rainbow spanning over it for Singapore. With that, Sir, I join my colleagues in thanking the President for his speech. 2.24 pm”
“I do wonder if the press would have been so quick on the take if it were women from another faith who took up the cause instead. It is unfortunate that by framing this episode as one that carries a religious undertone, the whole debate deeply polarised our society very quickly. Apart from the press, the Ministry of Education in the early days of the AWARE leadership struggle had maintained consistently that they did not look into this matter as no complaint was made by any parent. Not surprisingly, what followed was a deluge of complaints from parents which then prompted an investigation by the Ministry. The outcome was an implicit acceptance of the serious nature of the allegations against the CSE programmes run by AWARE. I am grateful to note the Ministry has now tightened the procedures on the appointment of course providers in the area of sexuality education. The AWARE saga is as much about the kind of values we want to promote in our society as it is about leadership struggle. To build a socially cohesive society, all interest groups must recognise and accept the fundamental building blocks of our society that have come to represent our values on families and relationships. Our values change, if at all, by evolution than by revolution. Aggressive proselytisation by fringe groups, whether carried out by insidious means or otherwise, will only invite a backlash from mainstream society. This is not how our society should be run. Social cohesion requires the active participation of all. In this particular episode, one wonders if the Ministry of Education had taken a more proactive stand in the first place by being more vigilant, the leadership struggle and the ensuing polarisation of our community would not have taken place in the manner that it did.”
“(c) In the sweep of fervent support, the constitutional amendments were also made to allow men and foreign women full voting rights (in a local women's association that makes the CEDAW report on the state of women in Singapore). In the perspective that such an amendment was thrown out in the previous AGM, the motives may be called into question. The press made no mention of this important development. I question the cover-up in the press. In review of newspaper coverage of AWARE developments, I'm also beginning to think that press focus on the sensitive issues of religious involvement was but a calculated red herring thrown out to manipulate public sentiments. Sir, I am pleading for the authorities to look into this matter as I am becoming increasingly alarmed that minority groups with a political agenda may not have just reached its grasp into a vulnerable women's group, and through it attempt to distort our children's views on sexuality, but have actually infiltrated the press to block out news and prevent the public from accessing the truth. I actually feel frightened that the press in Singapore can attempt to shape my views as it wishes by misinformation or partial information." The accusations brought up by Ms Ng have once again raised the question of whether there should be an unregulated press. In reporting the matter, the editors and journalists could have looked at the issue as one of the conservative groups in our society taking on the liberals rather than be quick to frame this in the context of the Christian Right against the homosexuals and the lesbians. True, many of the ladies came from the same church. However, the same may be said of any group who comes from any organisation. But that alone does not mean that they represent the organisation.”
“Perhaps, AWARE should have been more selective of its membership. The question of who should be given the right to vote has deep philosophical implications that would be applicable not only to AWARE, but philosophical implications for Singapore as well. Of the few protagonists involved in the saga, I would like to mention the role of the press in reporting this spat. One self-evident condition of a free press in a democracy is the need to be responsible, impartial and to present the facts as neutrally and objectively to the readers as possible. One wonders whether the press can be truly called upon to discharge that duty when some of its own members feel rather passionately about the issues in the public domain. The recent saga surrounding AWARE is but one example. I will quote one email that I received from one Ms Cheryl Ng. I must add that I do not know Ms Ng and I have not verified the substance of her email. However, I would say that I would not be surprised if it were true and would be very concerned if it is. Her email reads: "I'm also surprised and deeply troubled that the reporting in the Straits Times has not been honest in presenting the full picture to the public, especially concerned parents following the AWARE saga. There was a concerted effort by both the press and TV coverage not to mention the significant presence of the homosexual community. If I had not been there, I would never have known the truth. (a) In fact, I witnessed the main reporter responsible for blowing up the whole AWARE story ... hobnobbing with the homosexual fraternity at the EGM. (b) Some members of the press and TV were candidly jubilant as they celebrated the passing of the 'no confidence' vote by punching their fists in the air and hugging the 'old guard' they were standing with.”
“More importantly, our social cohesion must also be founded on the key values that our society has come to embrace; values that define who we are and what we stand for as a people. The recent incident involving the takeover of AWARE by a group of concerned Singaporeans demonstrates just how fragile our society is. For a brief period of time, our nation was on the boil. What turned out to be a relatively simple and lawful act of democracy suddenly turned into a deeply polarised and heated debate between the Christian Right and the homosexual and lesbian interest groups. The spotlight was quick to focus on a few key groups, rightly or wrongly – namely, the Church, as seen to be represented by the supposed usurpers; the old leadership who were seen to champion the rights of the homosexuals and the lesbians in Singapore; the Ministry of Education who denied knowledge of the instructor’s manual on Comprehensive Sexual Education (CSE) in schools run by AWARE; and, of course, the press. Sir, I do not intend to go into the rights and wrongs of the way in which a group of concerned ladies decided to take over the leadership of a voluntary welfare organisation, save to say that I find it odd that democracy suddenly takes on a very different meaning when a group of new members decide to legitimately contest in an election to determine a new agenda. I also find it odd that many of the members who did not bother even to attend the most important meeting in the year to elect a new leadership should now decide to raise a howl of protest after the event. If they, meaning the old members, were that concerned in the first place, I believe they should have taken a more active role in the affairs of the organisation.”
“For example, the Government can help local enterprises by working with them to discover intellectual property rights elsewhere and partnering these enterprises to acquire and own these rights or securing a longer term licence that will enable them to fully exploit these patents commercially. In doing so, the SMEs can widen the intellectual property pool that they can use to increase their chances of success. Sir, we constantly bemoan the fact that we do not have land and resources to meet even the most basic of our needs. In today’s globalised economy, the lack of resources in Singapore need not be a limiting factor. We should exploit opportunities for resource ownership elsewhere to help expand and improve on our capacities. Intellectual property rights that I just mentioned are but one example. Land is another. Just think of the possibilities that acquiring more land overseas will do to our relative insecurity over food supply. If our Government could provide funding and create opportunities for Singapore SMEs to own and operate farms overseas on a big scale and use these farms to channel their produce specifically to the Singapore market, it will give Singaporeans the much needed assurance of a constant supply of food, particularly in view of the recent experience of the relative lack of supply of rice following the sharp price increases. Economic progress and prosperity will not mean much to our country if we are not able to maintain our social cohesion. That ours is a fragile democracy of many interest groups is a constant reminder to all of us to be mindful of the need to preserve our national unity through civil discourse and mutual respect of views, even if those are not necessarily shared by all.”
“I do believe that our Government tries to bring local businesses along with them when a Minister makes official trips overseas. It is, however, one thing to bring them along to make a casual introduction, and another to work with local businesses on how they can effectively seal relationships with local businessmen to ensure the smooth passage of investment in these foreign territories. How far should IE Singapore go in providing assistance to the SMEs in finding the right foreign partner? We know that, with a strong local partner, the chances of succeeding in a foreign venture would be that much higher. Secondly, as we move into a higher economic gear, we can no longer rely on traditional manufacturing to ensure our long-term survival. Knowledge and intellectual property are going to be the key to ensure that we can continue to charge a premium for our goods and services and to enable us to stay competitive. The Americans have been leading on research and like them, we must leverage on technology to remain competitive. However, as a small country with a small population base, we must be realistic about our ability to come up with original and inventive ideas. What we cannot achieve by sheer ingenuity and ability of our population, we can achieve by looking to the world to acquire these rights. Presently, the Government has done much to provide the incentives and encouragement to our local innovators to not only register their patents but also to help take these patents from being ideas to commercial exploitation. On the other hand, there is more that the Government can do.”
“Again, leveraging on our Government’s investments overseas, we would be able to use these investments to help local SMEs to ride on the bandwagon of world-class companies to succeed in the international arena. I often wondered if Creative Technology had had the benefit of working with a company like Apple in the area of branding and value proposition, the battle for MP3 might have had a different outcome. There is, therefore, a recognisable need for our Government when investing its sovereign wealth fund to consider a broader canvass beyond returns on investment and look at how it can further enhance its strategic value by using it to benefit the Singaporean managers and enterprises. Going beyond, the Government can assist local enterprises further by deepening the partnership with the SMEs in its overseas ventures. To be sure, the Government is already doing this through IE Singapore, A*STAR, and SPRING Singapore, and the like. However, the question is whether more can be done and in what areas. Sir, I believe more can be done, and in certain key strategic areas. I shall name two for now. First, our Government is at the moment helping our local enterprises break into new markets such as Latin America, Eastern Europe and Africa, to name a few. These are new markets that will present new and exciting opportunities for our local entrepreneurs to do business. Just the other day, I was having a conversation with Olivia Lum of Hyflux. She told me that although the general economic climate has not improved very much, she is, however, receiving steady and strong orders from Africa where Hyflux also operates. These are orders from countries that have natural resources, particularly oil, and are prepared to spend to improve its infrastructure during this time.”
“However, their vision of the world is often constrained in the same manner as the proverbial frog that sees the world from the depth of the well. Given the right opportunity and environment, I am sure we will find more Singaporeans taking their companies from being third rate to first. Our significant stake in foreign companies may also be used to provide opportunities for our small and medium enterprises to work with these companies. As with managers, our entrepreneurs do not have the opportunity or the know-how to partner with these enterprises to grow their businesses. However, if our Government can be a trail blazer, a path may be opened up for them to confidently take the plunge by going into new areas with foreign partners who can now guide and work with them. As a simple illustration, a significant investment in, say, a pharmaceutical company should help to open the way to local companies that provide laboratory services to work with these companies. The support need not be confined to the operations of the pharmaceutical company in Singapore alone, but any where else in the world where our local laboratory can effectively and competitively set up presence and provide the service. This would yet be another way that we can provide opportunities for local industries to grow. Additionally, opportunities may also be opened up for collaboration in areas such as joint marketing, research and development. Singapore provides a strong educational foundation for its people. With an anticipated 30% of the student cohort going into tertiary education, there would be sufficient talent for local enterprises to engage in more research and development and to work with foreign multi-national companies to advance the frontiers of knowledge.”
“This however, Sir, should not deter us from continuing to look for good companies to take significant stakes, particularly if we decide that holding it for the longer term would give us better returns on our money. Sir, while I support the approach of our Government in regard to holding investments for the longer term, I am not sure if we should not place more emphasis on how we can make better use of our investments to work harder for us. Now, let me explain. The Government has regularly stated that as a sovereign wealth fund investor, it is in most cases a passive investor. In many of its investments, the Government does not ask for board representation, but would be happy to keep its substantial shareholder status while leaving the company to the care of the managers. This is a pity really. We could have used our significant share advantage to provide training and exposure opportunities to Singaporeans. One of the many challenges of being a small country is the lack of opportunity for Singaporeans to find the opportunity to compete on the world stage. We are talking about exposure to corporate planning and decision making at a higher level and in a completely different cultural environment. Few Singaporeans make it to this realm of seniority, and to those who make it are often celebrated as local heroes. Allowing more Singaporeans to participate at such senior levels, and I should add, not necessarily as employees but even as interns as well, would give more Singaporeans the occasion to build up their confidence and their capabilities and, in the longer term, bring our managerial skill-sets to international blue chip standards. It is often said, and I believe this to be true, that Singaporeans are, by and large, well educated and bright.”
“Sir, I rise in support of the motion and to join my colleagues in thanking the President for his Address at the Opening of Parliament. The global economic recession brought on by the financial crisis has not spared Singapore. We are now seeing one of the worst contractions in our economy. There is much anxiety as the people ponder on what the future will hold for them. Will there be jobs for them? Can they continue to enjoy the same quality of life as they know it? Will there still be a future for their children and their future generation? Whatever the concerns, this recession reminds us how vulnerable we are and how pressing is the task of ensuring that our economy is sufficiently robust to withstand the volatility and the cyclical nature of the economy. The President in his Address has touched on a very basic and fundamental concern of many Singaporeans. How do we ensure that we will be able to find new opportunities that will help continue the growth of the economy to give the good life for all Singaporeans? Much has been said of the strategies that the Government has adopted in ensuring our future economic well-being. There are broadly two approaches to this, and I will call it the "High" and the "Low" level approaches. At the level of "high investments", we continue to rely on agencies like the GIC and Temasek to look for investment opportunities that will give us reasonable returns on our investments. Both GIC and Temasek have been in the news recently and unfortunately for the wrong reasons. No doubt there will be much that will be said in the course of time about the relative losses, although I would like to add at this moment that with investments it is easier to criticise with the benefit of hindsight.”
“First, it presupposes that the owner/occupier has advanced knowledge of any illegal assembly or procession taking place at the premises; or if it did take place at the premises, the owner/occupier would have the necessary resources to deal with such a contingency. Secondly, this may potentially be a law enforcement matter. To ask the owner/occupier to take measures on a matter that may be of public interest may be unduly onerous or unfair to the owner/occupier if the owner/occupier has to bear the cost of such measures alone. It would be equitable if the Government agrees to bear a part, if not a substantial part, of the cost in this regard. Sir, although the right to peaceful assembly in public may be curtailed by Acts of Parliament, any act to curtail it should be carried out on the principle that it should be carried out as modestly as possible and only to the extent of absolute necessity. We must be mindful and careful not to pass laws that will eventually make a mockery of our right to peaceful assembly without arms. With that, Sir, I support the Bill.”
“I understand that the intent here is to avert any trouble or reduce the tension that may arise from participants making a nuisance of themselves in any place. Unfortunately, the proposed Bill in this instance is not clear as to how the powers of the police officers may be exercised. For instance, if the participants were asked to move on, how far they should be asked to go? Or would the police officer consider whether, on balance, asking the participants to go too far away may result in the assembly or the procession losing its impact on the ground? It is one thing to be placed at the centre stage for the performance and another to be placed at the exit end of the stage. How far should the nuisance go before the police officers will entertain a request from the people affected? Should there be a significant disturbance before the police may be called upon to intervene? The truth of the matter is that no outdoor public assembly or procession of any significant scale is going to result in no disruption to the local or business community. Should the Government clarify as to the circumstances under which it will act? Finally, the Bill places the burden of preventing any illegal assembly or procession from taking place in any premises on the owner or the occupier. In the event that an illegal assembly or procession does take place, the owner or the occupier shall be guilty of an offence and shall on conviction be liable to a fine of not more than $5,000, unless he can demonstrate he has taken all reasonable measures and exercised all reasonable due diligence. Sir, this provision is indeed rather onerous on the owner/occupier of properties.”
“With all due respect, Sir, I cannot see how one can draw similarities between a terrorist attack and a public assembly that, even at its worst, has gone riotous. As a layman, one would see one operation more as a planned response where secrecy is important and, in the other case, the response is seen more as a spontaneous reaction. In fact, more often than not, when a peaceful assembly turns violent even the most composed of law enforcement officers may be provoked. Police brutality often out of sheer anger, which is not an unnatural human response, cannot be a justification for taking away videos and photos on the basis that such videos and photos may affect ongoing law enforcement actions. The basis on which the Police may act under the present clause is unfortunately rather vague. Unless there is greater clarity, there will always be this concern that photos or video footages showing police heavy-handedness or, at worse, brutality, may be taken away for less than noble reasons. I would suggest that the powers to take away such media be given to a third party who can be the independent assessor of whether such records will, in fact, on the balance of probability affect police security law enforcement or security operations. Issues of speed and the need to act fast on the ground can perhaps be dealt with in other ways. Additionally, the new Bill brings with it the right of police officers to tell the organisers of the public assembly or procession to move on, where among others, the gathering is affecting the business of the place, or disturbing the peaceable conduct of the event, or where it is interfering with the entry or exit of the place. These are rather unusual powers.”
“Sir, such drafting does not give anyone who intends to organise outdoor rallies the comfort of knowing for certain whether his application will indeed be granted. Rather than leave the decision entirely to the discretion of the Commissioner, a better approach could perhaps be to ensure that the application for permits to hold public assemblies or public processions be granted as a matter of right unless and until the Commissioner is satisfied that issues of national security or law and enforcement will be an issue. By taking this approach, there is greater certainty on the outcome of the application and this will prevent the process from being hijacked by the government of the day to serve a different agenda. Setting a default mode to having permits granted automatically would also resonate well with the provision in our Constitution that guarantees the right and freedom of assembly. Perhaps what is more surprising about the Bill is the provision in clause 38 that allows a law enforcement officer the right to stop anyone from making any video or taking any pictures that inter alia may have an effect on law enforcement procedures. The provision also allows the police officer the right to confiscate and destroy such videos and pictures. In the run up to the debate on the Bill, the general view in respect of the policy behind this clause relates to the need to maintain the integrity of security operations in critical situation. The recent terrorist attack in Mumbai was cited as an example of how the media, when providing live coverage of the incident, had inadvertently compromised security operations that were taking place at that time.”
“Currently, under the present proposal, anyone who wishes to organise a public assembly, even if it just meant a one-man assembly, would require a permit from the Commissioner. If the concern relates to security, one wonders whether we have gone to the extreme by taking such a course of action. Surely, there are other security related instruments under our legislative armory that could have dealt with such issues than to go to such extent. Perhaps, we should just keep to the number threshold beyond which a permit from the Commissioner for public assembly is required. Next, the Bill allows for an appeal to be made to the Minister when the Commissioner refuses to grant a permit. I submit, Sir, that such a provision may be less than ideal. Many will criticise this as placing the Government in the position of being the litigant, judge and jury at the same time. Justice must not only be done, but must be seen to be done. With globalisation, the world will also be watching us. There must be some comfort given, not just to us, but to the outside world that the process of review is seen to be fair and impartial. Nothing short of provision for judicial review for the decision of the Commissioner, I believe, will meet the standards that one can expect to have, particularly when the issues behind the organising of the public assembly may be highly politically charged. There must be some assurance that the authorities have acted reasonably and that the process of decision making and appeal is not biased or seen to be biased in any way. In the current Bill, the right and discretion to grant a permit for public assembly and procession is at the discretion of the Commissioner, who may take into account concerns of public security and law and order issues when deciding.”
“Sir, thank you for allowing me to join in the debate. This Bill could not have come at a more appropriate time. Mental images of recent mass rioting and pitch battles fought with the police at international fora are still vivid in our minds. I have no doubt that many Singaporeans believe that we should never allow any situation in our country, short of any collapse of political legitimacy and authority, to degenerate into anarchy. This is not the mental image that we want Singapore to be associated with. Yet, the right of assembly is often seen as a universal human right. The ability of the people to collectively rise up for a cause is one reason why we are able to bring about change to our society. And for this reason, the right is enshrined in our Constitution which guarantees the right to peaceably assemble and without arms. To be sure, the right of assembly is not an absolute right. It is often necessary to allow Parliament the right to restrict assemblies and public demonstrations in the interest of public safety and order. Just how much of that right should be curtailed is often a delicate act of balance based on the prevailing norms of the society and the political agenda of the day. This Bill is therefore welcomed as it seeks to avoid the excesses of public demonstrations seen in recent times and yet recognises the rights of the people to gather to reflect their collective views. While I do not disagree with what the Bill tries to achieve, I do have some issues which I hope the Minister will address. I support the approach of the Government in trying to provide a clearer and more comprehensive framework to regulate the conduct of outdoor activities. However, in trying to regulate this, one wonders whether the Government may not have gone for the overkill.”
“Madam Deputy Chairman, I would like to thank the Minister and his colleague for a comprehensive reply to the questions that we raised under this head. What comes across really, is the assurance that the Government has given to all Singaporeans; that in this difficult time, no one need to be deprived of food, housing, medical care services and education. This is certainly very comforting to know. Given the time that we spent debating this, Singaporeans are also well assured that the money that we are going to spend under MCYS is money very well-spent. On this note, I would like to seek permission to withdraw. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The sum of $1,799,042,700 for Head I stand part of the Main Estimates. The sum of $154,775,100 for Head I stand part of the Development Estimates.”
“Madam, I note with great interest the statement made earlier by the Minister that they are intending to start a mentoring scheme to keep a close watch on the potentially wayward youths. Unfortunately, the Minister has not given us details about how this scheme is going to be implemented. I would like to ask the Minister to tell us a bit more about when the scheme will be implemented, whether it will involve the grassroots and community members. I also share that over at the various constituencies, we are experimenting with this mentoring scheme with varying degree of success and found this especially useful. This is relevant, particularly when the Ministry is actually concerned with dysfunctional families and particularly concerned with the development of children. Mentoring is a great way forward to try and prevent our young Singaporeans from going wayward. Perhaps, the Minister could comment on this.”
“Madam, I agree with Ms Jessie Phua that the announcement of Singapore being chosen as the venue of the first Youth Olympic Games (YOG) has brought us great honour and joy. For the first time in our sporting history, we are able to lay claim to being able to host a world class event related to the Olympic movement. This is an important milestone, indeed, for Singapore in several respects. First the YOG will provide the platform to allow us to improve on our organisational ability to host international events on a global scale. Second, it would help to put Singapore on the world sporting map as a country with a huge ambition to excel in sports that is only matched by its enthusiasm. Third, the YOG will serve as a rallying point that will not only bring our youths together, whether as sportsmen or otherwise, but also provide the clarion call to our people to work together to ensure its success. In choosing to host the YOG, we have also chosen to raise the stakes for ourselves. The world will be watching us closely to determine if we will be able to pull off this event. Our confidence in this exercise is, perhaps, well placed as demonstrated by our ability in the past to organise, and organise well, international events. Nonetheless, we cannot be too confident of our ability in being able to stage the YOG successfully. I would, therefore, like to ask the Minister whether the planning and organisation for the Youth Olympic Games 2010 is proceeding as planned, given the current problems facing Singapore, not least of which is the shortage of construction materials and the credit squeeze by the banks; and whether our youths are being adequately prepared for the coming games. Leveraging on YOG”
“Sir, the Member for Pasir Ris-Punggol GRC, Miss Penny Low, and I have spoken on the subject of social enterprise for several years now. Over time, I am grateful to know that social enterprise is increasingly gaining traction. Both the public and private sectors are beginning to see social enterprises as initiatives that can serve the public good without necessarily imposing too much demand on the charities sector, and by providing the basic structure for people to find employment or undertake business help to provide some relief from the pressures of mounting unemployment in deep recessions. Unfortunately, social enterprises are often assessed on the same basis as commercial undertakings. To expect social enterprises, which are organised to serve the public good, to compete on the same footing as normal businesses may, in the view of some, not be reasonable. Social enterprises should be given reasonable assistance and support if we are to ensure the longer term viability of the business. A good example could be offering unused void deck spaces at HDB at assisted rentals to keep the cost of social enterprises affordable. However, with subsidies, of course, we recognise the hazards of over-dependency and relative inefficiencies if these enterprises are not properly managed. If we accept the proposition that social enterprises are a useful public good, then it follows that the Government can do more to assist in getting some of these enterprises going. It would therefore be helpful if the Minister could inform the House whether he accepts the starting principle on social enterprises, and whether the Government would be prepared to do more in this regard. Social Economy”
“Therefore, it is hoped that MCYS can institute urgent measures to meet the needs of the social work profession in Singapore.”
“What is needed is a higher entry level salary structure, and defined career paths across the board, not only the Government but also the non-Government sectors. The actual remmune ration has to match the longer working hours, work overload and aspirations of young graduates. This will help stop the leakages that I mentioned earlier. A licensing board for social workers will raise the status and credibility of professional social workers. The SASW is working closely with MCYS to make it happen this year. Government support is a critical component in recognising the unstinting contributions of professional social workers to the social economy of Singapore, its social capital and well being of its people. An effective network of social services in a country supports the implementation of its social policies which, in turn, complements the economic progress and the moral fabric of society. The social work community awaits the Minister's details, not only on training opportunities for social workers, but also his plans for the establishment of a licensing board. In my view, a bold and swift policy measure is necessary, akin to what was done by the Ministry of Education in relation to teachers. Mr Zaqy Mohamad has also mentioned this point. A multi-pronged approach, including equal entry level salary standards, greater resources for social service centres so that social work assistants can be hired to assist the professional social workers, and maybe overtime pay as well for all the work done on weekends and the evenings, especially now when the case loads are rising very fast. It is common for domestic violence, crime and breakup of families to occur at times of an economic recession.”