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 7 of 20.
“For instance, the KiFAS should not be positioned as only helping to pay the school fees of the poor children but rather as a programme to enhance the learning capacity of the child so that he or she can get an even chance of competing in society. Equally, when it comes to providing welfare grants, the approach should be to use the money to set up an appropriate framework that would allow the welfare recipients to work, even if the income is somewhat subsidised through the ComCare Fund, than to give the money outright. Although this principle may not be applied in every instance, it at least provides the appropriate perspective by which one would view how assistance should be rendered and one which would allow us to effectively measure the outcome of what we put in by way of assistance, something which I will elaborate on later. Sir, it is perhaps our desire to want to be flexible with the ComCare Fund that we have worded the parameter of assistance broadly to include financial and other difficulties. As to what "other difficulties" meant, one would suppose would depend very much on the exigencies on the ground from time to time, as it would be rather difficult to tell in advance. However, in keeping the legislation broad and flexible, we also run into the risk that there is not enough guidance from Parliament on how the money should be spent and, with it, the attendant risk of abuse. This should be and can be avoided, if there are provisions in the main body of legislation that allow for guidance in some form of circulars or subsidiary legislation for MCYS as to what constitute "other difficulties". At the moment, there is much concern over the way in which charity money is spent by those in whose hands lies the responsibility of spending.”
“And, related to this point, should the decision whether or not to give financial assistance be left in the hands of managers alone? Are they guided by appropriate advice from social workers? Should we also set an appropriate benchmark of responsiveness for CDC with regard to applications for financial assistance from the residents? In the course of my work at the constituency, I have often heard complaints about lack of responsiveness from the welfare agencies. Granted that some forms may not be complete but, surely, incomplete information alone cannot account for the long response time that the agencies take to respond. It is not uncommon to hear sometimes how these agencies may take up to three months to respond. And, if it is true, I will be very concerned indeed. Moving on, I did mention earlier that we need to move towards adopting a performance measurement index to help us focus on the way in which we spend the money. I would like to remind us here in this House, Sir, that we need to move away from the mindset that ComCare Fund is welfare hand-out to the poor and needy Singaporeans and permanent residents. To do that would be to demean them and would rob them of their sense of dignity. We should see payments out of the ComCare Fund as investments in social capital that will ultimately yield results for the long-term good of our country. Seen from this perspective, the financial support that the community gives out, whether it be the CCC or the CDC, is not incidental and isolated but rather linked to the larger question of how best to assist the person concerned so that he or his family can be lifted out of the poverty trap and be of use to society.”
“So, I am heartened to note that the principle underlying the ComCare Fund is to ensure a holistic approach to helping the poor and needy. But let us just spare a thought about applying this when we implement the Fund. Thirdly, a proper measure of the ComCare Fund. Sir, much money will be dispensed under the ComCare Fund in the coming days to the poor and needy. While we applaud and laud the giving of substantial financial assistance to those who require help, we should also ask ourselves whether or not we should expect more appropriate governance and measurable objectives and outcomes from such commitments. There are two issues that we need to consider really, if we want to go down this route. (1) The manner in which the money is disbursed, how it is accounted for by those who give it away; and (2) How we can go about assessing every programme, in terms of the performance index, to ensure that the money is properly spent. On the first issue, the recent saga involving the National Kidney Foundation clearly demonstrates a need for strong governance, if we want to prevent another failure of similar proportion. At the moment, CCCs are given only $33,000 to give out as interim assistance. The CDCs, on the other hand, are given more funds at their disposal. The guidelines given merely set out the broad compass by which the funds may be used. It does not give sufficient guidance other than just some examples of how money should be spent. To give an example: should the ComCare Fund be allowed to blow $30,000 on a grand event to promote the various public assistance schemes? Should there not be an avenue of appeal to the committee for hardship cases who are unsuccessful, so as to provide the assurance that full consideration has been given?”
“While many may see the needs as being relative, I would submit that there are some requirements today that would and should be seen as essential items, as opposed to being treated as luxuries, which they may well be the case 10 years earlier. The examples I cited relate more importantly to the needs of children. Very often, and unfortunately, when parents fall into hard times, it is the children who suffer. The experience that these children go through will no doubt toughen them mentally. Yet, at the same time, for many, their circumstances will also put them at a distinct disadvantage in this highly competitive society. While I laud the achievements of those who are able to break out of the cycle of poverty and recount their stories at the height of their career success - which unfortunately tends to be more the exception than the rule - let us also spare a thought for those who could have got much further in life but for the limited opportunities that they had. I know that part of the remit of the ComCare Fund is committed to ensuring that the educational needs of the poor and needy children are taken care of. The question really is whether grassroots organisations are sufficiently focused on targeting the needs of these children to ensure that the concerns that I have just mentioned are properly addressed in a holistic manner. The simpler solution is to target their needs that are most obvious and easiest to solve, ie, pocket money, school transport, school fees, and so on. I believe that there is no one who can truly say that the holistic needs are taken care of, as opposed to sporadic needs, if we just did that. We want to ensure that our assistance is effective and, in many cases, would help a child break out of the cycle of poverty.”
“Incidentally, apart from some food items and vouchers, the monetary support that we give to a family comes in the form of allowances of between $100 and $150 per month. Realistically, for an unemployed family of four adults, this is really not enough, even including other forms of intervention. Secondly, a realistic assessment of needs. Sir, I am glad to note that the Minister has pointed out that the ComCare Fund will seek to address the holistic needs of those who are in need of assistance in Singapore. But that begs the question: what exactly are our needs and how do we define these needs? How much financial assistance should the State be giving before it is considered adequate? The conventional wisdom appears to be that our assistance should be placed at a level that is just below the comfort level. Sir, I have no quarrel with that principle. However, the question really is: just what should be the comfort level for Singaporeans? Should a middle-class family with young children attending enrichment classes now be required to stop these classes immediately simply because both parents are out of a job and are seeking public support? Should the children of poor families be given some form of assistance so that they can get a chance to travel and also share the meaningful experience as their other friends who are blessed with better opportunities? For that matter, should these children be denied rights to toys and other useful accessories simply because their parents are too poor, or should the children of these families be given proper food supplements to ensure that their physical development is not affected simply on account of their parents' inability to pay for these items?”
“I have a resident who is over 60 years of age. He has a wife and two sons. Both sons are mentally unsound and are thus unable to find work. The father is past retirement age and, even if he wanted to, would be unable to find work on account of his poor health. Without an income and relatives they can rely on, it is evidently clear that they are not able to support themselves by working, and that they would require long-term intervention. Unfortunately, under our schemes, we do not typically put families on long-term support unless they qualify for public assistance. Sir, there are not many who qualify for long-term public assistance based on our rather stringent criteria, and there are many who fall through the gap. For instance, in the whole of the North East CDC, there are, as of now, only about 168 families who qualify for long-term public assistance. This is out of a total of 205,000 families in North East CDC. If it is true, Sir, it is unfortunate. It cannot be that there are so few numbers of destitute families that require the state to look after them in the long term. It would appear that, for the majority, the main solution to their financial problem may not be interim assistance. For now, interim assistance seems the most available form of assistance. What happens then is that the resident is left with having to come every three months to the MPS to ask for financial support. Why put the family on short-term assistance when it is evidently clear that the family requires long-term intervention, even if they do not on the surface meet the strict requirements? Why are we so hesitant in putting more families on longer-term support?”
“Sir, the Bill before us is the culmination of our recent discussion on the setting up of a substantial fund to provide financial and other assistance to the poor and needy in Singapore. It puts in place a more solid framework for social welfare, both in terms of the amount that we can extend to those who need it and the flexibility with which we can deliver it. The fund size will eventually grow to $1 billion and the grassroots organisations, such as the CDCs and CCCs, will be given the task of targeting delivery specifically to those who need it most. This development indeed is a significant milestone for us in the way we want to move forward to help those who need help. While I am glad and cheered by the setting up of the Community Care Endowment Fund or ComCare Fund which is now finally underway, the timely introduction of this Bill gives rise to an occasion for us to consider further issues that are associated with it. Unfortunately, the introduction of the legislation is not going to banish forever some issues relating to the poor and needy in our society. I will touch on three broad themes today. These are: (1) The short-term nature of financial assistance; (2) A realistic assessment of needs; and (3) A proper measure of the effectiveness of the ComCare Fund in achieving what it sets out to do. First, the short-term nature of financial assistance. Sir, as the saying goes, "It never rains but pours." When bills come to those who are in financial hardship, they all seem to come at the same time. In the course of our MPS, almost all of us would inevitably come across cases of residents for whom the prospect of financial stability on their own may just not be possible. Let me pull out just one of the many that I have on my record.”
“I would be grateful if the Parliamentary Secretary can confirm that the SNOC would independently verify that the specific processes are indeed carried out.”
“I am sorry to be belabouring this point. I just want to know whether or not the SNOC independently satisfies itself that the process has been transparently and objectively carried out.”
“Sir, is the SNOC entirely satisfied that the selection and nomination by the various NSAs are carried out objectively and without prejudice or bias?”
“Sir, does the SNOC leave the decision of whether or not a sportsman is able to represent a country entirely to the decision of the club or the federation which nominates him or her? Dr Mohamad Maliki Bin Osman: Sir, by and large, the selection of the national team is left to the NSAs because they know the athletes and the sports best. The national coaches identify, train and groom athletes on a regular basis and can better understand each athlete's strengths and weaknesses so that SNOC relies on the recommendations of the respective NSAs because of the domain knowledge the NSAs have. At some point when the SNOC makes a decision, each NSA has its own appeal process that each athlete can go through to appeal for reconsideration to be recommended for selection at the SNOC.”
“Can I just ask the MOS what the Ministry's criteria for applying and qualifying for public assistance for single parents are?”
“Sir, will the Senior Parliamentary Secretary be able to give us an indication of the difference in premium if we were to raise the age limit of the Dependants' Protection Scheme from 60 to 62?”
“Sir, we learn that the London bombers were radicalised because of the visits to the madrasahs in Pakistan. I would like to ask the Minister whether he is aware of Singaporeans who have gone over to Pakistan to study at the madrasahs there, and what steps are being taken to restrict Singaporeans from travelling to such places and perhaps run the risk of radicalising themselves in the process.”
“Sir, is the Minister saying therefore that sex with minors overseas is not that serious? I believe that other legislation elsewhere, for example, the Securities and Futures Act (SFA) has extra-territorial reach which also involves getting evidence overseas for prosecution in Singapore. The Senior Minister of State has actually said that it takes some time to monitor and examine the performance of this extra-territorial legislation. I just like to know how long the Ministry intends to take or how much time does it take to continue with this monitoring before it comes up with any concrete action in this regard. Assoc. Prof. Ho Peng Kee: From my experience, we know, for example, the Australians have these laws in place for about 10 years now, and they have only about 10 prosecutions. But we will see the difficulties that they encounter and how they overcome these difficulties. And as we learn, for example, the experience of the Australians and the Americans, we will then be on firmer ground to consider whether such a law can work in Singapore.”
“Fault does not lie with the instrument, but with the weakness of the human character who uses the instrument. With this, Sir, I would like to urge the nation now to rally behind the Government in giving its full support to the proposal of the integrated resort.”
“This would help to take the measure one step removed from those involved, thus mitigating the tension within the family. Thirdly, the Government has said that there will be no extension of credit to residents. In this regard, casino operators will not be allowed to accept credit cards and post-dated cheques. We know that the human mind is only limited by its ingenuity. Will the restriction on credit stop patrons from engaging in a sale-and-lease-back transaction in order to raise money to feed their habit? Or, for that matter, mortgage their homes? Who will be the watchdog in such a situation? Finally, Sir, it has been said that advertising will not be allowed for the casino. I do not object to the policy. However, in reality, I wonder how this is going to be implemented. The casino will be part of the integrated resort. I cannot imagine that the restriction on advertising will apply equally to the resort. I am sure it does not and should not. The question then is, how can we effectively do a media blitz on the resort without indirectly promoting the casino? How can we encourage, through advertising, wholesome family fun at the resort without at the same time drawing some attention to the casino? I find this difficult to reconcile. At the end of the day, this debate is about doing what is right for Singapore, as opposed to personal preferences on moral grounds. Public policy should not be premised on morality alone, but on the interest of the nation as a whole. No doubt, there will be some who will unwittingly fall prey to the snare of compulsive gambling. This unfortunate outcome does not reflect the senseless nature of the policy as it does the senseless nature of one who engages in over indulgence.”
“If I were a young professional earning $5,000 a month and visited the place on a regular basis, there is a good chance that, with the entry levy, I could end up losing up to more than $500 per visit. If it was $500, it would be 10% of my salary. And chances are that that young professional would be occupying a managerial position in the company. You throw in the managerial decision-making powers, especially over financial matters, and a habit for gambling that, through high entry barriers, bet on bigger amounts, you could possibly end up with more Chia Teck Lengs to come. That is a real danger. Rather than leaving it entirely to market forces, can I also suggest that the Government consider restricting the number of times in a month perhaps that a resident or a citizen can visit the casino, and also limit the total amount that a person can bet, based on a percentage of his monthly income? This would certainly serve as a real circuit breaker for anyone with pathological tendencies to gamble. Secondly, there is a proposal to allow spouses and family members to exclude persons with gambling problems from entering the casino. While the objective is laudable, I am not sure if it is a realistic option for many when it is available. Sir, we are Asians, with an Asian world view of the family. It would, in our situation, be difficult for a wife or a child to write to the casino to restrain the father from entering one, without hell breaking loose later. Rather than just leaving it to the family, can I also suggest that leaders of the community, such as the CCC Chairman or even the social workers who are familiar with the family condition, be allowed to put in a restraining order under the circumstances, in order to protect the gambler and his family?”
“I do sincerely hope that the moralists will now close ranks with the Government and proceed to give their full support to the development of the integrated resort. Having expressed my own views on this debate, I would now like to turn to the issues of control enunciated by the Minister, as this will be key in minimising the potential harm to some members of the public. In his Statement, the Minister mentioned that, in addition to the national framework, the Government will put in place certain social safeguards to protect the interest of the public. These will include measures, such as imposing an entry fee on all citizens and permanent residents, non-extension of credit to residents, no advertising, and exclusion by spouses and family members, and even self imposed exclusion. Sir, as they say, the devil is in the details. Ahead of the Government's detailed announcement on these measures, I would like to raise some preliminary issues. Firstly, the question of the entry levy. I understand that the rationale for the high cost of entry is to remind visitors to the resort that gambling is an expense. This will keep out a majority of Singaporeans who are either not interested in visiting the complex or find the cost of entry rather prohibitive. However, at $100, it will not prevent professionals and other high salary earners from entering the resort. High entry fees would typically require users to wager in bigger amounts to make their visits worthwhile. It does not make sense for a person who is a regular patron to pay a $100 entry fee to wager only on total bets of $200 to $300. The bets would of course have to be larger.”
“It would be naive of us to assume that. In a complex world, what is beneficial to some may be harmful to others. If we took the moralist argument in this debate to its extreme conclusion, it would mean that we would also have to close down our cruise facilities, as the ships that berth here operate casinos in international waters; we would have to close down our turf club as we know that many a life has been wrecked through betting on horses. We would also have to ban pubs and KTVs because these are sinful indulgences. To take it even further, does it mean that we should also ban cars on the roads, since these vehicles are polluting the air and destroying our precious environment? Sir, the issue here is not about gambling but of excessive gambling. However, just because there are some in our society who may be exposed to the dangers of excessive gambling, it is not a sufficient reason for us not to have an integrated resort. The question really is how we minimise the exposure and the dangers to the potential compulsive gamblers when we proceed with the project. The Government has equally reiterated its concerns and has promised control measures, such as public education, credit restrictions and restraint measures, in some cases to stop pathological gamblers from doing more harm to themselves and their families. This is very reassuring indeed. It is for these reasons, therefore, that I have come to support the proposal of an integrated resort even though at a personal level I do not, as I said earlier, support gambling and I have a natural aversion to it. I have said earlier also that, as a representative of the people, I cannot foist my own personal moral preferences on the wider population, if legitimate individual preferences and rights are to be respected.”
“Indeed, with the proliferation of the various betting opportunities, both official and unofficial, it would not be difficult for the weak Singaporean to fall into the pathological gambling trap. Those of us who have served this country in National Service will know that gambling and betting are the favourite pastimes of servicemen. The vice is so widespread that the servicemen will bet on almost anything, including the last man to go up the three-tonner. The point here, I suppose, would be that you do not need a casino to become a pathological gambler. Opportunities to become one abound everywhere, and anyone who is predisposed towards gambling would have tried out his luck at these opportunities. Next, the argument that allowing gambling would result in greater social ills. Again, it would be difficult to see how well-run establishments, like the ones we are contemplating, would be a nest for pimps, illegal moneylenders, and prostitutes. The Government has given us much assurance that this project will not be carried out if it thought that the crime and safety of Singaporeans would be seriously compromised. In reality, Sir, we do not live in a sanitised world where we completely keep our citizens out of harm's way. Our sense of freedom and democracy does not allow us the right to impose our own moral dictates on others. We want to give our people choices to choose from. And that includes giving people the right to choose to take that occasional wager. It is this principle that distinguishes us from dictatorships and religious states. As a democracy that respects the freedom of the individual, we should always strive to balance our decisions to achieve the maximum good for the maximum number of people. Policy decisions cannot always be cast in two-dimensional colours.”
“What it finally came down to was to carefully weigh one set of arguments against the other. The benefits and the economic impact of an integrated resort have been well canvassed by the Prime Minister and members of his Cabinet previously. That it would be beneficial to Singapore, I believe, is not challenged by the conscientious objectors. Against these arguments, one would have to look at the counter arguments that are stacked against it. What are these? One could argue that gambling undermines thrift and hard work and the family would be at risk if we allowed casinos to be set up here. Sir, that contention would be true if everyone who steps into the casino suffers the same fate. However, and with the greatest respect, we know that the reality is far from the assertion placed by the conscientious objectors. The recent study by MCYS showed that three out of five Singaporeans gambled at least once in the last 12 months and, on the whole, Singaporeans wagered close to $6 billion last year. Against the knowledge of these statistics, can it be said that Singaporeans have since lost their work ethic and virtues of thrift? Sir, the issue, if one looks at it hard, is not about building casinos or providing opportunities for Singaporeans to gamble. The issue really is about putting the potential pathological gamblers, who make up close to 2.1% of the population, out of harm's way by not having a casino. As the hon. Minister Vivian Balakrishnan had so rightly pointed out the other day, banning the casino is not the solution as, with the advent of cheap travel and easy mobility, it would not be difficult for Singaporeans bent on gambling to find outlets elsewhere for their vices.”
“It is through anecdotes like these at a personal level that we are convinced of the evils of gambling. There are also other reasons why many Singaporeans are against gambling. In essence, the moralists object to gambling because: (a) it undermines the virtues of hard work; thrift and prudence; (b) it will create more social ills through the rise of syndicated crimes and prostitution; (c) it sends the wrong signals to our people that it is acceptable to gamble. If it was just a pure gaming proposition alone, one would agree that the arguments put forth by the moralists would be difficult to argue against. However, Sir, we know that the proposal of the Government lies in the promotion of an integrated resort, of which gaming is only one necessary component with which it is used to support the other activities to strengthen the viability of the resort's operation. Against this backdrop, the issue becomes more complicated. One would have to balance between the dangers that such a development would pose to those who are indeed vulnerable to being pathological gamblers, and the benefits that the integrated resort would bring to Singapore. Sir, having cast my net wide to canvass various views and opinions on the issue in recent months, I have come to the view that we can live with the proposition of a gaming establishment as an integral part of a larger undertaking by an investor. This does not necessarily mean that I have changed my views on gambling which, for personal and religious reasons, I still object to. Rather, as a people's representative in this House, I cannot ignore the fact that this is a cosmopolitan society with a diverse range of views and beliefs, and it would not be fair for me to foist my own values and belief onto the wider population.”
“Sir, like some of my other colleagues in this House, I too had to grapple with the issue of licensed gambling when the idea of building a casino started gaining momentum. The arguments against casinos may be boiled down to the question of the social harm that gambling brings not only to the individual, but to the society as a whole; particularly the clean and wholesome image that we worked so hard to build for Singapore over the last 40 years. Indeed, many of us personally know or have heard of families that have met with the tragedy that gambling brings; the most recent being the tragic murder cum suicide involving Simon Lee and his family. The sight of children dying on account of their father's sin is certainly a depressing thing; it drives home the point that uncontrolled gambling carries very high and dreadful social consequences. If we allow gambling in Singapore, there will be many more Simon Lee tragedies here. Indeed, the recent study commissioned by the Government estimates that 55,000 people or 2.1% of the population will be at risk of being pathological gamblers. Although it was said that the percentage of people at risk is comparable to established cities like Macau and Hong Kong, we should note that it is still higher in the comparison. On a personal front, I was told recently of the sad case of how a Singaporean husband had to write to the management committee of a well-established golf club here to ask for a restraining action to prevent his wife from entering the jackpot room as she was blowing close to $7,000 a month to feed her habit. And I am sure there are many more examples that colleagues in this House can call on that would clearly demonstrate that gambling can destroy lives.”
“Sir, I would like to thank the Minister, the Minister of State and the Parliamentary Secretary for their comprehensive replies, and my colleagues in this House for their participation in this debate. Indeed, as we journey together as a nation, we want to ensure that no one is left behind, particularly the old, the lame and the poor. The commitment given by the Minister that no one will be without shelter, food or medical care is very assuring indeed for all of us here. This gives us much hope as Singaporeans. We need to help each other as much as we can. As Singaporeans, unless we help one another, no one will. On this reassuring note, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The sum of $965,850,800 for Head I ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. The sum of $124,555,600 for Head I ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.”
“Sir, while I understand that the Government is trying to find various outlets of expression for our youths today, I want to know whether the Government has attempted to undertake a study or survey to determine the state of mental health of our youths in Singapore, and to better understand their present condition, as opposed to looking at alternative ways of finding an outlet for their expression.”
“Sir, can I ask that the Ministry consider setting a service benchmark for the CDCs, in terms of the response time in relation to the requests to appeal for financial and social assistance? From my own experience, sometimes, I do know that the CDCs may take a while to investigate. But from the recipients' point of view, they are very often left in the dark. If there is a seemingly lack of response, it would make it seem as if CDCs are not doing their work properly. So if you set a service standard, a certain benchmark, at least it becomes more transparent in the way in which services are delivered by the agencies, such as the CDCs.”
“Sir, just a point of clarification. When I mentioned about legislation to facilitate employment for the elderly and the disabled, I was not referring to any form of affirmative action. What I was referring to was the introduction of legislation to make it an offence to discriminate, and this is really quite different from reserving jobs for the elderly, which I understand bucks against the trends of the market forces and may not be in our economic interests. There are many countries in the West that have adopted such legislation. I know that one of the difficulties has to do with finding the basis for prosecuting a prospective employer on the basis of discrimination. But I suppose such legislation is not intended to bring about enforcement or prosecution, but to change the mindset and to signal a change on the part of prospective employers that there is a framework out there which compels them to take into account fairness and openness when seriously considering applications from such disabled or elderly persons.”
“Do we assume that we just naturally become good parents? Or, as I suspect, to many of us, we just leave it to our wives. Sir, this is a long haul and a delicate topic. But I feel we ought to give parents more support, since they are the cornerstone of building strong families. Social Enterprises”
“Sir, the topic of this cut is building strong families. Perhaps the question which we should ask ourselves before we speak of building strong families is whether or not we are really having enough families in the first place. Sir, can the Minister give this House an update on the effectiveness of the baby bonus scheme so far? I know that this is a dicey matter to ask for results in matters of the bedroom. But since we are told that this is a serious problem, we ought to know how far we have progressed. Sir, I want to address two issues in building strong families. The first is the issue of abortion. I wonder if we can look at this issue more seriously and provide some help to women who want to bring their babies to term but who, for whatever reason, decide to give them up for abortion. Can the Minister give us a breakdown of the profile of such women who seek abortions? I do not have the latest figures. From 1992 to 1996, the total number of abortions fell from 17,000 to 14,000. But the proportion of teenage mothers aborting their babies has increased slightly. In 1996, about four abortions a week were of teenage mothers. What happened in these instances? Can they be persuaded to keep their babies? How can we help these young people? The second issue is parenting. There are many parents today who need help in coping with children, whether they are toddlers or teenagers. I would like to suggest cash subsidies for parents who attend parenting courses as well as incentives for companies to provide time-off for parents to attend such courses. We also need to create some awareness amongst parents to make this a priority. We take gymnastic classes, exercise classes, even language classes. But how many of us, as parents, take time to attend parenting classes?”
“What is also needed is a focus by employers not on their differences, physically or intellectually, but on their common abilities and skills. Sir, I believe that we need to engage the disabled and the chronically ill in society by optimising their employment opportunities in a greater way than we have before. We need to minimise the serious risk that these Singaporeans would not end up as the most vulnerable workers, not only during economic restructuring, but also in good times. These special Singaporeans go through the education system, learn specific skills and arm themselves with professional qualifications. And yet, at the time when they should be setting sail on the sea of their career adventure, society instead sets them sailing on the sea of nowhere, treating them without the dignity that comes with their difference. There needs to be a sea change in the mindsets of employers to welcome this often rejected labour force.”
“The Government's response to the Remaking Singapore Committee's proposal to facilitate employment for the disabled stated that, "A more long-term arrangement and holistic approach is required for the societal integration needs of the disabled" and that "MCDS, NCSS and WDA are undertaking a more in-depth study on the skills, abilities and limitations of the different groups of persons with disabilities who are employable so as to market them more effectively to potential employers. Efforts are being made to engage companies to redesign jobs and to pilot employment test beds for employees with disabilities.". Sir, I would like to know whether this study referred to has been completed and what efforts have been taken to engage the companies on redesigning jobs and piloting the employment test beds as well as the outcome of these efforts. In the United Kingdom, recent legislative changes in the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 have rendered it unlawful from October 2004 for an employer to discriminate against a disabled person when choosing someone for a job or considering people for promotion, dismissal or redundancy. I would like to ask the Minister if the Government intends to consider legislative changes as part of its strategy to facilitate the employment of the disabled and the chronically ill. Such changes through governmental intervention may result in the disabled and the chronically ill getting one foot, perhaps both feet, in the door of a job opportunity. But I have no doubt that that is not the be-all and end-all of the matter. For the spectre of misunderstandings and negative attitudes from co-workers and employers is another battle for them.”
“Sir, I wish to ask what steps have been taken by the Government in facilitating the employment of the disabled? I read recently that Victor's Cafe hired three intellectually disabled people as waiters. This is unusual for the industry. The cafe owners said that although the intellectually disabled people may look a bit different, "that doesn't mean they can't do the job as well or even better". This effort is laudable and should be showcased. The President's Address at the Opening of Parliament on 12th January 2005 affirmed the "many-helping-hands" approach adopted by the Government to build up a broad range of support services for the disabled. This tripartite relationship between the Government, the citizenry and the voluntary sector has achieved commendable results in the outreach to people with disabilities. In particular, the collaborative efforts of the various agencies have brought about greater focus on employment opportunities for the disabled. Even then, there is anecdotal evidence that some of the disabled are understandably apprehensive about disclosing their medical conditions to prospective employers for fear of discrimination, even if such medical conditions would not hamper their job performance. On the Government's side, the Ministry of Education has continually played a vital part in improving the quality of education for the disabled. But these efforts by the Government alone are not enough to adequately address the issue of facilitating the employment of the disabled.”
“We should have more of such literature, as we have more elderly in our community. Sir, we also need more respite care centres that can take care of the elderly and disabled for short periods in order to provide the caregivers a chance to take a break. At present, we do have a few of these centres, including the AWWA Readycare Centre which is a day rehabilitation centre for the elderly, St Luke's Community Hospital and the Sree Narayana Mission Home. There are also other community service centres which provide daycare for the elderly, services such as meal delivery, laundry and home nursing. The charges for such respite care can range from $30 to $300. This is not subsidised by the Government and cannot be paid for using Medisave or MediShield. These are some of the voluntary welfare organisations that run hospitals and homes who may waive a portion of their fees for poorer families. I feel that there is a case for the Government to consider increasing the subsidy for such respite care in certain institutions. This is a small start in caring for caregivers but I believe that it would make a great difference to their quality of life.”
“Several of my colleagues have touched obliquely on the topic I want to broach on today - how do we make sure that the people who care for the elderly, the young and the disabled are themselves taken care of? Dr Lily Neo and Nominated MP Ong Soh Khim have said that they wanted caregivers of aged parents to be given income tax relief. Assoc. Prof. Ong had also suggested that paid leave be given to those who need time off to care for their elderly dependants. I would support these calls but, to broaden them, to include all persons who care for dependants including disabled family members or spouses, or parents of young children, or older children with learning disorders and disabilities. Our Prime Minister wants a more inclusive society and I also believe that he means more than just building the obligatory ramp up shopping centres. I believe what he means is to think of the weak and the vulnerable, not just as burdens to be borne, but as members who are part of the larger family. More importantly, our inclusive society must also uphold those who make necessary sacrifices to provide care and comfort to those who need them. We should then make the effort to highlight stories of caregivers and their experiences to inspire and inform other caregivers and the wider public. MCYS could do more to fund more of such public education programmes, and run training sessions for caregivers to help them with their task. I can think of an example. A simple thing such as taking a bath may be a special hazard for those who are infirm. Sir, there is a recent book called "Wish I Knew - Caring for the Sick at Home" which is a very readable account of the advice that nurses give to caregivers and how caregivers themselves cope with situations.”
“Quite obviously, Sir, this leaves them rather vulnerable, as they would be severely affected if their spouses were to leave them, or are no longer able to provide for them, through death or disability. Very often, their world would come crashing down should such an unfortunate turn of events were to occur. Could the Government help to increase the level of financial independence for these vulnerable Singaporeans? I truly believe we can. The Ministry could, apart from working closely with WDA and the CDCs to look for employment opportunities, take a leaf from the private-partnership model by actively working with the private sector to create employment opportunities for these people. I had, in fact, touched on this possibility in my earlier speech on the financial policy of the Government. Very briefly, the Ministry could encourage the CDCs to work with the private sector to set up small ventures that could help these people. My colleague, Ms Irene Ng, for instance, clearly demonstrated this is possible when she convinced Killiney Kopitiam to start an outlet at her Community Club to provide employment opportunities for those who have just left the prison. Another example of such approach could well be to provide a framework for the setting up of cottage industries. Sir, these are just some examples. My point is to ask the Minister whether the Government is concerned about the lack of financial independence of the elderly and the homemakers and whether they would seriously consider measures, including the ones I mentioned earlier, to help these Singaporeans who may be in need. Abuse of the Elderly”
“Sir, in an ideal world, the elderly and the homemakers should not have to worry about finances when they reach old age, or if the sole breadwinner in the family should suddenly leave the family or, worse still, meet an untimely death. Unfortunately, we do not live in an ideal world and, as MPs, we often come across cases in our meet-the-people sessions where the elderly are abandoned by their children or as we have heard earlier from our colleague, Mr Wee Siew Kim, of how an elderly is now forced to look for financial support, having looked after his parents all his life. Or, for that matter, housewives with children in tow, who had to grapple with bills and payments, when their spouses are no longer around. For the elderly parents with children, there is at least the Maintenance of Parents Tribunal to turn to for their financial needs. However, while this solution is available, it is not always an option, as some elderly may not have children to lean on or have the energy to pursue their children in court every time they have defaulted on a payment. For them, happy retirement is not a choice. They would need to look at some kind of sustainable employment to secure at least some form of regular income to support their needs. The situation for homemakers is not any easier. For many homemakers, they would have spent the better part of their lives being away from the workforce to help look after the family and raise their children. Very often, they are not in a position to hire domestic help because it does not make economic sense. Unfortunately, as they have not worked, they would not have accumulated sufficient CPF monies into their accounts.”
“For instance, the CPF Top-up Scheme, for year 2003, 400,000 eligible Singaporeans have not put in at least $50 into their CPF account to qualify for the second lot of Economic Restructuring Shares, and one third of them are senior citizens. Presumably, many of those who are entitled to handouts are not aware. Can the Minister tell us how this can be addressed for the present schemes as well as for the ComCare Fund? Second, with the introduction of ComCare Fund, will any current schemes be discontinued to rationalise and streamline administration of all these existing schemes? And thirdly, there are some Singaporeans who do not meet the criteria for the various schemes, yet they are actually in need of assistance. Will the ComCare Fund be administered with more flexibility? Will it adopt a looser and less strict approach towards such Singaporeans who are deemed too "rich" to be eligible, and yet too "poor" to sustain their costs of living? Cost and Standard of Living”
“We want each MP to be able to leave this House at the end of the day and be able to give the same assurance to their residents. I know that our PM has said that he cannot promise a comfortable life for all. He does not want to breed an "entitlement mentality" among Singaporeans. I agree with him that "the best way to help such lower income households is by creating job opportunities for the unemployed and education opportunities for their children". This is the long-term way to help them to climb out of the poverty trap. I am not asking for welfare. All I ask for is, if we can promise a simple life, with a simple promise. I ask if we can promise that no Singaporean child needs to worry that he cannot afford school. That no sick Singaporean will worry that he will be wheeled out of the hospital without care. That no family will be forced to sleep in the streets, if their home is force sold. Sir, these are basic needs. But I know that it is not easy to meet them. Even wealthy countries, such as America and Japan, have people sleeping in the streets. Healthcare is not a simple matter, and the cost of healthcare has increased even as our knowledge of illnesses has increased. Against this backdrop of growing concern for the down and out, I am glad that the Government has now initiated the ComCare Fund to provide added relief and help to allay some of the concerns of Singaporeans. I would therefore like to thank the Prime Minister for initiating this $500 million ComCare Fund. However, they say that the devil is in the details. I just have three quick queries for the Minister. First, in spite of the many existing and different schemes, many people in need may still be unaware of them, to make full use of these resources to alleviate their situation.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the total sum to be allocated for Head I of the Estimates be reduced by $100. Sir, given the stronger economic figures and the positive outlook for the year ahead, I think there may be a general sigh of relief that things will get better. While this may be true, there are many who would still be caught in the binds of structural unemployment or would have too many dependants to take care of. For those who are down and out, I would like to ask the Minister to repeat this Government's assurance yet again that there is indeed a social safety net for all Singaporeans, and that no one would fall through the holes in the net. Sir, many of us here in this House would know the stories too well. At our meet-the-people sessions, we come across more than a few who cannot make ends meet - whether it is because they have lost their jobs, have a spouse in jail, or just have too many children to take care of. We know that there are those who have to pay very substantial hospital bills for their parents, and still fork out monies to pay for utilities and school fees for their children. There are some who do well with some financial counselling, and there are others who are genuinely at the end of their tether. For the down and out, I try to assure them that their children will not drop out of school simply because they do not have the money. I try to tell them that they will always have a roof over their heads and that they need not fear if they are ill. But sometimes, I honestly say, and with all honesty, I do wonder whether these assurances that are given can be effectively kept. Sir, I stand here today to ask if the Minister would help me keep these promises.”
“Sir, I just want to go back to the point that the Minister made about the stock of people available for marriage if we liberalise these rules. That argument pre-supposes that everyone who has ever worked in Singapore would marry a Singaporean man. I think what we are looking at is to enlarge the pool of women that are perpetually available to give Singaporean men the appropriate choice. I think that is what essentially we are looking at.”
“Sir, apart from sex education in schools, I would like to know whether teachers are trained to identify and keep a look out for school girls who may be pregnant, and teachers could basically provide early intervention.”
“Sir, I thank the Minister of State for her reply. I just have a couple of questions. First, she said earlier that similar legislation overseas which allow for baby drops have not been effective. Will the Minister of State be able to clarify what she meant by not effective legislation? My second question essentially relates to social services being readily available and therefore mothers with unwanted pregnancies could go for counselling. I wonder whether the Minister will agree with me that more can be done in this regard to publicise the kind of help that is available. We all remember the telephone number for the Pizza delivery service. But can we recall the number of these help agencies on the top of our head as readily as we do recall the Pizza delivery service? Finally, although the Government may not be in a position to legislate to allow for baby-drop centres, I would like to ask the Minister whether the Government may be open to such a similar position at some point in time in the future.”
“Sir, I echo the sentiments expressed by my colleagues in this House on the recent efforts taken by the SAF in relation to the disaster which has occurred unfortunately in this region. The exercise undertaken has brought great pride and satisfaction to Singaporeans. Indeed, as a small country, Singapore is able to rise well above to the occasion brought on by the Asian tsunami where thousands of lives were lost. We deployed the SAF's Chinook and Super-Puma helicopters and our aircraft flew some 250 missions, carried more than one million pounds of cargo and 4,000 people. They carried water and food to isolated survivors and even transported a mobile control tower to Banda Aceh. The relief and humanitarian effort undertaken by the SAF recently together with other similar efforts taken at various times in the past clearly demonstrates the changing role of the SAF as a military organisation. It appears to revolve less around the traditional military roles and more on such non-traditional roles, such as humanitarian relief, peacekeeping and peace enforcement. The SAF has indeed done Singapore proud in the way it undertook its mission in Aceh and in other parts of the region. The question is whether the new roles undertaken by the SAF would, in the long term, bring about a refocusing of priorities of the SAF and its mission statement and also in its procurement exercise. Review of the SAF”
“Sir, we have debated the issue of piracy in regional waters several times before in this House. It shows the seriousness with which we view this problem. I know that our Government is rather concerned about this problem and has since taken several measures to deal with the problem. One initiative that the Government has taken has been to provide more coordinated patrols and to take more concerted efforts in fighting pirates and making our sea lanes safe. Sir, while I support the initiative by the Government in setting this up, the sad truth is that it appears that the problem of piracy has not gone away, for now at least. More seafarers were murdered last year than in 2003, even though the number of attacks last year has dropped. Just last month, 10 masked pirates, armed with guns and long knives, were so bold as to board a chemical tanker underway in the Singapore straits. Although the pirates did not succeed in their mission and got away empty-handed, what it does show is the increasing audacity of the pirates, who attempt to enter our Singapore waters even though we are supposed to be safe here. Sir, this is really disconcerting and I believe our people will be interested to know whether we will ever be able to deal effectively with the problem of piracy here. In particular, we would like to know what further measures the Government would be taking to improve security and safety in the Malacca and Singapore straits which are today known to be one of the most dangerous shipping lanes in the world. Would the Government be looking at, for instance, setting up organisations to provide armed escorts on a commercial basis to vessels entering our waters? International Operations”
“Sir, a point of clarification on CSSP. While the grassroots organisations may have intention to implement some of the CSSPs, perhaps the Minister is aware that hardware funding is required. RCs and grassroots organisations may raise their own funds but sometimes the hardware cost may exceed their capability to raise the funds. An example would be the CCTVs which are implemented in some precincts in HDB estates. I was wondering whether the Ministry would be prepared to assist the RCs by way of some form of subsidy to facilitate the implementation of that particular CSSP programme which requires assistance.”
“However, if that is all there is that could be said of us being a great nation, then I would be very disappointed indeed. For to be a great nation, we must also be sensitive and caring to the needs of those who, whether through choice or circumstance, have fallen by the wayside. To be a great nation, our policies towards the poor and the needy, the elderly and the disabled, must not be premised on grudging giving, but on adequate and fair provision to ensure that those who are truly in need do not have to worry about living from day to day. To be a great nation, our society must frown upon those who judge others based on prejudice and discrimination, and not on the basis of their character and ability. As a society, we want to deem such conduct to be unacceptable and, if necessary, to legislate against it. [Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Chew Heng Ching) in the Chair] 5.13 pm We have responded well to the Asian tsunami disaster by donating generously as a people. Our Government has responded in a way that makes us proud to be called Singaporeans. This shows that we do have a caring and a charitable spirit. If the Government could tap on this spirit to empower our society to lift the underclass out of their rut, I have no doubt that history would truly judge this generation as having made a turning point towards making Singapore a truly great nation. With that, Sir, I support the financial policy of the Government for the next financial year.”
“They could organise quality control checks to ensure hygiene and consistency of quality. The point here is that we overlay a good organisational framework on the business with the intent to help them with their businesses. But for the help of the grassroots in partnership with the private sectors, these housewives would not have the wherewithal to start their enterprise. And, if successful, this model could be replicated for soap making and other forms of cottage industry businesses. By adopting this suggestion, Sir, you will realise that we are moving away from the traditional model of depending on others for handouts and placing control over the ability to make money back to the grassroots and the individuals concerned. Some may well argue that getting cheap rentals from JTC or HDB to help kick start this business must surely come at some cost to the Government. My retort to that line would be, if we do not help the needy this way, the money would still have to be given to the needy in any event, albeit in a more direct form. Allowing grassroots leaders to run ventures like the one just suggested, also provides the opportunity for those in need to regain their dignity by working for their living and not just depend on handouts for their livelihood. Sir, I would like to end by again repeating the words of our Prime Minister. In his recent speech, he said that Singapore may be a small country, but it may be a great nation. I could not agree more. To be a great nation, we want to be a country where we are a world class economy and a politically stable and socially vibrant community, a place where we are able to nurture and maximise, to the limit, the talents that we have been born with and a place where the pursuit of happiness is not an idle wish.”
“On the other hand, there could be pockets of communities in Singapore where there are more elderly and senior citizens and for whom school pocket money may not be a solution to their problems. For such areas, the CCC could perhaps be given the ability to decide on welfare packages that are more suited to their needs. With more financial resources at their disposal, the CCC could, in fact, work with the CDCs to maximise the grassroots' outreach to the needy residents. The second approach takes the form of giving the grassroots organisation greater leeway to generate funds through the private-public partnership model. Typically, grassroots organisations generate funds for their activities through donations or sponsorships. With numerous charities and non-charitable bodies chasing for the donor's dollar, fund raising could indeed be a challenge for many communities. In fact, the public is increasingly complaining of donation fatigue as they are constantly bombarded with calls for donations. Sir, the way forward is to not only rely on donations to fund community programmes, but to expand the horizons of the grassroots organisations by allowing them to partner the private sector in win-win ventures that would result in more money being generated for community work that is outside of the traditional model of donation. Some examples of this would include, for instance, working with commercial set-ups to establish food factories where small areas secured at cheap rates are tenanted out to housewives who need industrial-grade kitchens to produce cakes and pastries for sale. The grassroots could even work with commercial operators to establish a distribution chain to help housewives package and place out their products.”
“Over the years, the town councils and the Community Development Councils have achieved much within their respective communities and have had a great impact in the lives of the people they look after. The common thread that lies with the town council and the Community Development Council has to do with giving the local people a greater say in the way in which local township matters and the community is managed. This has worked well, and it is now evident that the different town councils and Community Development Councils have evolved different identities and priorities. This has indeed widened the choice for the people to decide on how and in what kind of community or environment they want to live in. The time has perhaps come for us to consider devolving this decision making power even further by empowering the local Citizens' Consultative Committees (CCCs) with greater say over how and what resources from the Government for the poor and needy residents should be given in their respective divisions. For a start, I would suggest that there are two ways in which this may be carried out. First, a block grant based on the number of residents could be given to the CCC to decide how that sum of money should be spent to help those who are in need in their particular ward. We accept that there is no such thing as a one-size-fits-all approach to policy making in this regard. With the sum of money, some CCCs may decide to concentrate on providing tuition subsidy for children from disadvantaged background. This would help to break the cycle of poverty and help place the children on a more level footing with the others in their community. This would be helpful in areas where there is a high concentration of young children from relatively deprived backgrounds.”