Sitoh Yih Pin
Singapore
“Madam, apart from a healthy diet and regular preventive health checks, one of the key elements of keeping healthy in our silver years is to pursue an active lifestyle. Playing and participating in sports is a fun and engaging way to do so. Granted that as one ages, we may not be able to participate in intense sports activities.”
“Mr Chairman, as a market-oriented, open economy, there will be, over time, inflows and outflows of foreigners who live and work in our country, alongside fellow Singaporeans. These foreigners come from different backgrounds and cultures and take on work in various forms as PMETs, skilled or manual workers.”
“Madam, many Singaporeans are very excited about the Kallang Alive Masterplan announced at the Prime Minister's National Day Rally last year and are looking forward to how the plans will revitalise the Sports Hub and its surrounding areas.”
“Mdm Chair, Singapore's arts sector has matured over the years with globally recognised artists and companies supported by world class venues. Importantly, local audience support is critical in building a vibrant arts scene engaged with the Community.”
“Yes, Sir, I will keep it very short. I would like to thank the entire MCCY team and all the speakers for their speeches. With that, I ask for leave to withdraw my amendment. [(proc text) Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. (proc text)] [(proc text) The sum of $2,270,827,200 for Head X ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates.”
“Sir, I thank the political office holders for their responses. Sir, in the last few hours, several media outlets reported that Lady Gaga will be performing here at the National Stadium. I think four concerts in May this year.”
The complete record
Every one of 337 lines we hold for Sitoh Yih Pin, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 2 of 7.
“We are, basically, a price-taker although the hon Member Mr Leong Mun Wai just now said the Government is a price-setter. I intend to disagree. It is a price taker. But, fortunately, for us, we have a strong Singapore dollar and the strong Singapore dollar makes it more economical for us to import our products. So, Mr Speaker, Sir, my point is that as long as we stay united, cohesive, we will overcome this. We have enough experience and enough resources. There will be sunshine after the rain. We must have the guts, the gumption and the resolve to do this correctly. And rather than seek out the heat, we should look for the light and I am very confident that we will overcome this. My mind again goes back to a radio broadcast that Mr Lee Kuan Yew did, I think it was in 1961 and he said, "It is as inevitable as the rising and setting of the sun." So, it is as inevitable I think that we will overcome this if we stay cohesive, united and collected as a people. Sir, I think the long-term solution to all these, after we have overcome this cost of living problem, is that we must keep growing our economy and not only keep it going but keep it growing. And we must also continuously bake a bigger a pie so that Singaporeans can all have a bigger slice. The more vulnerable, those who need help will get it more and get it longer. Mr Speaker, Sir, in conclusion, as we commemorate the 100th Anniversary of Mr Lee Kuan Yew's birth, I like to quote him. And basically, this quote shows how important it is that we stay united as one people. And I quote Mr Lee Kuan Yew, "For the next thousand years, we will still be here, recognisable, identifiable." [Applause.]”
“Every time I look at it – and some people put their chips on the table and some put theirs inside the drawer – my reading of it is that what is on the table are MAS and Temasek. What is in your drawer is GIC because I do not know how much you have inside the drawer. And it is very important that we keep our Reserves as strong as possible and maybe as mysterious as possible because when people do not know how much you have, they hesitate to mess around with you. My mind goes back to 1997 again. During the Asian Financial Crisis, we all know that the currencies around us were all hammered, beaten down. We got off relatively unscathed and do you really think that the hedge funds did not look at us? I am sure they did. But I think they probably say, "You know, this little island, I do not know how much is inside that drawer, I better not mess with them because it is like throwing a boomerang. You throw a boomerang, hoping to hit the other guy, it comes back and it slit your throat." So, let us safeguard our Reserves and unless it is a real crisis like COVID-19, I think try not to touch it. Mr Speaker, Sir, please allow me to quote a famous Cantonese saying. Mr Leong Mun Wai will understand this because he is Cantonese. It goes something like "牛不喝水，按不到牛头底 ". When the cow goes to the river and drinks, if it does not want to drink, you cannot press its head down. Mr Speaker, do not worry, I am not going to talk about meat prices. I mentioned this in the context of our debate today because in a free-market economy, the price is set by willing-buyer willing-seller and it is set by basic demand and supply forces and, honestly, in Singapore, we import most of our products and we have little control.”
“We will never do that and we do not want to start doing that. So, I say, let us all behave like a herd. We are the Singapore Herd because, united we are strong and divided we become weak. And, Sir, here I would like to admit and also acknowledge that most of us, it is human nature, we like consistency and continuity. Many of us do not like change, especially when change involves an increase in the cost of living, it involves inflation. But I think it is something we have to accept collectively. It is a global phenomenon and we will overcome this. Sir, I would like to next move on to Mr Liang Eng Hwa's amendment because towards the last part, he mentioned "without undermining our fiscal sustainability and burdening future generations of Singaporeans." This is very important because every generation must solve its own problems. Every generation has to solve their own problems and down the road. And just now, the hon Member Mr Leong Mun Wai talked about Reserves again. I just want to say this: actually, in reality, neither him nor me are qualified to talk about our Reserves. We are only the custodians, and you know what? The Reserves are not meant for you; and neither are they meant for me. They are meant for our children and our children's children and that is why it is so important that we safeguard them. Like in COVID-19, if it was necessary to dip into our Reserves, we had. But I think if every time we come across a problem and a difficulty, we ask for the key to the safe and we start taking out, there is not going to be very much left in the safe, you know. I am always very marvelled by this mahjong table because on every mahjong table, there are four players and there is always a drawer there for each player.”
“But, sometimes, as we overcome difficulties, there are also learning points and I am completely certain in my mind that we will overcome this. The worst may not have come yet, the worst may well come later. But never mind, we recognise there is pain and we will get over this together. Sir, the second question I will ask is: having recognised that there is pain, is there pain relief? And the answer is, absolutely, and that is why the Government has rolled out so many packages: Cost of Living Package; Assurance Package; CDC Vouchers; U-Save rebates; Public Transport Vouchers and so on. We know them. The Government has done its best to cushion the rough and bumpy ride. But I think what we have done particularly well, maybe compared to some other countries, is that we are targeting assistance to those who need it more and I will urge the Government to continue doing that. Let us help those who need the most help and not only help them the most but maybe help them for the longest time possible. It is an unequal policy, but I think it is the right policy to adopt. Sir, the next question I will ask, having acknowledged that there is pain, having said that there is pain relief, the last question I want to ask is: so, in the process, are any Singaporeans being left behind? Clearly, the answer is no. As I have said, we will target assistance and help to those who need it more and hopefully for a longer period, and we will do the right thing. And doing the right thing is not about just policies or rules and regulations. We all know that doing the right thing is what is in your heart. And doing the right thing is – I hope the Opposition Members of Parliament will agree me – definitely not about straddling the middle ground to gain some votes.”
“Sir, as I listened to the speeches of the Opposition Members of Parliament, I cannot help but feel a sense of gloom and I am reminded of a Chinese war movie that I watched some time ago – I remember this very clearly because it struck me – it was a commander telling the troops in Mandarin, "你知道有什么比悲哀更悲哀吗? 那就是已经绝望了, 已经没有机会了". Do you know what is more sorrowful than feeling sorrowful and despair? It is when it becomes hopeless; it is when we no longer have a chance. But, clearly, this is not the situation we are in. So, I think it is important that all of us in this Chamber – PAP Members of Parliament, Opposition Members of Parliament, WP Members of Parliament, PSP Members of Parliament, Nominated Members of Parliament (NMPs) and Non-Constituency Members of Parliament (NCMPs) – come together and let us tackle this problem collectively. We have enough resources. We have overcome bigger problems. I noticed that the WP's Motion used the word "crisis", cost of living crisis. I shiver and shudder for a while when I saw the word "crisis" because crisis means, I think somebody is going to suggest a draw on Reserves. To me, this is a problem. It is a big problem. I would not classify it as a crisis. So, my point is, 我们不悲哀, 我们没有绝望, 因为我们有的是非常多的机会. That is, we are not sorrowful. We have not lost hope because we have a lot of opportunities. Discuss this issue of cost of living by asking three honest questions and, hopefully, by giving three honest answers also. The first question: is there pain amongst Singaporeans due to the rising cost of living due to inflation? And the answer is yes, there is pain. We have to acknowledge it and we have to admit this is going to be a rough and bumpy ride for all of us. It feels like a never-ending uphill battle.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to state at the onset that I recognise that there is a cost of living issue. I recognise that Singaporeans are going through this, but we have to recognise that this is a global phenomenon and we have to tackle this together. But, Sir, I have been listening carefully and intently to the speeches made by the three Opposition Members of Parliament and my impression is that they are basically asking for an ultimate reduction in tariffs, some reduction in taxes, more top-ups, more handouts. This is not the first time. It did not surprise me that Mr Leong Mun Wai, again, talked about the GST. Honestly, Mr Speaker, Sir, I think the Opposition Members of Parliament have been milking the GST cow for a very long time and we have explained time and again over the last several years why the GST increase is necessary and why there are offset packages. So, maybe I just want to say if you really must milk something, go and milk another cow. Mr Speaker, Sir, as a PAP backbencher, it is very clear in my mind that I am here to support the PAP Government's vision. I am not here to steer it. But at the back of my mind, I would like to ask the Opposition Members of Parliament if one day you are to steer this ship – I hope not, but we cannot rule it out completely – if you are to steer this ship, what is your overall underlying strategy? What is your philosophy? Because, so far, what I have heard is that you are basically dissecting the problem and you are talking about water, electricity, GST, so on and so forth. But at the end of the day, we need to balance the Budget and we need to balance the Budget for all Singaporeans.”
“Sir, I thank the four Ministers for their Statements. I have two points to raise. Senior Minister Teo Chee Hean was consulted by Minister Shanmugam to step in to make decisions should the then-Senior Minister of State Indranee Rajah need to escalate any matter. We know that Senior Minister Teo was not called upon to make any decision at that time. But given the above, I would like to ask whether it is appropriate for Senior Minister Teo to oversee an independent review of the matter. The second point I would like to raise is this. The CPIB report states that Minister Shanmugam asked the then-Deputy Secretary of MinLaw for a list of properties available for the public to rent. CPIB subsequently found that there was no disclosure of privileged information and no preferential treatment given to the Ministers and their spouses. I would also like to ask if it was appropriate for Minister Shanmugam to ask for this list.”
“He is not going to go out into the community and explain the need for GST to be increased or for public transport fares to be adjusted or for any number of popular but vital and important policies, where as community leaders, we have to convince residents that the long-term interests of Singapore are best served by taking these steps. He has asked to only do the nice things – hand out awards, take photographs, congratulate families. Yes, these are nice things. Events to celebrate. As a grassroots advisor, I am glad to be able to be with the families and share their joy and pride. But these are the results of Government programmes and Government policies. If Mr Faisal Manap is going to be honest about this issue, he needs to admit that he cannot fulfil the role of grassroots advisor on behalf of the Government when he disagrees with so many of the Government's policies and with how the Government raises money to fund its progress. Mr Speaker, Sir, PA does important work for the good of Singapore and Singaporeans. It also handles the difficult work of engaging the public on the hard truths involved in making our society harmonious, peaceful and sustainable. I thank the hardworking staff and volunteers for all that they do for all of us. [Applause.]”
“From another perspective, if we were instead a nation of one race, one language and one religion, then such discussions would surely end in a tragic outcome, as shown elsewhere around the world. Being able to constructively discuss such sensitive matters freely speaks volumes on how far we have come since Independence. We exhibit concern over these matters because they are vitally important to us. We take collective action because it goes to the very core values of the social compact that we have so painstakingly built over the years. It is therefore with much anticipation that I look forward to our Government's efforts and agenda in refreshing our social compact. Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to add that I listened to the speeches by the hon Members of the WP, Mr Leon Perera and Mr Faisal Manap. They made some comments about PA that I disagree with completely. Mr Leon Perera and Mr Faisal Manap are quite wrong. PA and its members are here to serve fellow Singaporeans and not to advance the interest of any political party. In fact, there are very strict rules on PA's activities, its roles and its objectives. Mr Leon Perera and Mr Faisal Manap's statements do not do justice to the contributions of many thousands of grassroots leaders, staff and volunteers in our PA community. These people come forward to serve the community and fellow residents and build a better Singapore. Mr Faisal Manap had also made comments about wanting to have the resources of a PA network and to be able to do things like give out Edusave awards. He only asked to be involved in some small selected part of the work of the grassroots advisor. He is not going to do the equally important work of explaining difficult Government policies.”
“But we were determined, together with our successive leaders, to hold on and continue to build upon the core values of a multiracial, multicultural society that leverages diversity as a strength towards creating a shared sense of belonging and identity. In so doing, we have also allowed different communities to be free to preserve and promote their cultural heritage and to practice customs and beliefs while always being mindful of the rights and sensibilities of others. Sir, we were never a homogenous people speaking a common tongue or practicing a common religion and I believe we never had any aspirations to be one. We were diverse but united in our belief that we are here to build a nation that every single one of us, regardless of race, language or religion, had a stake in. Being unique took many years of hard work and consistency in nation-building and I will be the first to say that while we have come a long way, we are far from the finished article. In fact, this is likely to be a continuing work in progress for as long as we believe that this is the social compact we want for Singapore. There are some who point to instances which suggest the polarisation of Singapore's society along socioeconomic status, race and nationality. There have also been vocal discussions on many social issues involving these topics. These topics that relate closely to our social compact. I had also raised these issues at the COS debates for the Ministry of Culture, Community and Youth (MCCY) in the last two years. Sir, I think, however, that such discourse can be useful if discussed in a constructive and respectful manner. It can also prompt a deeper reflection about our values and what it means to be Singaporean.”
“He said, "Anyway, the end result was that we were kicked out of Malaysia after two years. And I say that we make it succeed – from here. First, this belongs to all Singaporeans, regardless of race, language, religion. Second, when there is progress, we ensure that the progress is spread equally, regardless of race, language or religion. There will be the same schools for all, the same hospitals for all, the same low-cost housing for all – regardless of whether you are brown, black, yellow, green or any other spectrum of the rainbow. Provided you are loyal, you belong, you intend to make this place tick. I say you are a partner with me in this enterprise. And slowly, over the years, something is going to happen." Sir, that something did happen. In 1976, I started studying at Serangoon Gardens Secondary School as a 13-year-old, a stone's throw from the same Serangoon Gardens Circus the speech was made a mere 11 years earlier. I was the middle child of three boys to a pair of Chinese language teachers living in the promised low-cost housing, attending the same school with my Malay, Indian and other Chinese schoolmates from varying socio-economic backgrounds. Looking back, Sir, it is an absolute privilege to have lived through the earlier years where we worked towards this social compact together as a nation. Sir, to put things in perspective, embarking on this multiracial and multicultural path with an inclusive social compact was a unique one at the time. As Mr Lee Kuan Yew also shared in his speech, the other path, which was arguably an easier and more popular route by other countries of the time, was communalism, where one appeals to one's race, one's language, one's religion, oftentimes that of the majority.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of the Motion. At the address for the Opening of the second session of the 14th Parliament last week, Mdm President spoke on the geopolitical and economic challenges we face on the horizon and the need to refresh our social compact. She also set out the Government's agenda for the next half term of the 14th Parliament. In doing so, she reaffirmed the core values of Singaporeans: fairness, inclusivity, mutual support, equality and a sense of belonging for all regardless of background so that every Singaporean is afforded the opportunity to achieve his or her full potential. These core values may appear intuitive to most Singaporeans in the context of the present day. It is almost like an unwritten code that forms part of the psyche of being a Singaporean. And yet, we sometimes forget that these core values underpinning our social compact is not an inherent trait nor did it happen by chance. It is the result of hard work, deliberate effort and, dare I say, a lot of gumption and guts by our founding leaders in their efforts to build and forge social cohesion and unity among a diverse group of disparate migrant communities who have come to Singapore in search of a better future. Sir, in preparing to speak today, I chanced upon a speech that then-Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew gave on 11 December 1965 at Serangoon Gardens Circus. It was just after Independence – four months, in fact. Then-Prime Minister Lee was brutally frank and honest about the immense challenges that Singapore was facing post-Independence, but he also made it crystal clear the direction and values upon which Singapore was to be built upon moving forward. A part of his speech I thought summarised our social compact very well.”
“Thank you, Mr Chairman. I cannot help but notice the broad smile on your face when Liverpool was being mentioned. But on a more serious note, Sir, I like to thank all Members who contributed their cuts and the MCCY team for their responses and speeches. Mr Chairman, with that, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.”
“Thank you, Chairman. I have one question for Minister of State Low Yen Ling, because she spoke about the arts masterplan. Can the Minister of State share how our SG Arts Plan for 2023 to 2027, differs from the previous one?”
“The Arts and Culture Digital Roadmap was launched early last year to support arts and culture stakeholders and practitioners in assessing their own digital readiness and learn of possible solutions and opportunities available to support their work. Self-employed persons (SEPs) form a core segment of the talent in our arts and culture landscape. However, in order for them to thrive in and contribute to the sector, there is a need to ensure that they have adequate support in order to continually build on their skills and also improve their working conditions. Minister of State Low Yen Ling announced at the COS debate last year that the National Arts Council (NAC) would increase opportunities for capacity development of SEPs, work with industry partners to better ensure protection and working conditions for SEPs and pilot new ways for SEPs to create new value in the arts sector and beyond. I therefore invite the Minister to share MCCY's plans to build on the capabilities of our arts and heritage practitioners, as well as its efforts to strengthen the entire ecosystem; and further, to also share what kind of further assistance will be offered to SEPs to support employability and help them build a sustainable career in the arts.”
“In addition to our plans to build a thriving arts and heritage sector in Singapore, there are essentially two ingredients that will go a long way to help achieve the objectives set out in the plans. First, it is to ensure that there is adequate infrastructure or arts spaces which will not only add much vibrancy to the sector, but more importantly, support both our arts and heritage practitioners and create opportunities for Singaporeans to come together. Sir, the Minister shared at last year's MCCY COS debate that one of the focus areas for the sector is to "develop vibrant and inclusive arts and culture spaces to keep up with the emerging trends and better meet practitioners' needs". The Minister gave the example of 45 Armenian Street. Minister of State Low Yen Ling also shared about the Singapore Art Museum at Tanjong Pagar Distripark and the developing arts and culture sandboxes at Kampong Java. Such art spaces are important as they are key enablers in the overall ecosystem and support a diverse set of multi-disciplinary practitioners in their respective areas of practice. I therefore invite the Minister to share more about MCCY's plans to add, update and diversify our arts spaces in order to support the arts and heritage sector. Next, investments in the arts and heritage sector's capabilities are crucial in developing a globally relevant and resilient ecosystem and workforce, which will drive our creative economy. At the last MCCY COS debate, it was shared that there will be a strong drive towards digitalisation and the harnessing of digital technologies in order to create new opportunities for the sector.”
“These are monuments that are of such historic, cultural, traditional, archaeological, architectural, artistic or symbolic significance and national importance that the Preservation of Monuments Act allows the Government to preserve and gazette them as National Monuments. We currently have a total of 75 buildings and structures that have been gazetted as National Monuments. These National Monuments preserve not only our history but a quick look at the list of National Monuments shows that quite clearly it also represents in many ways the unique social compact that we have built as a society. The Padang, the latest addition to the list needs no introduction as to the historical significance it holds for pre and post independent Singapore. Sultan Mosque, Sri Mariamman Temple, St Andrews Cathedral and Tian Hock Keng (天福宫) represent a short list of the many National Monuments that showcase the collective conscience of our Nation, as a multiracial, multicultural and multireligious society where Singaporeans of diverse cultural backgrounds and beliefs live harmoniously together as fellow citizens. It is, therefore, imperative that we continue to ensure that we do our utmost to protect and to promote our collective heritage as we build on our social compact. I, therefore, invite the Minister to share more about MCCY’s plans to safeguard and preserve our built heritage, particularly our National Monuments.”
“Thank you, Chairman. Mr Chairman, I had raised at last year’s MCCY COS, about the Arts and Heritage Plans, which identified the priorities for Singapore’s arts and heritage development for 2018 to 2022. As 2022 marked the end of the first phase of the plans, I had sought an update from the Ministry on the next iteration of the plans. Minister of State Low Yen Ling had shared at the time, that the National Arts Council (NAC) was in deep consultation with stakeholders on the Arts Plan 2.0 and that a public consultation will be conducted in the second half of 2022. She also shared that MCCY’s objectives for the Arts Plan 2.0 were three-fold: first, to strengthen the role of arts in the wider local and global creative economy; second, to develop further ways for the arts to contribute to deepening our national identity, social cohesion and inclusivity; and third, to make the arts a distinctive factor that adds to Singapore’s attractiveness as a global city. For MCCY’s Heritage Plan 2.0, I recall the direction was to enhance the heritage sector’s digital capabilities, showcase Singapore’s rich multicultural heritage beyond our shores to grow new audiences and markets for the sector and to work closely with our local communities and heritage enthusiasts and partners in the tech and creative industries to celebrate our unique local histories. I therefore invite MCCY to update us on its refreshed Arts and Heritage Plans 2.0 for the next lap, show how the public and stakeholder consultations have shaped these plans, and also expand on MCCY’s efforts to increase arts access to various demographics in Singapore. Preserving National Monuments Mr Chairman, our National Monuments in Singapore form an indelible and integral part of our built heritage.”
“Sir, even as we grapple with the changing trends and needs in our society, we must be mindful that discourses on highly emotive issues of social importance can serve to deepen fault lines in our social fabric, if not carefully calibrated. We must never take for granted the social harmony that was painstakingly built over successive generations of Singaporeans since our Independence. Having said that, I remain optimistic, that discourse that is constructive and respectful can allow us to better reflect upon how we could refresh our social compact and strengthen our sense of national unity and identity. As we have shown to have done in our history, we can harness diversity as an agent for unity, rather than divisiveness. Sir, the launch of the Forward Singapore exercise by Deputy Prime Minister Lawrence Wong in June last year presents, in my view, an excellent platform where we can gather the diverse voices of Singaporeans, encourage a constructive exchange of views and work towards refreshing our social compact. The Unite Pillar led by Minister Edwin Tong, in particular, is well placed to tackle these issues head on. I, therefore, invite the Minister to update us on his experience so far as a lead for the Unite Pillar in the Forward Singapore exercise, as well as to share with us MCCY's strategies to ensure that we can create a Singapore, where every citizen belong, is able to maintain strong bonds with one another and is able to contribute collectively to build a strong, inclusive and cohesive society in a country where all of us can proudly call our home. [(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]”
“Chairman, I beg to move, "That the total sum to be allocated for Head X of the Estimates be reduced by $100". Sir, last year, at the start of the Ministry of Culture, Community and Youth (MCCY)'s Committee of Supply (COS), I had raised the issue of the need to safeguard and refresh the social compact that we have assiduously built in Singapore over the years. I believe that our core values of building a caring and inclusive, multiracial, multicultural and multi-religious society remain sacrosanct among Singaporeans. However, it is undeniable that, as each new generation of Singaporeans come to the fore, we will have to continue to evolve as a society and refresh our social compact. This House will recollect that, emerging from the COVID-19 pandemic last year, we observed a series of highly emotive discourse on issues of race, social economic status and nationality. We know that views on issues of social importance are progressively becoming more diverse across a wider spectrum of Singaporeans. Our youths, who form the bedrock of our future, are decidedly more seized with such issues and are inclined to speak their minds, even on sensitive issues of race and religion. Our demographics are also fast changing. The proliferation of inter-racial and intercultural marriages in Singapore will lead to a new generation of Singaporeans that will hold a fresh perspective on racial and cultural identity. An ageing population will require us to review our national policies to address the issues arising, but also to consider how Singaporean families fundamentally function as a foundational unit that is entrusted with bringing up the next generation and caring for our seniors.”
“I hope that the PDO will achieve its overarching objective of supporting accused persons with limited means to be legally well advised and professionally represented. As we usually say, the proof of the pudding is in the eating. We shall await to hear of the good work of the PDO. In the premises, I invite the Minister to share an update with this House on the PDO, in particular, on the number of applications received so far, the number of public defenders appointed and whether, at this early stage, we are seeing an increased number of applications for representation.”
“Mdm Chair, I remember listening with interest during the Parliamentary Sitting for the Public Defenders Bill that was passed in August last year. I am not legally trained but I was supportive of the Government's move to set up the PDO to widen the ambit of providing access to legal representation for accused persons who are unable to afford it. Members of this House would have experienced many requests for legal advice, aid or representation by residents or families of residents who require them. In the community, we have legal aid clinics or even lawyers – who are volunteers – who pitch in to give some guidance to residents who need legal assistance but are unable to pay the fees to retain a lawyer. Many laypersons who have had the unfortunate need of having to deal with legal entanglements will tell you that it is not a pleasant experience. In particular, if a person is charged with a crime, it does not affect only the accused but greatly impacts family members and dependents. The situation is greatly aggravated if the family is from a lower-income household. In such instances, while we have absolute and total faith in our Police and prosecutors in discharging their duties objectively and professionally, ensuring that accused persons have access to proper and professional legal representation will go a long way in assuring the public that we have a robust but fair criminal justice system that protects the interests of all. I was, therefore, very pleased that the PDO was launched on 1 December 2022, with a higher means test of $1,500 per capita household income and a wider coverage of offences, with exclusions.”
“Some scams even play the long game for many months, slowly cheating not only money, but also causing great emotional turmoil to its victims. Perhaps, what is the most alarming about scams, is the fact that it is often the case that these scams originate from overseas, and once money is transferred to another account, it promptly leaves our shores and jurisdiction almost instantaneously. This makes the task of the Police, no matter how well-trained and determined they are, all the more challenging in arresting scammers and, especially, in their efforts to retrieve the stolen monies for the victims. Given the insidious threat of scams and the disproportionate harm it brings to its victims, I hope that the Government will take steps to augment its support of the Police, by legislation or otherwise, to work with industry partners, such as our financial institutions and other stakeholders, in the process to combat scams and protect the community. In the premise, I invite the Minister to share with this House, the steps that the Government is taking to address the threat of scams in the community, whether the Ministry has plans to strengthen legislation to combat scams and the efforts that are being made to educate and keep the public informed of the latest developments, so that Singaporeans can take the necessary precautions against scams. Support for Scam Victims”
“Mr Chairman, the recent statistics that were released by the Police on scams has surely captured our attention on the threat that scams are causing in the community. That the Police released this set of statistics separate and distinct from other crime numbers for the first time, shows that scams are fast becoming a major cause of concern. The numbers are quite astounding. Year on year, the total amount reported to have been cheated from all scams rose from $632 million in 2021 to $660.7 million in 2022. The number of scams and cybercrime cases increased by about 25%, from 26,886 in 2021, to 33,669 in 2022. And for those of us who think that seniors are generally the vulnerable class in society that are more susceptible to being scammed, we know that the cases involving seniors only amount to 8.8% of all cases. A whopping 79.4% of cases involved individuals from the ages of 10 to 49 years of age. Anecdotally, I am sure all of us have heard of many stories of scams. As representatives in this House, we will also have met many residents who have sought our assistance when scammed. Not so long ago, I remember that the concern was mainly about phishing links, sent by emails, digital messages or on social media. Raising awareness on such modus operandi was easier. We warned one another not to click on links immediately, to always question and verify before proceeding. Scams have evolved quite significantly since then. There are now scams that appear to be innocuous, but end up being most insidious. Scammers masquerade as love interests, friends who have changed numbers and are in need of assistance, or even promise what appeared to be legitimate jobs but end up cheating, often times, the life savings of individuals.”
“If there is one truism in geopolitics, it is that no one owes us a living, especially for a city state that is nothing more than a little red dot on many maps. We have to stay relevant, be nimble and embrace change. Staying relevant means we have to offer the services and products that other countries want and pay a good price for. If we can do that, we will continue to have the things that we want, such as good jobs for everyone and a safe environment and good schools to raise our children in, as well as affordable housing and reliable public transport. In 2014, Sir, I said in this House that for Singapore to survive and prosper, we need to have the relevant skillsets, right attitude and the moral compass and values. I am optimistic for Singapore because I see these three important ingredients in the 4G leadership and the people. Mr Speaker, Sir, I support the Budget.”
“I might add, Sir, that it is also the aim of any Opposition who aspires to be the Government one day to convince the people that the glass is getting emptier and emptier and also to get them to focus on the pain points, to persuade the people that these pain points are unremitting, intractable and, in fact, getting worse and worse to the point of being life-threatening. They want you to change your doctor. But we have to ask ourselves: will this so-called new doctor have better solutions and cures or worse? Are they like the proverbial "koyok-seller" of yesteryear, trying to sell you miracle cures? Mr Speaker, Sir, as we transition from 3G to 4G, it must be the responsibility of the incoming 4G leadership to inspire Singaporeans to greater heights, to convince a new generation that the glass is going to be bigger and fuller at the same time, while acknowledging that pain points exist and to provide adequate and effective pain relief here and now, while working towards viable and sustainable long-term solutions. So, there are at least three broad responses to pain. One is to go for complete analgesia, which as I have said before, can be dangerous over a long period of time. Another is to be overly focused on the pain and be paralysed by it. And then, there is the better way, which is to live with it and get on with life, but take pain relief when available and necessary, because life is seldom ever totally pain-free and miracle cures seldom, if ever, really work. Sir, 10 years ago, when I turned 50, I said in this House that the Government must listen to the people, labour for the people and lead the people. Now, as I turn 60, I believe that these fundamentals remain. How do we make sure that the glass of water gets fuller and not emptier?”
“Examples of these in this year's Budget include enhanced GST Vouchers, additional CDC Vouchers, an Assurance Package that addresses rising cost-of-living and aims to support, amongst others, students and seniors, help for families with young children. Finally, we must also acknowledge the pain and provide comfort at the emotional level. A listening ear, a gentle pat, a nod, all these are small things we can do to provide emotional comfort. And sometimes, I feel that we focus too much on finding solutions to the pain that we may well fall short on empathy. We can improve ourselves. Sir, the record of the People's Action Party (PAP) speaks for itself over the past 64 years. Through our policies and programmes, we strive to improve the lives of the less fortunate. The social mobility of Singaporeans over this period demonstrates this. But sometimes, we do come across as a bit lacking in empathy. And empathy goes a long way when it comes to providing comfort. But as I have said, we can improve. Finally, there is another part to providing relief and comfort that is beyond focusing on our present-day problems. It is like looking at whether a glass is half-full or half-empty. We need to also focus on the half-full glass and ask ourselves where do the possibilities lie, what is the potential to make the glass of water fuller than what it is now? Or do we believe that the glass will get emptier and emptier as time goes by? Is the best behind us or is yet to be?”
“But like a good doctor, we know that suggestions for instant pain relief, like instant gratification, is temporary and may cause us greater grief in the future. While we do not profess to have all the cures to all pains, we are prepared to take time to address the root causes of pain, while taking steps to ensure that the pain does not overwhelm us. Indeed, as the Confucian saying goes: "知之为知之，不知为不知，是知也". Loosely translated, this means that the path to wisdom is to know what you really know and to be aware of what you do not know. The true danger then, lies in what some people call the "unknown of unknowns". Here, we need to gather information and listen to as many people and stakeholders as possible, to minimise the magnitude of "unknown of unknowns", so that we are not unnecessarily blindsided. The next step is to come up with solutions. We can learn from what it takes to be a good doctor and the axiom which is taught to all medical students is, "To cure sometimes, to relieve often, to comfort always". A good doctor knows that there is a limit to the illnesses he can cure. Indeed, even with modern medicine, complete and permanent cures are rare. But he can often provide relief and, with empathy and compassion, he can always comfort his patients. Likewise, there are few problems that politicians and governments can fix permanently with policies and programmes. Let us not kid ourselves on this. There are few equivalents to smallpox in public policy-making, where an effective vaccination programme has eradicated smallpox from this planet. But policies and programmes do provide substantial relief.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, in my recent speech in this House, I said it was dangerous to not feel pain for a long period of time. Pain reminds us that something needs to be done. If we feel nothing, we do not react. Therefore, we should not aim for analgesia to feel no pain but, instead, aim to ameliorate the pain. Pain is a call to action. I will take this occasion to speak further about how we should respond to pain. If pain is slight and fleeting, it can sometimes be dismissed. But when pain becomes more than a niggle here and a mild ache there, and is persistent, it is crucial that we acknowledge its existence and not dismiss it nonchalantly. It is the same with the polity as it is with the human body. The Government must recognise the pain that people are going through and, more importantly, act on them. Today, there are a number of pain points that are evident. First, there is high global inflation, coupled with sluggish economic growth. Our local inflation is hovering around 5%. Second, the Certificate of Entitlement (COE) prices remain high. And here, I am not discomforted by high COE prices for big or luxury cars, but for smaller cars and motorcycles. Many people need either a small car or a motorcycle for work. Workers in the point-to-point transportation and platform delivery industries are good examples. Third, the wait for HDB flats. And fourth, the wait for appointments in our public healthcare system brought about by the pandemic and exacerbated by the global competition for nursing and other healthcare manpower. And of course, the Goods and Services Tax (GST) increase. The PAP does not walk away from these pain points. We face them head on and we come up with viable and sustainable long-term solutions.”
“Sir, I will take less than one minute. I just want to clarify with Mr Leong whether he is aware that Singapore's home ownership rate is 89% because I started yesterday by disagreeing with him. But the more I listened, the more I think it is scary and dangerous, and it is like a gust of Progress Singapore Party wind can blow us all off. So, just be careful. Second, I appreciate what Mr Leong said about doing more for Singaporeans. I know we want to have more Singaporeans to get onto the property ladder; we can give them a stool to climb up; but he is not doing that; he is taking down the whole ladder. And I just want to make the comment.”
“By the end of 2025, there will be 9,000 new dwelling units in Bidadari. I have visited the flats there. Overwhelming demand for the flats. They are all almost completely sold. Based on my estimation, I think the flats are sold at not mean household income, but the family household income, about maybe six times, maximum seven. It is more like six, of their annual income. And I think that is fully affordable, right? Well, is there a problem? Yes, I think there is a problem. I will concede. The problem is the long waiting time, as residents at Meet-the-People Sessions have told me and emailed me. But the key reason for the long waiting time is because of COVID-19 and as Minister Desmond Lee has said, we are looking for ways to solve this as soon as possible. Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to conclude by saying that our housing programme is definitely not broken. In fact, I think it is very good. It has delivered many benefits to Singaporeans and will continue to do so. Can we improve? Sure. Of course, we can improve. And that is why there are public policy adjustments from time to time. Again, I want to say, be careful what you wish for, because we are having a good run. It has taken us 60 years, almost 60 years, to reach where we are today, because we have got hardworking people, we have got good jobs, we have got good economic growth and the nation has progressed. But there is one more thing, one more key important reason that I feel we do not talk about enough. And it is because the PAP Government has earned its place amongst our people. We have built upon the strength of this nation. One people, one heart, "one semangat" or one spirit. [Applause.]”
“So, I was reading just last night as I was trying to research for what I want to say today. But after hearing, I decided to put aside my speech and maybe I should respond. I think there is a quote by Lenin from Soviet Russia. He said something along the lines like, there are decades where nothing happens, but there are weeks where decades happen. If I go according to Mr Leong's or the PSP's methodology, those few weeks and those few months can see our property prices crumbling. Is that what we want? I am 60 years old this year. I have seen episodes in my life. What I have learnt is that when you come down it is very steep, it is very slippery, it is very fast. But when you try your way to recover and to climb back up, I can tell you the slope is very, very gradual. It is going to take you a long time. So, again, be careful what you wish for, especially in Singapore where 89% of our population are home owners. It is unlike other places. In Hong Kong, for example, it is 51%. So, if we do what Mr Leong suggested we do, are we able to stomach it? And another lesson I learnt in life is that when you do something, you ask yourself whether you can stomach it, because if you cannot, do not do it. Do not think about the upside because the upside is only a measurement of your happiness. That is something you can fully enjoy and fully be able to take in. So, what do we hope to see? I think we hope to see something like a Goldilocks situation. Our prices can move steadily upwards and slowly, in line with our rise in income, not too hot, not too cold. Mr Leong Mun Wai gave an example about Tengah. Actually, I was hoping that he would bring up Bidadari as an example, because Bidadari is in Potong Pasir constituency.”
“Because some of the arguments put up by Mr Leong, I think, whilst I am no property expert and neither is he, I think it is going to lead to a decrease in BTO prices, it is going to lead to a decrease in resale prices. And not that it has not happened. I think if my memory serves me right – in 2003 and 2004, after the 1997 Financial Crisis, there were unsold HDB flats; tens of thousands of them. There was walk-in selection, where people walked in and they bought the walk-in flats at prices lower than those for the people who have queued for their flats. So, be careful what you wish for, because if I go by Mr Leong's methodology, we can be in a lot of trouble. Over the Chinese New Year, I came across an article by a BBC correspondent. It is an article written in January, last month. It says, "Japan was the future, but it is stuck in the past." Singapore was the future, is the future and, as an aspirational country, we definitely want to be the future too. Let me read to Members a paragraph, very interesting to me, in this article. I quote, "Then in 1991, the bubble burst. The Tokyo stock market collapsed. Property prices fell off a cliff. They are yet to recover." A friend was recently negotiating to buy several hectares of forest. The owner wanted $20 per square metre. My friend told him forest land is only worth $2 per square metre. But he insisted he needed $20 a square metre because that was what he paid for in the 1970s. Never mind that this is forest land. You go to Tokyo, you go to Osaka. It is the same. The property prices have never recovered in the last few decades. Is that what we want? So, the song goes again – be careful what you wish for. I wish I could sing it to you, but the Standing Orders do not allow me to sing in Chamber.”
“But on the other hand, it can also decide to sell this same piece of land to the private sector. If he sells it to the private sector, we all know there is a Government Land Sale, the proceeds would then go into reserves and then it is invested and that is where we get our Net Investment Returns Contribution (NIRC). So, if you just give it to HDB at $1 or less than the market price, you are in effect depleting the reserves. It is an economic cost forgone. Mr Leong Mun Wai will know this because he is an Economics graduate from Japan, I think. Are there instances where land is transferred at less than market price? I think there are; I have not checked this. I think there are. And let me give some examples. Gardens by the Bay is in a prime location. If it is not transferred at a nominal price, it cannot be built. It is a project by NParks. Second, Government hospitals. Government hospitals, I think, should be transferred at nominal value because we need to build hospitals for our elderly and for our fellow Singaporeans. SAF training camps and training grounds must have been transferred to the Ministry of Defence (MINDEF) at a very low cost because that is for national defence. Gardens by the Bay and public hospitals are public amenities for the public to use, for the public to enjoy. And that is why it justifies transferring the land at below market price. But your HDB flats are public housing, but it is not a public home for the public to walk in and out. It is a home that Singaporeans own and they live in and have their own privacy. So, because of that, there must be a price to the land cost. And the price must therefore be the prevailing market price as assessed by the Chief Valuer. Sir, there is a song called “Be Careful What You Wish For”.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, thank you for allowing me to participate in this debate. I would like to spend the next few minutes to provide my thoughts after listening to the comments by Mr Leong Mun Wai and some of the Progress Singapore Party (PSP) and Workers’ Party (WP) Members of Parliament. Firstly, there is talk about the pricing of land, whether you should price it below market price, whether you should transfer it at historical price and so forth. As an accountant, I can tell you there is a fundamental basic principle in accounting, which is that everything must be done at arm's length. It is called an arm's length transaction, that is, goods and services must be provided, sold or transferred at arm's length prevailing market prices. This is basic accounting. This is basic corporate governance. And that is why you cannot transfer land at historical cost, at $1 or whatever. Because you must make the HDB management and the board accountable for all its operations. When you do it at less than market price, they are going to have a field day with what they want to do. This just does not make sense. The second point that was raised was whether this amounted to a raid on our reserves. To be very, very honest, my brain is not very big and it is not very fast. It took me a while to figure out why Minister Desmond Lee said it amounted to a raid on reserves – and it is. Let me again try to explain it in my very simplistic manner. I have not discussed this with Minister Desmond Lee, but I hope I get it correct. Let us say there is a piece of land here. The authority – whether it is the Singapore Land Authority (SLA) or the Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA) – can decide to give this piece of land to HDB to develop.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I thought I already answered Mr Perera. I said for a small country like Singapore, saving must be a virtue and as far as we can, we can continue to save, not just for future generations but for a rainy day. I would like to pose it back to Mr Leon Perera. Does he not think that savings should be a virtue or does he think that we should saving now?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I was responding to Assoc Prof Jamus Lim's speech when he mentioned over-saving in his speech and I say it again. For a small country like Singapore, with a limited population, with no natural resources, saving is a virtue. I do not think we should grouse about over-saving.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I think the issue here is not about the NIRC. As far as I know, the Workers' Party agrees with having the NIRC system and so do I. It is a good system to have. But the question that they have posed is should we have 50-50 or should we allow 60% to be used as expenditure. I completely agree that the NIRC system is a good system. It is here to stay. For now, I think 50-50 is about right. It is fair. Mr Leon Perera asked a question earlier after Mr Liang Eng Hwa's speech. I think he asked about what if 50-50 is not enough. Well, we have a mechanism, right? If using 50% of NIRC is not enough, there is a mechanism for the Government to tap on the reserves, with the permission of the President. I think our system works perfectly well.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, sorry, I do not get his point. What about 2008? Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim: In 2008, as far as I believe, the Government altered its NIRC contribution percentage. We do not have, at least on the record, the specific shares. Our own calculations suggest that it went from somewhere in the order of 10% or 20% of the NIRC contribution up to the present rate of 50%. So, I am not talking about China here. I am talking about Singapore. This PAP Government, which was in power in Singapore at the time, in 2008, altered the NIRC share.”
“Mr Speaker, I thank the hon Member Jamus Lim for his question. I think if you were to play the tape, I said for a small country like Singapore, do not talk about over-saving. I said for a small country like Singapore. I am reminded of 1997, during the Asian Financial Crisis. Remember? The countries around us – their currencies all collapsed. In the summer of 1998, the SAR Hong Kong government, with the backing of Beijing, had to come in to defend the Hong Kong dollar and to defend the Hang Seng Index. So, for a small country like Singapore, saving is a virtue and we should continue to save. That is my point.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I think Mr Perera is putting very serious words into my mouth. What I am saying is that we are all going through difficult times. I did not say the assistance packages are not helpful. In fact, I think they are very helpful and the Government is targeting it at the people who need it most. I did not say we deserve to go through this pain. What I am saying is that in these turbulent times of calamity, we have to bond together as a nation and we have to go through this together – 同甘共苦的精神, the spirit of sharing weal and woe – if the Member knows what I mean.”
“Mr Speaker, I thank the hon Member Mr Leon Perera for his question. I do not see how the Support Packages can be "no pain". The support packages are meant to help our fellow citizens to get over this period. I noticed the Workers' Party kept saying "You are trying to fan the inflation". Yes, I think the Government implementing the GST in this difficult inflationary time. But please bear in mind that GST is also a consumption tax, in the sense that it is charged from the spend. So, I think the Assurance Package, GST Voucher is meant to help Singaporeans. I do not see his point that it is meant to be "no pain" at all. I am sorry, I missed the Member's point.”
“I do not know whether he has heard of another phrase – "A thousand gold can’t buy being poor at a young age", which means that if you are not rich when you are young, when you grow up, you will appreciate what you have and treasure the people around you more. Hence, I found it very hard to believe his story. Perhaps Ah Gong is trying to teach the grandson, or to save for his grandson to prepare for his education in the future and so on. So, I think the story Mr Leong told is very extreme. [Applause]”
“Or are we better off if we take the PAP’s approach, which is to keep the country alert to dangers and challenges, while we give relief to those who are suffering more, as we forge ahead through these difficult waters? Mr Speaker, I think that the answers are clear. Planning for the long-term interest of successive generations of Singaporeans, always ensuring that Singapore remains resilient through choppy waters, while at the same time, supporting Singaporeans in facing the challenges of today, is surely a better, more holistic approach than providing analgesia to numb the senses so that we can all pretend that the pain does not exist. Mr Speaker, since I have a little bit of time, I would like to comment on what the hon Member Mr Leong Mun Wai said and since he used Mandarin, I will try my best to do so. (In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Earlier, Mr Leong Mun Wai shared a story about Ah Gong and Ah Seng. Of course, he is the author of the story, and we cannot stop him from writing the story as he pleases. So basically, Mr Leong is saying that this Ah Gong comes from a very rich family and he keeps taking money from Ah Seng until Ah Seng is out of breath. Of course, this is his narration. But I want to share with him this saying, I do not know if he has heard of it before - "you can raise a child for 100 years and you will worry about his welfare for 99 years." We are an Asian society. We take care of our children and grandchildren for 100 years and for 99 years we keep worrying about him. In an Asian society like Singapore, are there stories as he has mentioned? Of course, there are, but they are rare. He keeps talking about how Ah Gong tries to collect money from Ah Seng until Ah Seng is out of breath. I think that this is very rare in our society.”
“But we cannot provide analgesia so that we do not feel, at all, the adverse conditions around us. That would obtund us to the point that we may have a festering wound threatening our lives in the long term and yet we are not aware of it. We may then die from it eventually, or at the very least, we may need drastic intervention not unlike chopping off a part of our limbs. That would be a disastrous outcome that we need to prevent. We are here to help. Yet, we do so in a way such that Singaporeans remain alert, sensitive and even quickened to the challenges and threats around us. That is how Singapore can continue to stay resilient, thrive and prosper. Sir, the GST hike is implemented to help balance the books. But at a deeper level, the hike reminds us, both the Government and the individual, that we need to remain prudent in our consumption behaviour and that the world is going through tough economic times. But I must say, this does not stop the Government from intervening decisively to help families and individuals to lessen the pain in these trying times. And I think that the Government has shown, through the years, that no matter how challenging the internal or external environment is, we will continue to support Singapore and Singaporeans on the cost of living here. Even with the impending GST hike, the Assurance Package and Enhanced GSTV scheme effectively buffer many Singaporeans from the increase. Sir, the fundamental difference between how the PAP and the Workers' Party approaches the problem is really this: the Workers' Party wants to provide analgesia for an extended period of time. The question is whether we, as a country, are better off and more resilient if we take this approach?”
“To have no sensation of pain, unless induced by a doctor through anesthetic intervention for a short while, is not good at all. A good example is a person with badly controlled diabetes. Often, he has no sensation in his lower extremities because his nerves have died due to the scourge of diabetes. He feels no pain. Not just pain, he actually also feels nothing at all in the area where the nerves have died. As a result, he may not know he has developed bad diabetic ulcers, which can sadly end up with an amputation of a part of the leg. He may even die from these painless diabetic ulcers. So, in summary, only the deceased feel nothing for a long period of time. It is therefore neither possible nor advisable that the Government shield Singaporeans from difficult economic conditions worldwide, so that they feel no pain at all. It is also not responsible for the Government of this generation to spend more than its fair share so that this generation of Singaporeans feel no pain. The can is kicked down the road and subsequent generations have to feel additional pain because of the profligacy that takes place now. I know this sounds somewhat harsh, but reality is like that. No one owes Singapore a living. We must be prudent so that we are always resilient, no matter what or how the global climate is. Any good government must understand this. Only then can we bounce back from difficult challenges and grow even stronger in the future. But it is also vital that the Government also feels for and understands the pain of Singaporeans during such challenging times. What the PAP aims to do is to reduce the pain, as in providing effective and substantial pain relief. Where the pain is most severe and sharpest, we will give the most pain relief through targeted assistance schemes.”
“We are not just saving, we are re-investing. We are then flowing it back to the NIRC of future generations. Just a short while ago, I see a group of students in our audience; they just left. But why do you think even in such turbulent times, we are able to invest in education, to invest for the future? It is precisely because of the reserves that our forefathers had given us. So, let us not kid around. There is no such thing as under-saving or over-saving for a small country like Singapore. We have to save as much as we can, and I dare say, for a small country like ours, do what you can and do not ever use that word "over-saving", please. Mr Speaker, Sir. I will go back to my speech now. If I have time, I would like to say something on Mr Leong Mun Wai's speech but let us see. Sir, the argument against the GST hike, as some have said, is that times are hard, we are experiencing terrible headwinds and people are suffering from the rising cost of living. I recognise that. We all know that. I am sure the Government knows that both in their hearts and their minds. So, what is their solution? Here I am reminded of what a doctor friend told me. I learnt a new word. The difference between analgesia – I hope I pronounced it correctly – analgesia and pain relief. Analgesia is the absence of pain. For example, an anesthetist is trained to achieve analgesia in a patient undergoing surgery. But when a patient is in this state, he needs constant monitoring and this consumes a lot of resources. It is not possible to have a long period of time whereby a patient feels no pain. This is because pain is a sensation and not to have any sensation is dangerous. While we do not like pain at all, a little pain is necessary because it is what makes us alert, it is what keeps us alive.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, today on the NIRC, we have a 50-50 arrangement which we think is equitable. This current generation takes 50% of the NIRC and leaves 50% for the next generation. If we drop to 40% to reserves, what is there to say we cannot drop to 30% or even 20%? I must say 50-50 is not rocket science, and I am the first to admit empirically, it feels like the right thing to do. We are an Asian society and generally speaking, our forebears have tried very hard to give us a better life than what they went through. This is possible only because they consumed less than what they produced and left us with the rest. We should continue this good practice of leaving something for our descendants. So, at this juncture, I would like to take a pause and comment on some of the speeches that were made earlier. The hon Member Mr Louis Chua likened a GST increase to scoring an own goal when you are 5-0 down in football. When he said that, I am reminded of the Suzuki Cup semi-finals last year, on Christmas Day, where I was there with Minister Edwin Tong and which Deputy Prime Minister Lawrence Wong also mentioned during his Budget speech. In that game on Christmas Day last year, our Lions lost 4-2 against Indonesia. We had one man sent off, two men sent off, three men sent off. We were down to eight men. Our back was against the wall. But the Young Lions battled, they were clearing shots off the line, they defended stoutly and they were throwing bodies all around. That is how Team Singapore play. Not the way that Mr Chua has spoken about – conceding an own goal or scoring an own goal when you are 5-0 down. Mr Speaker, Sir. Assoc Prof Jamus Lim also made mention of over-saving for our reserves. For a small country like Singapore, there is no such thing as over-saving.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir. The Workers' Party has proposed the following as alternatives to the GST hike: (a) to use more of the net investment returns contribution, or NIRC, for expenditure, that is, 60% instead of the current 50%, and to put back a smaller amount, 40%, into the reserves; (b) to use a portion of our land sales as operating revenue; (c) raising corporate tax so that the effective tax rate is 15%; (d) raising tax on activities which have negative externalities and raising "sin" tax. Deputy Prime Minister Wong had earlier this year, in his Budget round-up speech, explained why this cannot replace the GST increase. For today, I wish to comment on their NIRC proposal. But Sir, before I do so, I think it is even more important to re-examine why we are having a GST hike. Of course, we all know a GST hike is never politically popular at any point in time anywhere. But in Singapore, the PAP has always done what we think is in the best interest of Singapore now and for successive generations; sometimes, regardless of the political cost. That is why we are where we are today. The first principle in terms of taxes and expenditure is that each generation must, as far as possible, bear the cost of the public services it consumes. That should not be an inter-generation transfer of liabilities such that one generation pays for the services consumed by another generation. It is surely not a "pay as you go" arrangement that we see in other countries. This is the slippery slope that we must not go down and there are many examples of this elsewhere. Eventually, it pits one generation against another and leads to society fissuring and even fracturing along generation lines. One can see many examples of this around the world.”
“Thank you, Sir. I am heartened to hear from the Minister that once the Government takes over the Sports Hub's management, we are going to do a lot more things for a lot more Singaporeans. But, Sir, that will also mean that we need a lot more resources. Bearing in mind that the MCCY budget is always amongst the smallest in every Budget, I would like to ask the Minister whether he can go to the Finance Minister and ask for more funding because, Sir, especially when we celebrate National Day next week, the lion must roar.”