Steve Chia Kiah Hong
Singapore
“A similar prohibition would apply to the videocasting, or video streaming of explicitly political content. At this point, the Government has no intention to amend the legislation regulating Internet campaigning during an election.”
“Sir, may I clarify with the Senior Minister of State? He did not answer my question exactly. My question is this. From the "positive list" of the websites that are approved and registered, a concerned citizen downloads all these materials and prints them out on his own, using photostating machine or whatever, and distributes them to the m…”
“Sir, with regard to chicken farms and especially slaughter house workers, I believe they must be well trained and briefed on the precautionary measures to take. But are they insured under the Workmen's Compensation Act or any other kind of insurance in the event that they are afflicted with the bird flu virus?”
“Sir, I hope that the Minister of State understands that suicide is basically an attempt to cry out for help. In that time, if they do not have an easy number to remember, like SOS' 1800-2214444 hotline, can they call 999 or 995 and be redirected to the SOS in the event that they are thinking of suicide?”
“The clarification is that this individual, whom we do not know, is not our election agent or election helper. This is an individual in the constituency who wants to download anything and distributes it to the residents in the contested constituency. Is it an offence?”
“Active political recruitment has been going on inside and outside the RC and PA s organisation and premises. Although grassroots leaders are under no compulsion to join the PAP and can opt out if they want to, Straits Times' Forum writer, Ms Yee, had correctly pointed out that "joining a grassroots organisation seems to be a sure way for…”
The complete record
Every one of 543 lines we hold for Steve Chia Kiah Hong, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 6 of 11.
“How can a reject of the people's choice still have the ability to hang around and exercise influential powers over the financial decision of the grassroots CCC in an Opposition ward? Can the Government respect the residents' wishes and curb the powers of the grassroots advisors? Otherwise, this is seen as another case of manipulative politicking at the local level, and the residents will not be well served. I would also like to take this opportunity to propose that the People's Association allow the RC and CCC chairmen and members to beelected by the residents, instead of being appointed by the Government. This is in line with DPM Lee's vision of opening up our society more, and allowing our citizens to have more participatory stakes in the issues that affect us. I hope that the Goverment will walk the talk, instead of just talk the talk.”
“Madam, at lastyear's COS debate, we were told by the Government that Opposition MPs will not be appointed as advisors to grassroots organisations because doing so will politicise the grassroots. Yet, the Government went ahead to politicise the grassroots with the appointment of a PAP candidate as the Advisor. How can a politically-linked person of the governing party be appointed as a grassroots advisor in an Opposition ward and expect the grassroots not to be politicised? Is this not political manipulation? If Opposition MPs are not allowed to be appointed as grassroots advisors, then the governing party's candidates who contested and lost in the elections should similarly not be allowed to be appointed as grassroots advisors. I would propose that the Government ensure that, other than the elected MP, no politically-linked person could be appointed as a grassroots advisor in an Opposition ward. The Government could consider appointing a civil servant from the People's Association to be an advisor instead. Otherwise, there will be lots of politicking and the residents will not be well served. To quote the Minister of State in his reply previously: "We owe it to the residents to ensure that politics stays out." So, please act on it. Powers of Grassroots Advisors I turn now to my next cut, Powers of Grassroots Advisors. The grassroots advisor has great influence over the CCC and has the power to persuade the CCC to reject projects and funding requests for upgrading projects and estate maintenance by the town council. This is not right, especially when the MP is elected to represent the people in matters of the constituency, whereas the grassroots advisor is a clear reject of the people's choice, as explained in the earlier cut.”
“With a disciplined programme and care that the students go through, we will soon produce remarkable athletes and fine youths for our society. What I am asking here is for the Government and MCDS to be half as willing to subsidise more for the other programmes that care for the weaker, poorer and less hopeful members of our society, especially the aged, the infirm and the frail, as we cough up more money to promote sports.”
“Sir, I take this opportunity to thank the Minister for inviting us to visit and view the recently completed Sports School . It is really impressive considering the amount of money that was spent to build and subsidise it. I believe it has an excellent model for training our future athletes. From that visit, I was informed that the total cost to train per student is around $25,000 per year. The students are required to pay school fees of $500 per month, amounting to $6,000 per year. When the School is running in full capacity in a few years' time, it is expected to have about 600 students and the total subsidy for the whole school to keep it as a going-concern will be around $11.4 million per year. Sir, we can see that the Government subsidises around $19,000 per student per year. That is a lot of money, a lot of subsidy per student. It is a lot higher than subsidies for students from other secondary schools or even university students. I am wondering if this huge amount of yearly subsidy is justified. Are we subsidising too much per student at the expense of other schools and welfare programmes? The Government is willing to subsidise so much per student for its pet project, but when it comes to welfare and other community care programmes, it is always more stingy and tight with subsidies and expenses. I think there should be a rethinking on the Government's role and it should be more willing to subsidise and finance other equally worthwhile community care and welfare programmes. Sir, the reason why I raise this matter under Sports School is not because I am against the idea of subsidising the Sports School here. I think it is great.”
“Sir, senior officers at the recently concluded air show said, as reported in the Today papers, that, "The cost of buying military equipment and low value purchases are rising and taking their toll on military expenditure." In view of the expected contractions in the budget of the various Ministries over the coming years as the economy is not as good as in the past, what is the Ministry going to do about the possible overall reduction in budget that may even take place in the Defence budget over the years? How do they intend to tackle this rising cost problem, especially in the purchase and use of advanced military technology? On another matter, Sir, there are two ways of achieving peace - harmonious relations through diplomacy and cooperation versus deterrence. The first choice is always the better, as it is less threatening and promotes the spirit of mutual cooperation, understanding and win-win attitude. This is especially happening now in Asia and around the world. In view of the rising trend towards greater economic cooperation and trade pacts, do we still need to continue investing heavily in those latest and most advanced but also highly expensive weapon systems? The truth is that military hardware is expensive and constantly requires costly maintenance. So if we can pursue a strategy of peaceful cooperation and recognise that the threat of traditional warfare is low, should we also not look into reducing our expensive military arms purchase, while focusing more on terrorism-related defence expenditure?”
“Two points. First, many shopping centres recently converted car parks and public spaces into more leasable shop floors. Are there specific rules and proper monitoring on such conversions? What if the conversion seems to block fire hose access points, eg, the one in Basement One of Chua Chu Kang, Lot One Shopping Mall? I have a resident who emailed me to raise this concern as she sees that the fire hose access points are totally covered, blocked by the new to-be-converted shop space and will no longer be visible to the public eye. I hope there will be more ground supervision of fire safety by the authorities as permits are being granted for greater conversion of public spaces into leasable areas in shopping centres. Second, what is the Government's position of tents and promotion booths that are supposed to be temporary but are, in fact, becoming a fixed permanent feature in some shopping centres? Will it become a fire hazard when it becomes especially crowded with shoppers and display of goods on weekends when there are many people who go to the shopping centres? Is fire safety precaution taken when planning for such semi-permanent tents and promotion booths?”
“It is about how a money-losing entity, like the HDB, can accumulate such a huge asset valuation reserve of $8.2 billion. Assoc. Prof. Koo Tsai Kee: Madam, a lot of the capital grant reserves that we see in the HDB Annual Yearbook were acquired over a period of time, many of which belong to the previous governments. HDB is obliged to lock them up. So what you see is not what we can get. It is just a book figure. The HDB cannot spend it because the money belongs to previous governments. Downtown at Marina Bay”
“The Senior Parliamentary Secretary has not answered my question.”
“I thank the Senior Parliamentary Secretary for his answers. He may not have heard me correctly when I said that if the investments are in the HDB subsidiaries, HDB should ask the subsidiaries to return the money back to HDB so as to reduce the overall budget funding for HDB. There are $10 million in quoted shares, $91 million in quoted and unquoted bonds, $33 million in unit trusts and others. That is a lot of money that could be used, instead of sitting in the subsidiaries. As for the rental of the HDB flats, the criteria seem to be so strict that there are a lot of excess empty flats waiting to be given out for subsidised rental. Maybe the criteria are too strict. Am I right to say that? Assoc. Prof. Koo Tsai Kee: Madam, the subsidiaries are doing a good job. They need the working capital and much of the money is not in cash form anymore. They got their investments in equipment or something else. So long as the subsidiaries are doing a useful purpose that fits the mission of HDB, the HDB should not ask them to liquidate their working capital or ask them to sell their assets, so that HDB can recover the cash, because whatever they earn, depending on the shareholding, part of that belongs to HDB.”
“I recall that in Parliament, Mr Mah Bow Tan, Minister for National Development, had said that about 60% of the available flats are not being rented out. So, what is HDB waiting for? It is interesting to note that while the HDB waits to rent out the rental flats, we are losing more than $200 million in accounting loss a year. I thank the Minister in advance for his answer. 6.00 pm Civic Community”
“Madam, in the Budget Command Paper, I read that there is a capital grant of $422 million given to HDB to finance its operating deficit. But according to the HDB's Annual Report, it was also stated that HDB still has investments in bonds and instruments amounting to $150 million, comprising $16 million in investment properties, $10 million in quoted shares, $91 million in quoted and unquoted bonds, $33 million in unit trusts and others. Madam, I do not understand it. Why is HDB asking for $422 million in capital grants to finance its deficit when it still has $150 million in investments? If the investments are held in an investment subsidiary, then the funds should be returned to the HDB so as to reduce the budget funding for HDB and help to reduce the budget deficit. Further, I would like to seek clarification from the Minister on the following two questions: (1) For an entity that lost $773 million in 2003, $997 million in 2002, $952 million in 2001 and received accumulated Government grant of $11.5 billion since 1960, HDB has an equity of capital gains reserve of $4.9 billion and $8.2 billion in asset revaluation reserve. Can the Minister explain how a money losing entity like the HDB can accumulate such a huge reserve? Is it correct for us to assume that the HDB has been selling flats at higher inflated prices than the actual cost price to Singaporeans and then reporting it as a paper loss on the profit and loss statement? Is this how it resulted in an annual transfer of more than $100 million to the asset revaluation reserve and a slightly smaller amount into the capital gains reserve? (2) Loss in rental of flats is similar to upgrading of flats, as reported in the 2002/2003 Annual Report statement.”
“Sir, the current cash card reader on motorcycle is big and bulky and openly subjected to theft of cash card. Many motorcyclists, myself included, as I declare here, are known to have lost many cash cards when they forget to take it out from the reader, after they have parked the motorcycle. Not everyone is born with the talent of good memory and habit of checking for our cash cards before leaving our machine. Bikers should not be financially penalised with loss because of the design system issue or problem. The ERP reader has been in place for almost 10 years since the start of the road pricing. It is high time an alternative to the cash card reader be considered and implemented for motorists to alleviate this problem of stolen cash cards in motorcycles and also smashed windscreens in cars. My suggestion is for LTA to consider the setting up of a system whereby the motorists, whether car drivers or motorcyclists, can sign up for a monthly billing and Giro deduction system. Under such a system, the card reader records the different entries under different ERP gantries and LTA can bill the registered motorists electronically at month-end and receive payment via Giro automatically. I believe this is not a very high-tech nor expensive system and it will greatly reduce the inconvenience that road users have to bear, especially when they forget to insert the card, top up the cash card, hide or lose their cash card or stolen through windscreen breakage. This will also discourage petty theft as there is less opportunity to tempt the thief into stealing and smashing windows for that cash card. I hope the Minister will at least agree to look into this idea before giving his objection. Public Transport for the Disabled”
“This should not be just a matter of good business practice, it should be part of the law of our land to safeguard the public and the investors from the greed of unscrupulous management and CEOs. Totalisator Board Mr Ngiam Tong Dow, our former top civil servant, in a recent public speech, said BG Yeo, as MITA Minister appealed to the Prime Minister concerning the funding for the Esplanade project. The public is now informed that the Prime Minister then decided to bypass official protocol and procedure and decided that the Totalisator Board should finance the capital expenditure of the Esplanade outside the budget, below the line. I would like to ask the Finance Minister: (1) How can the Prime Minister decide on such a matter, considering that he is not in the Ministry of Finance, nor a member of the Totalisator Board? (2) Has the Prime Minister over-stepped his power, position and authority in deciding on this financing matter? (3) Is there genuine transparency and proper accountability from the distinguished board when external influences are brought to affect its decision-making process and expenses, considering especially that the board in effect is acting as an agent of the Ministry of Finance? Its revenue was to be credited to MOF at the end of the financial year. (4) How can such a large expenditure of about $500 million be approved by the decision of one person without passing through Parliament? I hope the Finance Minister can give us a satisfactory explanation of the questions. Statutory Boards”
“Sir, as Singapore aims to become the financial centre of Asia, we must have rules and processes that ensure greater accountability and transparency of corporate activities, especially those of GLCs and public companies listed on the Stock Exchange of Singapore. I propose the Government should look into enacting the equivalent of a Sarbanes-Oxley Act like in the United States. This is to ensure that management undertakes personal responsibility for establishing and maintaining an adequate control structure and procedures for financial reporting. We must ensure that large-scale corporate and accounting scandals like Enron, Tyco and Worldcom, etc, involving any of our listed companies cannot and must not be allowed to take place here. Under such an Act, auditors are required to certify not only the company's financial statements but also the financial processes that produced those statements. This means that auditors must fully understand these processes and believe that they have been executed without variance. All public companies listed on the Stock Exchange (SGX) must also have a compliant reporting mechanism in place that allows employees to report, whether anonymously and confidentially or otherwise, questionable accounting practices, financial misconduct, or suspected illegal activities, directly to the company's audit committee or other company management who has the authority to investigate and discover misconduct or to terminate other employees for such misconduct. Sir, doing everything possible to identify suspected fraud, accounting abuses or other illegal acts not only prevents problems from escalating into legal action, it will also minimise the damage when such illegal acts occur.”
“Sir, I have a point of clarification for the Minister. He said that the Prime Minister's hands should not be tied on the announcement of the election date. Can the Minister give a good reason?”
“Sir, is it very difficult for the Prime Minister to give an assurance or at least a certain timeframe?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I thank the Minister for all his answers except one which is not answered. Will the Prime Minister undertake an assurance that the Electoral Boundary Review Committee's Report will be out for at least four months before he decides for a dissolution of Parliament? We hope not to have a case like the last election where Parliament was dissolved one day after the report was out, but at least we can have an assurance that it would be out for at least four months.”
“On another matter, I would like an update on the training to be given to the 15,000 election officers. How has the training been? And how many have been trained so far? Will parliamentarians be invited to better understand the training process and the new systems to be involved? Electoral Boundary Review Committee I understand from the Hansard that the electoral boundaries are reviewed from time to time, following population shifts arising from housing developments. And that it is a practice of every Electoral Boundary Review Committee to release its report in the form of a White Paper as soon as it is ready. I would like to ask the Prime Minister the following questions: (i) Has the Electoral Boundary Review Committee been constituted? (ii) If not, when does the Prime Minister intend to constitute it? (iii) Will Parliament and the public be informed when the Committee is to be constituted? (iv) Who will be the Committee members? Will any independent persons other than civil servants from the Elections Department be appointed to the Committee? (v) What will be the instructions and mandate to be given to the Committee in carrying out their work? (vi) How long will it take for the Report to be out? (vii) Will the Prime Minister undertake an assurance that the Report will be out for at least four months before he decides to call for the dissolution of Parliament? With these seven questions, I thank the Prime Minister for his answers in advance.”
“Thank you, Sir. Last year, Mr Wong Kan Seng, Minister for Home Affairs, argued persistently that there is no need for an elections commission or for the Elections Department not to be under the Prime Minister's Office. He said that nobody can guarantee that there will be no fraud, no vote rigging or that the system will be free and fair even with an elections committee. Yes, Sir, I agree that we cannot guarantee that there will be no fraud, no rigging, no excesses, etc, even with an independent elections commission. Yes, we may have an Elections Department run by civil servants with high integrity, which is fair and balanced and who may carry out their work objectively and fairly in a transparent manner. But the fact remains that their immediate boss is the Prime Minister who is the leader of the governing political party and their career ladder and rice-bowl are deemed to be at stake if they show signs of great independence or fairness that may disadvantage the bosses' political party. This is unnecessary stress or coercion on the civil servants at the Elections Department. But by having an independent Elections Department, every Singaporean can at least be 100% certain that any accusation about the governing party manipulating or gerrymandering at the electrol process is nonsense and invalid. The person spouting such accusation is talking rubbish. That is more important than saying that nobody can guarantee anything and then refusing to make it an independent entity. As often said, "Justice must not only be done, but seen to be done." I want to add that "Elections must not only be fair, but seen to be fair." Therefore, I will urge the Government to set up an independent Elections Department or commission away from the jurisdiction of the Prime Minister's Office.”
“DPM has not answered my question about having more political openness by increasing the number of single-seat constituencies to let citizens have the benefit of exercising the privilege of citizenship, ie, to vote.”
“They cannot have the privilege of enjoying the best of both worlds when our citizens have only one world to live in. I would also like to ask the Government if there are also any plans to reduce the push factors, pushing our citizens to consider emigration, or plans to increase our pull factors to attract our citizens back. If one of the key privileges of citizenship is the right to exercise our vote at an election, does the Prime Minister hope to allow more citizens to exercise that vote by encouraging greater political competition by making sure that more than 50% of the contested seats at a general election are allocated to single member constituencies? In this way, the special voting privilege of citizenship becomes real, and not just in name only.”
“Sir, at last year's Budget Statement debate, I said, "Singaporeans must have greater privilege than non-citizens so much so that highly talented foreigners will queue to sign up for citizenship, and that membership in Singapore must have its privileges. There must be strong economic and social reasons for Singaporeans to be proud to want to remain as a Singapore citizen." 11.30 am I thank the Government for listening to this plea - to recognise the importance of treating PRs and citizens differently. This will only mean extending greater benefits and privileges to citizens, while reducing the current benefits accorded to PRs. I would like to ask the Government: what are some of the greater incentives to be introduced to make PRs more willing to commit towards citizenship? At the same time, what are some of the disincentives for them to stay on as PRs perpetually? Does the Government realise that many PRs want the best of both worlds, and are not willing to commit towards Singapore citizenship? Permanent residency cannot go on forever. There must be a time limit whereby the PR must be forced to make a hard choice of whether to continue as a citizen or to revert to employment pass. If we do not force the PRs to make a decision, there will never be a decision and they will take it for granted to enjoy the best of both worlds. When a national crisis comes, we will see them take flight in large numbers, and this will actually worsen our national crisis further. I therefore propose that the Government limit the PR term to five years, after which the PR will have to make a considered choice of whether he or she wants to continue to work and enjoy life in Singapore as a citizen, or to revert as an employment pass holder.”
“(3) Give new mothers and young parents six years of maid levy fee waiver, so that they can employ a personal helper to take care of the newborn, them and the house. This is definitely better and more highly valued than having cash or baby bonus incentives. (4) Give outsourcing contracts to ex-staff who become self-employed and work from home, so that they can better take care of their children. They need to be encouraged with contractual work while remaining committed to raising families and children. To conclude, Sir, this is a prudent and mildly expansionary Budget. Overall, the Government remains prudent in its expenditure. This is also expansionary in view of the 2% point cut in corporate tax rate. This Budget will strengthen Singapore's current recovery path. In particular, a lower corporate tax rate will make Singapore an even more competitive business and manufacturing centre. I believe, Sir, with the review that was in place and this Budget that is being put before us, there is more hope for our future. Sir, with this, I support the motion.”
“If citizens are constantly made to feel as a statistic, a burden on Government finance, a stress on future budgets, then citizens do not feel valued and cared for, why then would they want to reproduce their young to suffer the same fate? The correct value system of appreciation must be shown. The Government must not shirk its social responsibility to the citizens for fear of rising subsidies. It is high time that the Government assumed greater responsibility for healthcare and education and stopped talking about subsidies for these essential services. After all, is this not what the taxpayers are paying for? Constantly planning to raise healthcare cost, education cost, transport and living costs while constantly stressing our vulnerability of losing our number one status to competition to our neighbours does not help to build confidence in Singapore's future prospect. If young couples are not confident about the future, how can we expect them to be confident about providing the best for their children? Finally, Sir, I would like to offer some points for the Government's consideration to make living easier and to attract young couples to have children. (1) As some Members have suggested, have a 5-day work week so that young parents will have more time together and with their young children. (2) Encouraging more flexible working schedule for young parents and the ability to do work from home through the use of Internet technologies. This is more beneficial than the six months of maternity leave being considered. As any career-minded woman is concerned, there may be no job left when they return after six months.”
“If holidays are deemed important than the inconveniences of having a baby around, why do they want to have children? If the opportunity cost is high, why do they want to have children? If the dream condominium is still a distant dream, they will totally forget about having children. The Government and the media, as lead influences in our society, have sent us a wrong message all these years: cars, careers, condominium and cash are more important goals in life than having the last "C", ie, children. Only when some or all the other valued items have been attained or will be attained will the idea of starting the next big project "C" get some consideration. By then, it is too late, as most women and couples are past their fertile age. If I may observe correctly, most Ministers and high-income earners often have more than one child, some three, four or five. Why? Is it not because they are happy with their life, existence and achievements? But can we say that of the rest of society, those living in 1-room, 3-room, 4-room HDB flats, especially the young and the ambitious? Many feel like slaves slogging from day to night, short of time, short of money. Life is a constant struggle for many. If so, why do they want to bring another life into this Singapore to suffer their same fate? Their prospect does not look any brighter. If the Government wants our society to reproduce itself, it must send the right and consistent message that strong families with children is as important as anything else. The Government must show that it supports and values its citizens as individuals, and not as a digit and statistic in the production process.”
“This will put less stress on the family, and also help to build stronger three-generational bonds as aged parents can help to take care of the grandchildren, if any. Twelfth, I support the Government in delaying the cut of top-end personal income tax to 20%. There is no hurry to give rich people working in Singapore (earning high income) better treatment. As was said in last year's Budget debate, people who work here and earning good money earn it because the system here allows them to do so. It is the job they are holding on to that pays them well and makes them stay here, not the lower tax rate that attracts them to stay here. Cutting their tax bracket will only make the rich richer, while the middle income get squeezed further. Lastly, I would now like to touch on the procreation issues. Many MPs had addressed many aspects of this issue yesterday. I would now like to add my views. Mr Speaker, Sir, parents here want the best for their children, nothing but the best. And if that is not attainable, they will rather not have any. If we, as citizens, are not happy with our given lot and purpose in living, and that the prospect does not look any brighter, no amount of incentives, childcare subsidy, baby bonus or maternity leave is going to help persuade young couples to have more children. This is especially so for the educated and ambitious ones. Only those with a non-materialistic value system, or living within a strong family community or religious network, will be more persuaded to have children and more. This has all to do with the value system of our society and the young couples. If work and career are valued as more important, then why have children?”
“Therefore, more will go into university and more money is required to subsidise our children's university education. Sir, this is good news and nothing to be frightened of. It is the aspiration of every parent for their children to get into university. It is like participating in the race and the ultimate price is for those parents whose child has been successful in getting a place in the university. Therefore, how can the Government break faith by asking successful parents and students to pay a higher burden of the tuition fee now? This is sending a wrong and conflicting message to parents. On the one hand, the Government wants us to have more children. On the other, it is telling us that the university education fee for the unborn child is going to rise, and not telling us by how much. This promotes uncertainty and will not encourage procreation. The Minister talks about increasing the duration of maternity leave but is totally unmindful of the grievous effect of this announcement on procreation. Eleventh, having adequate money for retirement. Sir, while the policies will help the working generation to plan for retirement for themselves and their families, I want to talk about another issue, that is, to encourage and allow aged parents to rent out their whole flats, even if they have not finished paying their mortgage or have lived there for less than 10 years. This is to allow them to opt to stay with their younger married children, or allowing their children to rent out the whole flat and to stay with the parents. The rental income will help to pay for the mortgage instalment while any excess is extra money for living and retirement planning.”
“Eighth, in the same way, budgets are being set aside in the various Ministries as grants or transfers to statutory boards and other bodies to acquire land and property from the Government. If such grants to the statutory boards for the purchase of Government properties are classified as budget expenditure, then land and property sales revenue should similarly be classified as Government revenue. This is only fair and proper since it is in effect a book-keeping exercise - a transfer from the Government's left hand to its right hand. In this way, the pressure to raise taxes and revenue from the people will be greatly eased, and the Government can afford to be a lot more generous to its citizens, especially to those that do National Service, either in the Armed Forces or in reproducing for our future. Ninth, building a strong society. Sir, what makes a strong society? No doubt, stable families, social cohesion, racial and religious harmony, secure homes and streets make for a stable society and an attractive place to live, work and play. But it is not enough. A strong society is where different members of the society can agree to disagree in a systematic, fair and democratic manner. We are coming along slowly, but it is still a long way to go. Until Singapore has established strong alternative political institutions for the people to have a genuine choice, and the genuine practice of the democratic principle, we are far from being a strong society. In that respect, more efforts have to be made for fair play and upholding the democratic principle. Tenth, concerning the rise of university tuition fees, we are told that the proportion of each cohort entering local universities will rise from 21% to 25% by 2010.”
“There is productivity to be gained that is not achieved yet. If the civil service can afford to suggest six months of maternity leave, it hints that the civil service is not lean and still has fat to trim. There may be excess head count to be considered. Sixth, a small deficit at less than 0.5% of our GDP is nothing to worry about. Depending on how the US economy is expected to perform next year after its Presidential election, the Government should not be too intent to balance the budget by FY05. There may be a greater need to be expansionary if the US economy falters and there is no alternative engine to stimulate growth. The back-to-back deficits should not be a cause for concern - as revenue may turn out to be stronger than projected and past experience has shown that the fiscal position tends to err on the side of caution. The FY04 budget may turn in a smaller deficit, or even a surplus, as revenue and investment returns improve while expenditure is capped. Seventh, the divestment of non-core assets. Sir, money was asked from the budgets in the initial years of Singapore's growth to set up Temasek Holdings, EDB and all the other statutory boards and strategic businesses. Now that some of these businesses and companies are being divested for very handsome and profitable gains, what happens to the money? Where is the money? It should not stay in the books of Temasek or the statutory boards, but should rightfully go back into the Government's revenue calculation as an exceptional item. As an example, thanks to Mr Ooi Hong Leong, the Government made a 110% return on its NatSteel holding in 15 months. All these profits should be channelled back as investment returns to the Government's revenue stream, that is, the budget.”
“A balanced budget, a trim and efficient public service make for steady growth and sound philosophy of governance. This must be encouraged. The Government should slowly reduce its presence in the economy, market and society. The budget, revenue and expenditure should gradually decline in percentage terms with reference to a growing GNP figure. This will put more money in the hands of our citizens to live a more comfortable and balanced life. Fourth, the Minister said that MOF will reduce the Ministries' budgets by a percentage equal to the Productivity Growth Rate (PGR) to encourage Ministries to improve their productivity. Sir, I do not know how the productivity growth rate is calculated. But I am sure that if a Ministry's budget will be cut when their productivity rises, then no Ministry will want to improve on their productivity and see their budgets being cut. I think there is a wrong assumption here. The plan may not work. The Finance Minister may need to warn that he will cut the Minister's and the Ministry's senior officer's salary if productivity does not increase instead. This will put more pressure on the civil service staff to improve on their budgeting and PGR, thereby adding to a reduction in the allocated budget for the Ministry. Fifth, I am happy to hear of the Minister's plan to permanently cut the budgets of almost all Ministries by 2%. Although I had earlier called for a 10% cut at last year's Budget debate, I am still satisfied that the call has been taken up for a 2+2% cut over two years. This will place less burden on the Government to raise revenue from the people. Although some MPs before me are concerned about this 2% cut on the provision of service, I am confident that it is a non-issue as the civil service is not as lean as it could be yet.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker, Sir, for allowing me to participate in this debate. After studying DPM's Budget Statement, I would like to take this opportunity to comment on some of the points addressed in the Minister's speech before moving on to deal with the procreation concerns and how we can help (in our own small way) to build a future of hope and opportunity for Singaporeans and our children. First, the Skills Development Fund. Currently, the SDF's annual expense is $120 million for 600,000 training places. We are told that it is expected to rise by $56 million to $176 million by FY09 for an increase of 166,000 additional training places. A simple calculation shows that it costs around $200 to train a worker currently. However, the training cost per person is expected to go up to $337 for the additional 166,000 persons. This is an additional 68% increase. Can the Minister explain why such a drastic jump in the expected training expense? And will the raised salary ceiling to $1,800 add to any additional business cost? Second, the new category of "S" Pass. Sir, I am sure that this new "S" Pass will definitely increase the supply of skilled manpower from other countries to our various industries. With the job market still stagnant and not growing, I, together with many other Singaporean skilled workers, am concerned that the increased competition from the extra supply of skilled foreign workers, introduced from the "S" Pass, is going to depress wages and salaries further. This will make life harder and tougher for our Singapore workers who are already struggling with CPF and wage cuts. How then to plan for more children? Third, the importance of sound public finance. Sir, I support the Minister's position on maintaining fiscal prudence.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, as I understand it, workers that are vaccinated and called to cull the chickens are currently not protected by any form of financial compensation if they get infected by the Avian flu. Will the Ministry concerned look into financial protection for these workers who are called to do national duty?”
“Sir, four supplementary questions. (1) Can the Minister confirm that our poultry and abattoir workers are covered by the Workmen's Compensation Act against Avian flu, especially when they are called for duty to cull the affected chickens when it happens? (2) Will the SARS Relief Fund also be used to pay out compensation for these workers if they become infected in the process of culling these affected chickens? (3) In view of the rising incidents of animal disease transmission, is it necessary for Singapore to maintain chicken farms, especially considering the dung smell that farms emit to nearby residents after rain? (4) Will those mountain chickens that are found in the wild in Pulau Ubin and the nature reserves also be culled?”
“Sir, in view of the rising importance of Internet e-commerce, should not lower income earners also be allowed to own at most one credit card, even if their income falls below the $30,000 minimum? Would the Minister agree with me that allowing lower income earners to have one credit card with only two times the monthly salary credit line is more prudent than having a minimum $30,000 income criterion but owning many credit cards with many different banks? Should the minimum income qualification not be waived and the maximum amount of cards allowed, based on the income level, be more prudent?”
“Sir, can the Parliamentary Secretary explain what are the common reasons given by employers for non-payment of CPF, and whether these are the acceptable reasons?”
“Sir, in view of the cheaper alternatives sprouting around us, should not the Minister consider cost reduction as the top priority, rather than simply the upgrading and enhancements as detailed? Also, will this upgrading and enhancements add to the cost for the users?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, can the Minister explain why is he not confident that Singapore companies can be the mainstay of our economy? Can the Minister elaborate as to why it cannot be? BG George Yong-Boon Yeo: This is because of the limitation of our size and population base. We are a city-state. We run a big economy which is far beyond what a population base of three million by itself can support. It is like cities such as London and New York. The economies of London and New York cannot be based on the native population of London and New York alone. So, it is the same for Singapore. And we have ambitions far greater than what we by ourselves can sustain on our own. CHANGI AIRPORT (Competitiveness) 5. Mdm Ho Geok Choo asked the Minister for Transport what are some of the new measures and steps that his Ministry is taking to keep Changi Airport a competitive and leading airport in terms of (i) uniqueness; (ii) costs; and (iii) service levels in the midst of growing competition from Asian capitals developing their airhubs and establishing budget airlines.”
“Otherwise, citizens whose beloved family members are in a comatose brain dead condition will feel shortchanged and cheated when the organs of their loved ones are being harvested when they have not completely and fully died. The next-of-kin of a brain dead person should also have the power to decide whether to let go of their brain dead loved ones in such circumstances or to continue sustaining the brain dead using machines, hoping and hoping for a miraculous recovery. Secondly, living organ donors of a kidney or any part of the liver should be Singapore citizens and permanent residents only. They can donate their organs to fellow citizens and permanent residents only and without any form of contractual or monetary transactions. This is because nobody in Singapore should be so poor or be so forced into by circumstances as to have to sell their organs for a living. The second reason is to prevent the creation of a black market for organ trading in the very poor and undeveloped countries where many see selling one of their kidneys as an easy way out of abject poverty. Sir, Singapore has a global reputation to maintain, and we must be seen to maintain our standards of moral integrity and ethical code of conduct. We must not be seen to become a centre for the illegal trading of human organs. Other than the above two concerns for the Health Ministry to address, there is no reason why human organ transplant, especially by willing, living and informed donors, should be prohibited by law. Sir, I support the amendment Bill.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker, Sir, for allowing me to participate in this debate. As an Opposition MP, I rise to speak in support of the Human Organ Transplant (Amendment) Bill. As long as we are medically able and ethically persuaded, there should be no reason why an organ transplant operation should not be allowed to take place either from a willing brain dead person or from a willing living and able donor. The purpose is to save and/or improve the life of another critically and/or terminally ill patient, without which living is misery and death is most certain. However, my only two concerns for the Ministry to look into are as follows: First, all Singaporeans are, by default, organ donors. Yet, they are not educated to understand the implications and consequences of staying put as an organ donor. Many people thought that it is okay to donate their organs when they die. But they do not realise that they would not be fully and completely dead. They are just brain dead, by medical definition. The heart is still pumping and their organs will be harvested when they are actually still breathing. If they had completely died, as their heart had stopped beating, then their organs would have been useless. Sir, all organ donors and their families should be made aware of this fact so that they can better decide if they want to opt out or stay put in this programme. Not enough effort is made to explain this point to our citizens. Even I, as an MP, do not know of this distinction until the Minister explained yesterday. What more of the general public. Since this is an opt out scheme, the Health Ministry should take on this mammoth task to explain the pros and cons of staying in this programme objectively to our citizens.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, can the Minister actually give us an estimated timeframe when the international accreditation from the Malaysian farms would be completed and when can we actually start importing the pigs from Malaysia?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, if a family member is asked to lend his name to help the family in a crisis so that they can actually tide over the loan, how can that be considered as him taking a first bite of the cherry when he has not set up his family in the future?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, can I clarify with the Minister? Where a child's name is added to the list, the child is actually considered as a first-time purchaser and he would not actually qualify for concessionary loans in future if he is getting married and buying another property. Am I correct to say that?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, why can the MOE not issue standardised guidelines for all principals and all schools to follow, instead of having the individual principals in individual schools to decide whether to allow or not to allow? It should have a standardised policy where education is concerned.”
“Sir, does the Minister know that many school students are also very obsessed with the latest handphone models and constantly bug their parents to buy them these expensive latest new MMS models with cameras and whatever? It may not be much for a rich family to buy, but for children from lower-income families, going to school without a mobile phone is actually like being considered an outcast among their peer group, not accepted into the group, and not being kept in the loop of what is happening because they do not receive messages from their friends through the mobile phone. I am wondering whether the Ministry will look into subsidising the students for carrying handphones, by allowing for more students to carry handphones.”
“Sir, recent news reports revealed that at least 15 mobile phones were reported lost or stolen daily. By allowing students to carry mobile phones in school, are we not adding to the number of handphone thefts and robberies happening amongst school students?”
“Question No. 11, Sir. The Minister of State for National Development (Dr Vivian Balakrishnan) (for the Minister for National Development): Mr Speaker, Sir, since the announcement of the Estate Upgrading Programme at Sennett Estate in January 2003, a Working Committee comprising the CCC Advisor, and volunteers from the grassroots organisations, has been formed to gather feedback from the residents on the desired upgrading items. The Working Committee will next be working with the residents, relevant public agencies (ie, LTA, PUB, URA, NParks and SLA), the implementing agent and consultants on the detailed planning and design. It usually takes about 12 to 18 months to do the planning and design, after which work can begin. USE OF MOBILE PHONES BY STUDENTS IN SCHOOLS . 12. Mr Steve Chia Kiah Hong asked the Acting Minister for Education if he will give the rationale for allowing school students to carry mobile phones for use in schools.”
“Sir, the Minister for Education will address part (d) of the Member's question on support programmes in pre-schools to help children acquire the minimum literacy and numeracy skills necessary for Primary 1.”
“It provides a subsidy on top of the existing Government Childcare Subsidy for Working Mothers. Under the CFAC, there is also a one-off assistance of up to $1,000 for low-income families to meet the upfront costs of placing their children in a child care programme. As of 30th September 2003, there were about 2,200 children assisted under the CFAC. For those who prefer to send their children to kindergartens, the Government has also recently introduced the Kindergarten Financial Assistance Scheme (KiFAS) to help low-income families pay for the cost of kindergarten education. The subsidies are targeted at children who are attending kindergartens that have upgraded their programmes to qualify for the Ministry of Education's recurrent grant. KiFAS aims to assist low-income parents offset any fee increases which may arise when better-quality kindergarten programmes are implemented. Application for the 2004 kindergarten intake has commenced in October 2003 and about 3,500 applications have been received so far. The Member also asked about the number of children who dropped out of pre-school in 2003. Children leave their pre-school centres for various reasons. A child who leaves one centre may subsequently be enrolled in another pre-school centre. Both MOE and MCDS do not have data on children who "drop out" of pre-school as requested by the Member. However, for child care centres, centre supervisors will refer cases of children who may have to leave child care due to financial reasons to the CDCs for financial support so that they can remain in child care or be referred to Family Service Centres for other social services.”
“Travellers can call the traffic information hotlines or listen in to TrafficWatch on the radio to find out the latest traffic conditions at the Woodlands and Tuas Checkpoints. PRE-SCHOOL EDUCATION CLASSES 9. Ms Braema Mathiaparanam asked the Minister for Community Development and Sports (a) what is the ratio of teachers to pupils in pre-school education classes; (b) how many children received financial assistance in 2003; (c) how many children dropped out of pre-school classes in 2003; and (d) what are the support programmes in pre-school classes to help children acquire the minimum literacy and numeracy skills necessary for Primary 1. Assoc. Prof. Dr Yaacob Ibrahim: Mr Speaker, Sir, pre-school children may attend child care centres licensed by MCDS or kindergarten programmes registered with MOE. The ratio of teachers to children in child care centres would depend on the age-group of the children. This ranges from having one teacher caring for five children for those below 18 months, and one teacher caring for a maximum of 25 children for those above four years of age. For kindergartens registered with MOE, the recommended teacher-pupil ratios are one teacher to 20 K1 children and one teacher to 25 K2 children. The Government recognises the importance of pre-school programmes in preparing children for primary school and that lower income families need additional financial assistance so that their children can benefit from such programmes. Children from needy families are eligible for subsidies through the Centre-Based Financial Assistance Scheme for Child Care (CFAC). This scheme enables young children from low-income families to benefit from quality developmental programmes at child care centres.”
“Question No. 8, Sir. Assoc. Prof. Ho Peng Kee (for the Minister for Home Affairs): Sir, our checkpoints safeguard our safety and security. Since September 2001, security checks at all our checkpoints have been stepped up to prevent the entry of undesirable persons, weapons and explosives. While these checks have initially caused some congestion at our checkpoints, the situation has gradually improved, as we adjusted and fine-tuned the system. Travellers are cleared as quickly as possible. However, it is inevitable that there may still be some inconvenience during peak hours when the traffic builds up. The resulting inconvenience is a small price to pay to ensure Singapore's security. The clearance time is not lengthened because of lack of supervision. It is the result of the sheer number of travellers. Let me assure Mr Chiam that ICA closely monitors traffic conditions at the checkpoints. During periods when traffic is particularly heavy, ICA opens up more clearance counters. All available manpower is deployed to clear the congestion. For example, if there is a build up of bus passengers, more officers will be deployed to the bus arrival hall to clear the passengers. In addition, ICA has staggered the shifts of its officers to better accommodate the traffic patterns. ICA can also call upon off-duty officers to return to help during times when there is an unexpectedly heavy volume of travellers. To further speed up baggage screening, ICA has just installed an additional x-ray machine at the bus arrival hall. Travellers can play their part by adjusting their travel plans to avoid peak periods where possible.”