Sylvia Lim
Singapore
“Thank you, Speaker. I have a supplementary question for Senior Minister of State on PF. It was pointed out in the FATF report that representatives of foreign flag states have a very low understanding of their PF obligations.”
“Thank you Speaker. I have noted what the Minister is proposing that the House do. I am not standing up to object to it. But I think it is important for me to also state that my response on some of the issues that she mentioned, I have made them on 14 January during the debate on the Motion of the Leader of the Opposition, and I do not thi…”
“Thank you, Speaker. A clarification for the Minister. I think it is quite clear that we are not denying that services were provided and residents had benefited from the services. I also would say that we do appreciate that MND did this internal review to undercover this problem, if I can say that.”
“Thank you, Speaker. I have one clarification for the Senior Parliamentary Secretary, and that is on the necessity for the retrospective legislation.”
“Sir, regardless of which country may have primary jurisdiction over a particular case, both governments may feel pressured to retain cases involving their own nationals. This could be for various reasons, such as the differences in law and punishments or to give their nationals better access to justice in their home countries.”
“One clarification for the Minister. This is in relation to when Singapore may have to give up its primary jurisdiction to Malaysia to investigate incidents and particularly on clause 39(2).”
The complete record
Every one of 1,794 lines we hold for Sylvia Lim, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 21 of 36.
“The gentleman was so traumatised by the incident that he did not return to work. I do not know whether this gentleman's experience is an isolated incident or not. However, it raises the issue of how civilians are recruited and trained before they are deployed to face the public. Even though such law enforcement has been outsourced to CERTIS, these civilians are exercising law enforcement powers and will affect the public. What role does the Government play in ensuring that such personnel are properly chosen and trained? What oversight role does the Government have? Manpower for the Home Team”
“For this industry, only Singaporeans, Permanent Residents and Malaysians are eligible to apply. In our daily encounters with Auxiliary Police, we see a large presence of Malaysians in CERTIS and AETOS uniforms. During the Little India riot, quite a number of Auxiliary Police at the scene were Malaysians. What is the current proportion of Malaysians out of the total Police strength in these two Auxiliary Police Forces? Does the Government have any guidelines on the ratio of Malaysians to Singaporeans? One officer recently told me that the ratio allowed is five Malaysians to one Singaporean and I wonder if that is true. Are there guidelines on any duty or assignments which must be done only by Singaporeans? For example, at the immigration checkpoints, are there Malaysians checking their fellow Malaysians, and what would the risk there be? Lastly, I come to the civilian personnel being recruited to do law enforcement on behalf of certain statutory boards. I understand that CERTIS CISCO is the outsourced agent to do enforcement of traffic violations on behalf of LTA and URA. CERTIS has been recruiting many civilians for such tasks. Recently, I came across one such recruit, an elderly gentleman around 60 and not in good health. According to him, he attended the recruitment interview and specifically requested that he be posted to do enforcement only for URA carpark violations as he assessed that there was less risk of confrontation with members of the public as compared with LTA traffic violations. To his surprise, the next day, he was deployed to a team to do enforcement of LTA violations. His worst fears were realised when there was, indeed, a confrontation with an irate motorist booked by his team who apparently chased after the enforcement team to dispute the booking.”
“Under this outcome, the stated KPIs all relate to the legitimacy of inflows, for example, the number of offences detected and unauthorised vessels intercepted. There are no measures for the efficiency of flows. Would the Ministry be brave enough to introduce a measure of efficiency, for example, set a desired time limit within which to process an individual or vehicle through Woodlands or Tuas Checkpoint? One final desired outcome to highlight is the secure and humane custody of prisoners. Again, the indicators emphasised on the security aspect only, for example, number of escapes, number of assault cases. What about measuring humane custody, which is equally important? Manpower for Security/Enforcement Next, I move on to manpower for security and enforcement. My cut is on manpower not just in our law enforcement agencies. It also covers the Auxiliary Police and civilian personnel doing law enforcement on behalf of some statutory boards, such as Land Transport Authority (LTA) and Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA). As far as our State law enforcement agencies are concerned, much has already been said in recent years about the challenges faced by the Singapore Police Force (SPF). Currently, SPF is functioning at probably a very low police officer to population ratio of 170 officers per 100,000 population, and it is trying to leverage on technology, outsourcing and civilianising jobs to cope. Page: 49 What about the other law enforcement agencies, such as the Singapore Civil Defence Force, Central Narcotics Bureau (CNB) and the Singapore Prison Service? Do they face similar manpower challenges and how are they coping with them? Next, I move on to the Auxiliary Police Forces, particularly CERTIS CISCO and AETOS, who are deployed islandwide.”
“Madam, first, the Ministry has set out its Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) in the Budget documents. I would like to highlight and comment on a few of them for the Ministry to review in future. First, the Home Team has a desired outcome of a safe and secure society where lives and property are protected. One of the KPIs is the number of overall crimes per 100,000 population. I would caution that this figure simply reflects the incidence of crimes reported to and recorded by the Police. It does not tell us about crimes that were not reported and it has been found in other countries that reporting rates are especially low for sexual assault and crimes committed by someone the victim knew well. Vulnerable groups, such as foreign workers, victims of domestic abuse and others, may be reluctant to seek Police help due to fear of repatriation, retaliation or distrust of the Police. Official crime rates are also influenced by how the Police may reclassify cases. Furthermore, crime rates cannot be attributed to the Police alone. While Police action can reduce certain types of crime, other crimes are not preventable by Police actions and are a product of social and economic forces. If the Ministry wishes to have a more accurate picture of the crime situation in Singapore, there needs to be an attempt to uncover unreported crime. This is done in other countries through national victimisation surveys, such as the British Crime Survey, where the population is asked about their experience with crime. Such a population survey should also cover why the crime victims did not report to the Police, thus helping the Police address any service gaps. Another desired outcome of the Ministry is secure borders with efficient and legitimate flow of people, goods and conveyances.”
“Thank you, Madam. I have one clarification for the Finance Minister. Earlier, in his round-up speech, he acknowledged that Singaporeans are worried about their jobs, and he mentioned that the Government was reviewing how it could better support people who lose their jobs through some difficulties, including perhaps reviewing the retrenchment benefits. I would like to ask the Minister whether this review would also include looking into the feasibility of some sort of redundancy insurance.”
“As pointed out by the panellists at the Economic Society of Singapore post-Budget roundtable, better cushions for the unemployed will also encourage more people to venture out on their own and become entrepreneurs, an essential element of an innovative society. Madam, economic restructuring and downturns from time to time will result in redundancies. It is also inevitable that if we succeed in our productivity and automation drives, people will be displaced from their jobs. We should devise a feasible scheme to tide our fellow citizens through these difficulties.”
“Page: 63 In this economic transition, there are hardworking Singaporeans and their families being pushed into limbo. As a society, we should devise some safety nets to give them some peace of mind. To this end, the Government should look into the feasibility of introducing redundancy insurance. One model could involve requiring workers resident in Singapore and their employers to each contribute a very small percentage of the employee's monthly salaries towards a fund. The fund should be geared towards helping workers who undergo involuntary unemployment, meaning those who are made redundant, including those terminated with notice. The fund could gear towards giving a six-month payout at a fraction of the worker's last drawn salary, say, 40%, subject to a cap, say, based on the median wage. Such a modest scheme of limited payouts which end after six months will send a clear signal that only a temporary buffer is being provided, incentivising the worker to actively prepare to earn his own income again. Madam, such redundancy insurance has benefits for both the individual and society. For the individual, he would seriously have recourse to this buffer which he contributed to. He may not need to queue up at the social assistance agency and tap on public monies. He also need not grab the first job opportunity that comes along but be able to take a bit of time to hold out for a suitable job, enabling a better employee-to-job-fit and sustainability. Madam, this Budget emphasises the need for innovation which, in turn, requires people to feel secure.”
“Secondly, the Government, in time, should go beyond this to look into a substantive measure of underemployment and publish that. For example, employment income versus the median income for that academic qualification and age, or versus the previous employment income. This will give some idea of the extent to which people are downgrading expectations and taking up jobs that are below reasonable labour market expectations just to make ends meet. Madam, I believe that such additional measures will enable us to understand better the underemployment facing Singaporeans so that appropriate policies and mitigation measures can be put in place. Coming back to the Budget measures, what does this Budget do for workers who lose their jobs? There is an Adapt and Grow Initiative and the TechSkills Accelerator. Adapt and Grow is stated to be targeted at those who face greater difficulty in finding jobs and for mid-career jobseekers. The emphasis is on inducing employers to hire through wage support to the employers and on retraining and job matching assistance. These are certainly laudable, but it may take some time before the job seeker is able to find meaningful employment, through no fault of his own. As for TechSkills Accelerator, it is not clear whether it is meant only for those already from the information and communications technology (ICT) sector or has a broader catchment. However, it is very ambitious. I concede that I am no ICT professional, but TechSkills Accelerator assumes that technical skills learning can be accelerated. For simple level skills, that might be the case, but for specialised knowledge, I can imagine that it would take years of experience to master, just like other professions, say, engineering or law.”
“ILO noted that many countries were facing changes in the employment situation, labour market flexibility and the rise of various forms of non-standard employment. Thus, new situations have emerged that can be regarded as under-employment. According to the 16th International Conference of Labour Statisticians, underemployment reflects an under-utilisation of the productive capacity of the employed population. Measuring under-employment usually starts off with time-related measures, namely, the hours worked versus the hours that the employee could be available and willing to work. We note that the Government has been putting up some statistics on time-related underemployment in its Labour Force Reports. While looking at underemployment based on time is certainly useful, it does not present the full picture. Returning to the general manager example, the fact that he works five hours a week, as compared to a full 50-hour week, is one indicator. But it is also relevant to consider whether he is now drawing a pay at a rate below what is commensurate with his qualifications and experience. A person's earning potential is just as relevant as the hours spent at work. In order for us to better understand the phenomenon of underemployment in Singapore, I call on the Government to do the following. First, the Government can use the existing data it already collects and publish headline numbers showing not just unemployment, the headline numbers should include time-based underemployment and the numbers of demoralised workers, meaning those who have given up looking for work and, hence, dropped out of the unemployment statistics. Putting these three measures in headline numbers will ensure that public attention will be focused on these.”
“If a job seeker is unable to find work and decides to give up the job search or to go into training, he is not considered unemployed. In addition, a person is considered employed in Singapore so long as he has worked for just one hour in the period in question. Thus, a general manager who loses his job and works just five hours a week at a fast food chain counter is considered employed and off the unemployment statistics. Clearly, the plight of this general manager deserves attention. One of my residents recently shared with me his worries about employment in security. Some of his friends in their early 40s had recently lost their jobs. They had decided to dumb down their expectations and found jobs in other industries, but the reduced pay was insufficient to meet their commitments, leaving some of them to become Uber taxi drivers to supplement their income. Such persons are not captured in our statistics. But are these displaced workers not worthy of attention? What stress befalls a breadwinner who loses his job at a stage of life when he has to support children or elderly parents, service a mortgage and more? These stresses, in turn, have ripple effects on the quality of family life and the ability of children to concentrate on their studies. Madam, it is time for the Government to put in more efforts to measure underemployment. Unlike unemployment, which refers to the extreme situation of a total lack of work, measuring underemployment will indicate to what extent a person is suffering from a partial lack of work. According to the International Labour Organization (ILO), measuring underemployment is Page: 62 increasingly relevant for industrialised countries.”
“Mdm Speaker, the focus of my speech today is on understanding and addressing employment insecurity. Madam, this year's Budget Statement acknowledges that businesses are facing difficult and uncertain conditions. To this end, we see a continuation of some existing schemes to support businesses, such as the Wage Credit Scheme and an extension of the SEC which provides a modest offset for wages paid to Singaporeans. These measures benefit employers and employees still on the payroll. The painful reality is that there is a significant proportion of Singaporeans who have lost their jobs or are at risk of losing their jobs. What is the size of this problem? The Minister said that unemployment remained low at 1.9%, but this percentage included foreigners in the computation. What about unemployment among Singaporeans? According to the Labour Market Report issued by MOM last month, unemployment among Singaporeans rose to 3% in December, meaning that more than 58,000 Singapore Citizens were out of work. As for long-term unemployment among residents, for those who have been searching for work for more than 25 weeks, for the whole of 2015, there were 12,700 residents in this predicament. The report further noted that among those made redundant and sought to re-enter the workforce, only about half of them were able to do so within six months. These figures paint a worrying picture but, in all likelihood, under-represent the problem. This is due to the definitions adopted in compiling the data. While the definitions used are in line with international norms, it is useful to elaborate briefly why unemployment statistics likely under-represent the employment landscape. First, a person is considered unemployed only if he is out of work and actively searching for work.”
“Currently, section 34 of the Act provides for the PG to make annual reports to the Minister about the discharge of his duties, and I believe these reports are uploaded on the website of the OPG. Clause 12 repeals this provision totally, which suggests that the PG need not produce annual reports anymore. Could the Ministry explain why this section is being repealed? How would this affect the public accountability of the PG? 5.34 pm”
“Nevertheless, my view is that it is good to ensure that the donor is always asked whether he wants someone to be notified so that he will direct his mind to that question specifically. If this is adopted, we will still be respecting the donor's wishes – he can decide whether he wants to notify someone else or not. Madam, next, Court-appointed deputies. I next move on to deputies who may need to be appointed by the Court after a person has become mentally incapacitated. Their concern is about the legal cost associated with such applications. The estimated legal cost for such applications is about $6,000 to $7,000 even in the clearest of cases. For instance, parents of mentally-incapacitated children need a Court Order to act for their children once they attain adulthood. It is clear that these parents will continue to care for their children with or without a Court Order. At last year's Committee of Supply debate, we were told that the Ministry would work with the Court to simplify the process and improve the accessibility of the Court processes and also to reduce the cost to make it easier for the families. It was reported in March last year that there was a pilot project involving law students which enabled costs of such applications to be brought down to about $250. In January this year, the Ministry said it was still working with the Family Justice Courts and MINDS on how to simplify the paperwork and process in such cases. This review has been going on for many months already. Is the Ministry able to confirm or estimate when this review will be completed? Lastly, Madam, accountability of the PG. Earlier, the Minister explained the rationale for clause 11, on why the Public Guardian Board was being abolished. I have a question about clause 12.”
“However, currently, all that is needed is for a standard form to be filled up by the person and issued by a doctor or lawyer who may not have any prior knowledge of the person or his circumstances. To illustrate, I am told that under a well-intentioned ground initiative, large groups of heartland residents were organised to make LPAs at the Ministry issued by persons who had not met them before. Earlier, the Minister mentioned that the LPA Information Sheet is being amended to encourage donors to inform loved ones of the making of the LPA. I would like to ask if the default LPA form could retain a question asking the donor if he wishes to notify another person about the making of the LPA. Under the original MCA framework, if the donor named another person to be notified for the making of the LPA, the named person would have an opportunity to object to the registration of the LPA. The objection would then need to be assessed by the PG or the Court before the LPA can be registered. Such a regime would enable LPAs granted in controversial circumstances to be flagged out early before the LPAs take effect. This potentially prevents the registration of unsound LPAs before the donee takes charge of the properties of the donor. Moreover, the objection to the registration of the LPA will likely be made when the donor is still mentally lucid and can give invaluable assistance to the PG or the Court to determine if the LPA should be registered or not. Madam, this option to notify a named person was removed from the default LPA form in 2014. From what I gather, the Government did not see the need to retain this feature as it was always open to the donor to notify someone if he wished to.”
“Mdm Speaker, the Bill enhances the regime of the Mental Capacity Act passed in 2008. The Bill will allow professionals to become donees and the Court-appointed deputies under the Act. It also gives the Court additional powers to manage cases where a donee's or a deputy's powers may need to be revoked, restricted or suspended. While I support the rationale for the Bill, I wish to raise three concerns: first, regarding early intervention in problematic LPAs; secondly, about the process for parents of disabled children to be Court-appointed deputies; and, thirdly, to seek a clarification on the changes regarding the accountability of the PG. First, early intervention in problematic LPAs. While the benefits of LPAs are clear, the risks have also been painfully clear in recent years. Vulnerable persons may sign away their rights to property to persons who have unduly influenced them. Besides the well-publicised case involving a wealthy widow, which Minister mentioned earlier, I have received feedback from residents concerned that a family member may have appointed someone outside the family as his attorney. In these cases, it is foreseeable that some time down the road, when the LPA is activated due to mental incapacity, the attorney and the family may have disagreements and disputes over how the person should be cared for or his properties dealt with. I am not saying that a person is not entitled to appoint someone outside the family as an attorney. Indeed, I totally agree that there may be very good reasons why a person may not want a family member to be his attorney and may not want the family to know of such an appointment.”
“Mdm Speaker, one final clarification for the Senior Minister of State. Based on the figures she cited earlier, the 71,000 being investigated, after we deduct the 43,000 where the claims were rejected prior to payout, and the 1,470 where they were clawed back after payout, does this mean that there were more than 26,000 cases where payout has been made, but clawback has not been achieved, as yet?”
“Madam, three supplementary questions for the Senior Minister of State. I am sorry, the figures were too much for me to remember, but I wonder if the Senior Minister of State could clarify, out of the applications made for cash payouts, how many percent of the claims were rejected before payout and how many needed to be clawed back after payout? If the Senior Minister of State could give us a sense of that distinction. Secondly, I wonder if the Ministry, in hindsight, thinks that it perhaps had been too lax in its approval procedures since now we are faced with having to claw back after payout, and whether IRAS would review the approval process to tighten this up. Thirdly, I understand that IRAS has prosecuted some people in Court for PIC fraud and there are also some cases pending prosecution as well. From the IRAS website, the cases that were reported as prosecuted appeared to involve the grant recipients. We understand that, of course, many of the grant recipients relied on consultants who provided them, as it seems, dubious advice. So, I would like the Ministry to clarify are there cases actually involving consultants that have been prosecuted or are being prosecuted, and, if so, how many of them.”
“I just have one clarification for the Senior Minister of State who mentioned in his round-up speech that each request will be assessed carefully and we may need to work with the foreign agency over a period of time to gain confidence in their capacity to fulfil the obligations. I would like him to clarify whether this ongoing process applies also to our ASEAN counterparts or has that already been finalised and it is quite clear that we are confident that we can share information with our ASEAN counterparts without needing to go through this because it has been done earlier.”
“With this backdrop, I would have presumed that if a request for register information came from an ASEAN country, it would be contrary to ASEAN integration to reject the request. Given the different stages of development among ASEAN countries and each country's institutions, what has been done or is being done to ensure that ASEAN countries can, indeed, share crime information with one another, with the confidence that the information will be safeguarded and not abused?”
“"Foreign law enforcement agency" is defined to include agencies in countries that are members of INTERPOL as well as those that are not. INTERPOL itself consists of 190 member countries, practically all the nations on earth. Madam, there is a vast disparity worldwide in the effectiveness of governments, the strength of a country's institutions and state agencies, and levels of corruption. How will the Government go about ascertaining whether a requesting country can fulfil the obligations we expect of them under the Bill? Earlier, in the opening speech, the Senior Minister of State referred to INTERPOL rules, but my question is: how do we know whether these countries can actually fulfil these rules that they have signed up to? And will we take their word for it, or will more be done to ascertain for ourselves? Indeed, Madam, according to the proposed section 13I(3), the Government actually foresees that a receiving country may breach an undertaking given, and this is rather worrying. Madam, on a related note, the international cooperation envisaged by this Bill will touch on our regional responsibility as a member state of ASEAN. In line with greater ASEAN integration, there have been discussions amongst ASEAN country Ministers about the need for cooperation to combat transnational crime. Transnational crime in ASEAN is understood to refer to drug trafficking, terrorism, economic crimes, human trafficking, money laundering, piracy, weapon smuggling and cybercrime and, since 2015, includes illicit trafficking of wildlife and timber, and people smuggling. Last year, Singapore signed up to the Kuala Lumpur Declaration on Combating Transnational Crime, which calls for a new ASEAN Plan of Action to Combat Transnational Crime and greater information sharing.”
“Mdm Speaker, I am generally supportive of the Bill. However, I wish to raise some concerns about clause 4 which relates to the furnishing of information on our Register of Criminals to foreign law enforcement agencies. Madam, we can certainly agree about the importance of sharing of information with foreign law enforcement agencies to prevent and solve crimes, just as we would value their sharing of information with us. To this end, clause 4 enables a Singapore-designated authority to share with a foreign law enforcement agency information about an individual recorded on our Register of Criminals. I have noted that clause 4 details safeguards that the Singapore-designated authority should adhere to before deciding to release any information to the foreign law enforcement agency. Such safeguards include requiring the foreign agency to give an undertaking in relation to the retention, use and destruction of the register information. The foreign agency must also undertake that Page: 78 information received from Singapore will be kept and maintained using such methods and technologies that will ensure that unauthorised persons cannot access the information and that the information will not be used for ulterior purposes. It all sounds very good on paper. My question is: to what extent will we exercise due diligence to verify whether the foreign agency requesting the information is able to fulfil the conditions we have set, before we furnish the information requested? According to the proposed section 13I(4)(6) of the Bill, the Government intends to be able to share information with potentially all countries in the world, since it defines "foreign law enforcement agency" very broadly.”
“Madam, could the Minister answer my question about future NDPs, whether there is an expectation that we will go back to the Sports Hub and what is expected to be paid? That was in the Parliamentary Question I filed.”
“Madam, supplementary questions for the Minister. The Minister mentioned that the 15% is a figure. So, I would like him to confirm that what he is saying is that the rental cost of the Sports Hub is calculated to be under $6 million. The next question is: will the detailed figures be provided in the Government Budget in the coming Budget for 2016 in terms of the itemised costs for MINDEF? The third question is: the Minister mentioned in his speech that public expectations have risen since the SG50 NDP. In last year's Budget, we were told by the Government that extra expenditure was expected for NDP 2015 because it was the SG50 year. So, I would like to ask the Minister whether it is actually not correct or not justifiable for the Government to proceed on the basis that SG50 is a benchmark for future parades in non-milestone years. The last question is: the Minister did not quite answer my question about the dispute resolution under the public-private partnership (PPP). Is he able to give a more detailed answer about how disputes will be resolved under the agreement?”
“Mdm Speaker, supplementary questions for the Minister. The first supplementary question is: the Minister mentioned that for NDP 2016, the venue cost would be about 15% of the infrastructure cost, if I heard him correctly. Could he specify in dollar terms, how much would the rental of the Sports Hub cost? For the second question, Madam, we understand that the agreement between the Government and the Sports Hub allows the Ministry of Defence (MINDEF) to use the Sports Hub for 45 days free of charge each year. My question is: did the Government foresee that it would be holding the NDP at the Sports Hub? Next, why were only 45 days provided for when we understand that the average number of days needed for the NDP is closer to about 80 days? Third, is there any dispute resolution mechanism provided for under the public-private partnership between the Government and the Sports Hub over the use of the Hub?”
“Madam, we ask for our dissent to be recorded.”
“We would like our dissent recorded, Madam.”
“Madam, lately the PAP has sought to downplay the effect of the 2011 GE and insisted that it has started reviewing its policies since 2006. However, Singaporeans could not have helped noticing the slew of palpable changes in many unpopular policies after the 2011 GE, including the slaughtering of some sacred cows. These included reviewing benchmarking Ministerial salaries to top private sector earners, delinking prices of BTO flats from market transactions and putting Government monies into acquiring buses for the use of public transport operators. Madam, Singaporeans should pat themselves on the back for sending the Government a strong signal in 2011 that they were not satisfied with some aspects of the PAP's governance. In 2013, the PAP lost Punggol East SMC to the Workers' Party, the second blow in two years that made them quicken the pace of change. Singaporeans forced the PAP to review their policies, at the risk of losing more ground. Madam, in our system where the PAP is so strongly entrenched, Singaporeans must always remember that their vote is the loudest check of all. Madam, do we want a system where Opposition Members only get to debate? If Opposition Members do not manage constituencies, they would not be able to demonstrate that they, too, were up to the task of representing their constituents, building vibrant communities, and, yes, running the Town Councils. Should the Ruling party decay or become corrupt, it would be too late to look around for any other party with ground experience, as there may well be none. Madam, even as we move this Motion, we are under no illusion that NCMPs can replace the check and bargaining power the people have with elected Opposition Members in Parliament. Madam, I urge the House to support the Motion.”
“Because what I had said was that the scheme was overall supportable in the context of GRCs and gerrymandering that has been taking place in our political system, which I think I do not have to elaborate on. And I mentioned in Parliament that the Prime Minister was trying to make a bad situation better. But the NCMP scheme is not the way forward to make the system more robust. And that was why the Workers' Party voted against the Constitutional amendment in 2010. Madam, it would be a dangerous day indeed if Singapore was to function on the basis that all that was needed for good politics was the NCMP scheme. Entrenching the NCMP scheme as good politics sends the wrong signal. To Singaporeans, the signal being sent is having Opposition voices is enough. It is not. Madam, the most effective check and balance on the Government is the prospect of, and, in fact, the actual loss of constituency seats. Madam, Singaporeans would remember what happened after the 2011 GE five years ago. At that election, the PAP faced a national swing that reduced its vote share to 60% and the first loss of a GRC. At the post-election press conference, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong was in a sombre mood. He reflected that Singaporeans were concerned with various issues such as the cost of living and housing, education and healthcare, and also with the PAP's approach to Government. Prime Minister Lee pledged that the PAP would "analyse the results, learn from what has emerged, put right what is wrong, improve what can be made better, and also improve ourselves to serve Singaporeans better." Madam, last year at the state funeral of Mr Lee Kuan Yew, we even learnt that the Prime Minister went into meditation after the 2011 GE.”
“The Party had earlier announced that should Parliament declare the vacancy and resolve that it be filled, Assoc Prof Daniel Goh would fill the seat. Madam, earlier, Mr Charles Chong referred to the legal framework and suggested that we all should follow the legal framework and abide by it in our decisions on NCMP. Madam, there is actually precedent for Parliament to fill an NCMP vacancy. The only time this arose previously was after the 1984 General Election, when it was the Government itself that moved the Motion to fill the vacancy. At that election, the Workers' Party candidate, Mr MPD Nair was offered an NCMP seat, having narrowly lost the contest in Jalan Kayu by 571 votes, out of about 23, 400. When Mr MPD Nair did not subscribe to the oath of allegiance in the first two Sittings of Parliament, then Leader of the House, Mr S Dhanabalan moved the Motion to declare the seat vacant and to have it filled by the next succeeding candidate. So, Madam, the Government itself condones the filling of a vacancy when an NCMP does not take up the seat or as Mr Charles Chong and Er Dr Lee had said, the Government condones the "transfer of NCMP seats". No by-election was held in that instance to fill the seat. Madam, the NCMP scheme was put in place by the governing party and Workers' Party cannot change it. We are moving this Motion today because the Constitution provides for it. We also recognise that the Workers' Party can make a contribution to the nation this way. Madam, earlier, Er Dr Lee Bee Wah commented on some of my earlier comments about the NCMP scheme, and I would suggest that she reads my comments in totality.”
“Mdm Speaker, I rise in support of the Motion. Madam, I was an NCMP from 2006 to 2011 and I wish to share my perspective on this Motion which will determine if the House will have another NCMP or not. First, Madam, let me refer to Member Charles Chong's earlier speech where he made some comments about being disappointed that Ms Lee Li Lian would not take up the seat and how Punggol East residents would be disappointed. Madam, I can fully understand why Ms Lee Li Lian did not want to take up the NCMP seat offered to her after the general election. She has explained her decision publicly. The first and most important reason, she cited, was that she had been the incumbent Member of Parliament in Punggol East SMC for two and a half years, and had to respect the voters' collective decision not to re-elect her. In other words, she had the mandate of the voters of the constituency but it had been lost. Madam, if an incumbent Member of Parliament who had served the constituency, was just defeated and yet returned to Parliament as an NCMP, it might be deemed undemocratic. And Madam, contrary to what Mr Charles Chong had earlier said, the Party did not support Ms Lee's decision because we "want to swop candidates". We respect her decision that she was the incumbent Member of Parliament who had lost and she wanted to give due respect to the voters' collective decision not to re-elect her. That is the critical difference, Madam. Personally, if I had been in her shoes, I would have done the same. Madam, the Workers' Party is proposing that the vacancy be filled by the next succeeding candidate in accordance with the Parliamentary Elections Act. The next succeeding candidate would be one of the team-mates of NCMP Leon Perera from the East Coast GRC team.”
“Thank you, Madam, a clarification for the Parliamentary Secretary. He spoke in his speech about leadership of sports groups and also referred to what I had said earlier. I am glad to hear his confirmation for the association where the Government is nominating all the council members, in other words, in the Football Association of Singapore, that that is being changed and now they would have an election. But, of course, he brought up the bigger point about leadership in other sports associations and he pointed out that many of them who are led by non-politicians are actually doing very well. I wonder if the Government thinks it is actually better for politicians to refrain from going into contest in these sports associations. After all, we have enough talent in the sporting fraternity and I am not doubting the sincerity of the PAP Members who have gone into certain sports associations, but the bigger point is: is it not better to build a stronger sporting leadership and for politicians actually to sort of step back and let others take the lead and they can always support in other ways?”
“Madam, would the Member not agree that if a non-incumbent person, meaning not the incumbent Member of Parliament – besides if you are not a grassroots leader as well, under the People's Association – if you try to organise any activities in an area where you have no locus standi, you will need permission from other authorities to have the space to run those activities?”
“Madam, just to clarify on the Member's most recent exposition, did he say that NCMPs have the same capacity to grow their roots in the constituency that they are contesting? Was that what he said?”
“Yes, Madam, thank you. Madam, Mr Low is not in the Chamber, so I would like to clarify with Mr Tong on part of his speech. I am not sure whether I heard Mr Tong correctly, but was he trying to imply that the Workers' Party is arguing for NCMPs to be on equal standing with elected Members? Because from what I understood from what Mr Low said, basically, he was making the point that they are not the same. And speaking for myself as a former NCMP, I can say definitively that while yes, we are in the Chamber to contribute to debates, but it can never be the same as being an elected Member representing constituents.”
“So sorry, Madam. Just a small clarification for the Member Mr Ong. He mentioned the swimmer who got deferment from National Service. Quah Ting Wen, I believe, is a lady. I wonder whether he is referring to her brother.”
“Thank you, Madam. I have one supplementary question for the Minister concerning source eradication. We have some residents living in private estates who may be living adjacent or near to private land which is unoccupied. I would like to ask what is NEA's response in such matters; as in, how far does NEA go to follow up to do checks within such premises, whether with or without the owners' consent, and is it a check on 100% of such premises or is it based on complaints?”
“Thank you, Madam. I have two supplementary questions for the Senior Minister of State. First, he mentioned earlier, of course, the threat of self-radicalised terrorists but he did not elaborate in his answer very much about the Government's strategies to counter that. So, I wonder if he could share with us what the Government is doing in that area. For example, is it making a concerted attempt to block, for example, dangerous Internet sites from being accessible from here? Secondly, relating to security of people coming into Singapore via the air or sea checkpoints, could the Senior Minister of State explain whether there are enhanced measures as in additional checks on passengers coming in on a random basis, or are there more intensive checks based on certain risk criteria?”
“To this end, the Government should re-examine and reduce its presence in matters that are not core government functions. For a start, a lot of Government nominees are on the boards of professional bodies and sports groups. Is there a need for the Government to nominate persons to such bodies, instead of leaving the organisations to manage their own affairs? Mdm Speaker, Singapore is facing a different world today compared to the founding years. While in the past, we could get far while being technically competent and hardworking, today's ever-changing world requires a people who are visionary, adaptable, resilient and empowered. Singapore is our home and Singaporeans must take ownership of it. Empowered Singaporeans will not blame others when the going gets tough but will face difficulties squarely, with an unwavering faith that they can be overcome. The future is uncertain. We need Singaporeans who will stick by Singapore through thick and thin because that is what an exceptional nation is all about. 3.08 pm”
“Madam, our education system plays a vital role in nurturing Singaporeans from young. If we believe we need a different mould of Singaporeans to face the future, compared to the past, our education system must support these goals. Next, scaling back Government in non-core government functions. Madam, the PAP Government has been in power for more than 50 years. Our Civil Service has known no other governing party. Over these five decades, the governing party has established strong connections within the public sector and outside. A power network is in place. The Government's presence is Page: 27 felt in practically every aspect of life. Singaporeans want a strong government. However, even the Government understands that there must be stabilisers and checks and balances in the system. It is not sufficient to talk about letting alternative views be articulated and taken into consideration. Singaporeans must feel that they can make a difference. In other words, all citizens should be free to have a vision for Singapore and to be a mover to achieve that vision. To truly empower citizens, there must be real power centres outside the Government – in local enterprises, in the private sector, in civil society, in the people sector – so as to effectively check and work with the Government. Lately, the Government has been using the phrase "collaborative governance", referring to a collaboration between the public sector and the private and people sectors. For true collaboration, no partner should be dominant. The Government needs to let go and devolve more power first, so that there is real and meaningful collaborative partnership among equals. Singaporeans should be given more voice and more say in the running of their lives and society.”
“Parents will have to pressure children to achieve academic scores over and above all else. Students will be hard pressed to spend more time to pursue other interests against society's pressures. Madam, it is assessment that drives student behaviour. If we accept that, then I believe our education system could still produce Singaporeans who can dream and chase rainbows if we fundamentally review the way students are assessed. If we want Singaporeans to be able to dream, our system should nurture a spirit of exploration and encourage students to think out of the box and to have different opinions. To ensure the message is not diluted, such an approach should not be just in one or two subjects, but be a pervasive and consistent theme throughout our education and assessment system. For instance, could our educators be required to give credit for answers that do not regurgitate what has been taught? Instead of only rewarding students who give the right or model answers, can extra credit be given to students who give alternative solutions or different approaches to questions posed? Granted – each subject is different and what is possible would vary from subject to subject. The last thing we should do is to blindly mark a student down because his or her answer does not conform exactly to the expected answer. That has been happening. It is the surest way to discourage creative thinking. As dreams also carry the risk of failure, students should also learn that some things may be worth doing even if one fails. The school syllabus should highlight case studies of persons who failed to achieve what they set out to do, to appreciate why certain endeavours are important even if the outcome is uncertain.”
“Madam, a nation cannot be exceptional by bread alone. Its people should have dreams for the country, a vision of what the country should be and the gumption to go out and realise that vision. We must believe that they are the ones who can move the country higher and be unafraid to take Page: 26 risks even if they should fail. An exceptional nation should have a people whose DNA is being unafraid to fail. What then can be done to unleash Singaporeans' potential to dream and be agents of change? To foster a climate that supports dreaming big would require a thorough examination of Singapore's life cycle: how children are brought up, what role models society celebrates, safety nets for failure and the extent of citizen empowerment. Today, I would like to touch on just two areas that I believe are worth looking into: one, aspects of our education system; and two, scaling back Government in non-core government functions. First, our education system. Over the years, our education system has been a social leveller and a key to social mobility. It is important for us to ensure that students from poorer backgrounds continue to have equal access to education opportunities in Singapore. The Government has stated that it is making efforts to ensure that our students' experience is holistic. For instance, it has announced that schools will move to reduce excessive focus on examination results. However, in a somewhat conflicting move last month, after the release of the PSLE results, MOE issued a directive to schools to no longer consider appeals for transfer from students who did not meet the PSLE T-score cut-off for entry into the school. This sends a signal to parents that academic results are still the most important criterion for progression within the system.”
“I have spoken in the past about the inadequacies of GDP as a measure of the people's well-being and I believe that is clearly accepted in many developed countries. Neither is a high GDP per capita a measure of how committed a population is to the country. In my past teaching career and travels, I have encountered people from countries far less wealthy than ours, countries whose GDP per capita is about US$1,000 or less. What strikes me is that even though the international community may laugh at them or even use their countries as negative case studies, the people have a strong commitment and passion to their home. When natural disaster strikes, the people use their own resources and energy to help each other, knowing that they have to take the initiative. Should there be a border incursion by a neighbouring country, the people are up in arms and willing to fight with whatever outdated weapons and ammunition they have to ensure that not one inch of their soil is given up. To me, these are exceptional displays of love of country, of passion for their country that money cannot buy. Fundamentally, these citizens strongly believe in their ability to make a difference and that it is up to them to make their country stronger. About 20 years ago, in a speech to the Singapore Press Club, Mr Lee Kuan Yew expressed sadness that a young Singaporean had considered emigration because she could not fulfil her dream of owning a house and a car. "Man does not live by bread alone," he said, quoting that famous biblical phrase. Dreams should move beyond material wants. He recalled that when he first set out as a young man, he had a Singapore dream, a dream that Singapore would be a democratic society, keen and vibrant, a united people.”
“Mdm Speaker, in his Address, the President asked Singaporeans to progress as an exceptional nation with a thriving economy and a caring and inclusive society. Page: 25 This aspiration statement bears examination. What is an exceptional nation? SG50 has come and gone. Twenty-fifteen also saw the passing of our founding Prime Minister Mr Lee Kuan Yew. Mr Lee is widely regarded as an exceptional man, but to be an exceptional nation takes more than an exceptional leader. It is akin to organisations. Any organisation that cannot sustain its performance after the departure of a particular CEO, cannot call itself a great organisation. The current economic climate seems dire, with analysts predicting that it would deteriorate further and hoping it would not be as bad as the post-Lehman period of 2008. The region's stock markets continue to dive, including the STI. China's growth has slowed down, affecting many countries, especially Singapore. Worldwide, jobs are being cut, with Singapore as no exception. There is weak demand for office space, with vacancy rates here expected to be in the double digits this year. Amidst this climate, what does it take to be an exceptional nation? The Government has laid out its Addenda to the President's Address, setting out in broad strokes some of its plans. We need to debate them in the coming days. For my speech today, I would like to focus on the role of the people of Singapore in building an exceptional nation. According to World Bank data, Singapore in 2014 had a GDP per capita of about US$56,000 or S$70,000, making us, apparently, one of the richest countries in the world. Of course, this aggregated figure at the national level is no measure of wealth distribution amongst citizens and no indication of inequalities that exist.”
“Madam, Deputy Prime Minister Tharman has not actually answered my questions whether he accepts that in the FY2013/2014 accounts which our auditors approved, that they have noted that out of the 13 disclaimers from the past, only three remained unresolved. So, I would like him to confirm whether he accepts that point. Secondly, does the Deputy Prime Minister also accept that some of the areas which our auditors highlighted were actually carried over from the previous Town Council's opening balance issues, for example? That is the second point. The third point, also regarding the Sinking Fund transfers, I think it is public knowledge that the Town Council has still not received its operating S&CC grants for FY2014 and FY2015. So, is the Deputy Prime Minister not aware of that as well? Last of all, does the Deputy Prime Minister not accept what I put to him earlier that the auditors' opinion was that except for the specific observations, we have complied with the Act?”
“Madam, some supplementary questions for Deputy Prime Minister Tharman. He made some reference in his answer to the audit done by AGO on AHPETC, and I would like to ask him some questions on this. Firstly, is the Deputy Prime Minister aware that the Town Council has since filed the subsequent audited accounts for FY2013/2014 by 30 June 2015? Secondly, can the Deputy Prime Minister confirm if he has read those accounts? Thirdly, the auditors who audited our accounts, which were recently submitted on 30 June, is the Deputy Prime Minister not aware that out of the 13 disclaimers that were put into our previous accounts, the auditors have confirmed that only three remained unresolved? Last of all, is the Deputy Prime Minister also not aware that in this recent audit that we did for FY2013/2014, our auditors actually made the observation that except for certain specific issues, the Town Council has actually complied with the Act, in terms of keeping proper accounts and books?”
“Madam, the Workers' Party would like its objection to the Bill due to clause 6 recorded.”
“Madam, the Workers' Party would like its objection put on record.”
“Thank you, Madam. Madam, I have five clarifications for the Minister. First clarification is, does the Minister not agree that clause 6 is not just an update but it is actually a change, fundamental change, in the way members are nominated to the Board? That is the first clarification. The second clarification is that earlier, Prof Tan Tai Yong, as a member of the Board of ISEAS, mentioned how well things are going in ISEAS. So, does the Minister disagree? Does he think that there is something wrong with the way ISEAS is currently being run? Third, the Minister mentioned about Board size. Quite apart from Board size, is there a need for the clause to make the Minister the sole appointer of the entire Board? I think those are two different issues really. The fourth clarification is, does the Minister not agree that ISEAS is not just any Statutory Board? Looking at the origin of ISEAS as a multi-stakeholder institution, is he saying that that has changed? And last of all, Mdm Speaker, just to clarify, if the Government removes clause 6, we will support the Bill.”
“Thank you, Madam. I would like to make a clarification. I am not sure why Senior Parliamentary Secretary Hawazi is hurt. If he has listened to what I have said, I said that we fully support the renaming of ISEAS as the "ISEAS-Yusof Ishak Institute". We have no issue with that at all. Our only issue is with clause 6 that changes the structure of the Board of Trustees.”
“Further, removing the office of President, our Head of State, from his role in ISEAS and replacing him with a Minister will adversely affect ISEAS' prestige and standing in the region and, indeed, beyond. Therefore, the Workers' Party objects to clause 6 of the Bill to make the Minister the sole appointer of all the Board members, replacing the President and other organisations. Madam, in the spirit of supporting the renaming of ISEAS as "ISEAS-Yusof Ishak Institute", I urge the Government to rethink the amendment Bill, to preserve the diversity, autonomy and presidential association of ISEAS. If the Government fails to do so, we will have to vote against the Bill to register our objection to clause 6. 4.03 pm”