Tan Soo Khoon
Singapore
“May I just seek your indulgence and the Ministers for me to raise a little clarification? I raised the point about the absence of a medical officer at Changi Naval Base when the incident at sea happened last year.”
“We all look forward to its people obtaining their legitimate right to democracy and freedom, though I must add here that it should not necessarily be the kind we now see in some other Southeast Asian countries where democracy, unfortunately, has been taken to mean fluctuating between people demonstrating on the streets and the threat of m…”
“The West is unable to accept that it will soon be overtaken by the emergence of Asian powerhouses and fears that it will become irrelevant in an increasingly globalised world it refused to wake up to.”
“They are committed to Singapore and they want to do their National Service, but they just want MINDEF to exercise flexibility when they request for deferments. Mr Speaker, recently, MINDEF granted a deferment of three months to one Mr Stanley Aw to allow him to participate in the Singapore finals of the World Cyber Games.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, this issue of the revenue pooling between the two airlines of Singapore and Malaysia is not a new issue. But can I ask why is it that in this era of competition and trade liberalisation, we are still allowing the two airlines to have this archaic policy of revenue sharing which, in fact, results in higher prices for trave…”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, does the Minister of State believe that it is in the interest oftravellers between the two countries to allow what is essentially a cartel made up of MAS and SIA to exist?”
The complete record
Every one of 656 lines we hold for Tan Soo Khoon, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 14.
“Sir, the Minister has not addressed the point that I raised. I asked a very specific question. Does NUS intend to spend a lot of money to renovate the Bukit Timah Campus that it is moving to?”
“4 million went to needy students, which is really peanuts, if you consider that only one in 10 needy students who applied got bursaries, which means nine others are left in the lurch. Therefore, increasing the pool of bursary beneficiaries should be an urgent priority for NUS. Some have advocated that our universities adopt a lock-in scheme whereby fees are fixed for the students during the whole duration of their studies. This is the approach now being taken by SMU. It is probably a sound approach, as students can plan ahead and set aside specific sums of money, rather than face uncertainty during their studies. But fees must be locked in at a low cost, not a high one, otherwise it makes a mockery of the system. Ultimately, the key lies in our universities working harder in cost management and cutting back on lavish expenditures that do not directly benefit students, something which students and parents feel our universities are not doing enough. Sir, I have just one specific question: I would like to know if NUS intends to renovate the Bukit Timah campus vacated by SMU when it moves there, bearing in mind that SMU has also spent a lot of money renovating it not long ago and, if so, how much will this cost?”
“However, most donors are very specific in how their money should be spent, for example, for scholarships, for research, for a particular facility or building. 1.45 pm Perhaps, NUS can consider focusing its efforts on raising money that will directly benefit students in the financing of their fees. A simple back-of-the-envelope calculation tells me that NUS can reduce fees by $500 per student for its 20,000-odd students, if NUS just raises $10 million for this general purpose from its donors. Of course, donors prefer to have pet projects and naming rights and when universities get big donations, they always make the headlines. But in fund-raising, universities should try harder to convince donors to give more that would help students alleviate their financial burdens directly. Or it could tweak its budget and cut back on something else like high-profile glamorous projects. Sir, I am reminded of the time when I was an undergraduate in the then University of Singapore. Dr Toh Chin Chye was then the Vice Chancellor. The Deputy Vice Chancellor was a man called Reginald Quahe. The late Mr Quahe ran the university like a tight ship, and he was really tight-fisted when it came to money matters. I remember that as a student leader, I used to nag him persistently for rain shelters to be built so that we could be protected from the rain from the lecture theatres to the Union House. He refused to give way for years. And his answer was very simple: "Haven't you guys heard of umbrellas?" If you consider the fact that we were not a wealthy country at that time, I think he was right. NUS could also focus its efforts on raising money for bursaries, as only 500 bursaries were given last year. A total of $1.”
“Sir, the recent increase in fees announced by the National University of Singapore has caused much unhappiness amongst students. Many students heard about the increases through the media, so it came as a rude shock to them. They are also unhappy with the administration's explanation for the reasons for the increase which at 3% is probably quite small. The increase ranges from $200 to maybe almost $2,000, depending on the course you study. But I can sympathise with the medical student who pointed out in the press that his fees have increased by some $1,320 in the past two years, from $16,200 in 2004 to $17,500 this year. That is a lot of money to students. One of the issues raised by students was for the need for more transparency and accountability on the part of the university administration. All our universities say they have sufficient safeguards in place to ensure good governance and best practices but this has failed to alleviate the students' grievances. Unfortunately, the NUS increase took place against the background of NUS' 100 years centennial celebrations and the building of a multi-million dollar new University Hall characterised by opulence, thus reinforcing the perception of a NUS that is extravagant in splashing on image building events and posh buildings. Bad timing, bad PR. Therefore, the reasons for the increase - higher operating costs and the need to upgrade resources, and the assurance that it works hard to keep costs down - sounded hollow to students. Our universities depend a great deal on donations from the public and very generous philanthropists. NUS alone received some $200 million from donations in the past two years.”
“May I just seek your indulgence and the Ministers for me to raise a little clarification? I raised the point about the absence of a medical officer at Changi Naval Base when the incident at sea happened last year. I would like to find out from the Minister whether it is the practice to have doctors on call or on standby at the medical centre. In this case, where the incident was one with high risk, would it not have been prudent to ensure that there was a doctor on standby?”
“Sir, with due respect, this is a debate and there is actually no need for a Member just to seek clarification, but he can actually speak.”
“But, I think, somewhere down the line, there is what we call a lack of the safety culture and it is probably that which says, "Oh, don't worry, it won't happen to me." But then it has happened once too often.”
“Much obliged, Sir. Sir, two training-related incidents resulting in the deaths of our armed forces personnel in 2005 compel me to, once again, raise this issue of training safety in the House again. Sir, in June, last year, a serviceman died at sea while training under the supervision of four officers. In July, two commandos were killed after falling from a helicopter while undergoing rappelling training. Following the dunking incident in 2003 when a serviceman died, the SAF did an extensive audit of training procedures, tightened regulations and conducted surprise audit checks. Sir, we have been regularly assured that the procedures are in place and that the safety of SAF personnel is of prime importance. But it puzzles me as to why such incidents do happen. The helicopter incident, for example, was a repeat of a similar incident that actually happened in 1990 when three persons were killed. In the training incident at sea, there were four supervisors looking after six men, and yet not one of them noticed that the poor man had slipped under the waves. When he was sent to a medical centre at Changi Naval Base, what was even more surprising to find out was that there was no medical officer at the Changi Naval Base. So, what is the point then, if we have a medical centre and the most important personnel, a doctor, is not available? Sir, I think our safety consciousness is still not sufficiently instilled amongst the SAF personnel. It is good to tighten rules to have all the proper training procedures in place, but I think we need to do more, and that is, we have to ensure that this safety culture is properly instilled in our men. I do not doubt that at the very top of the command chain there is an urgency to maintain this safety consciousness.”
“We all look forward to its people obtaining their legitimate right to democracy and freedom, though I must add here that it should not necessarily be the kind we now see in some other Southeast Asian countries where democracy, unfortunately, has been taken to mean fluctuating between people demonstrating on the streets and the threat of military coups. I think that would just result in further political turmoils. What we all desire to see is a strong Myanmar that is politically stable, bringing happiness and prosperity to its people so that it can once again contribute meaningfully to ASEAN and hold its head up high in the international community. The Middle East”
“Can you imagine what it would be like if a bird flu pandemic were to break out over there and you get the government there, which is ineffectual and unwilling to cooperate with its neighbours? Myanmar consistently becomes an obstacle in ASEAN's dealings with the rest of the international community. Many other countries had threatened to boycott ASEAN dialogue meetings if Myanmar had insisted on being the Chairman this year. As a parliamentarian, I too have encountered difficulties each time I meet my counterparts from other countries, especially those from Europe. Inevitably, a major part of the time of our discussions is spent dealing with questions about Myanmar, instead of on more substantive issues. But what can be done now? I think ASEAN has to continue to hold Myanmar to the promise it has made to commence genuine political reforms which includes national integration of its diverse ethnic groups and the release of political prisoners. We have to up the ante. If there is no credible move by Myanmar, ASEAN must be prepared to consider alternatives. The first would be to get Myanmar to voluntarily take leave of absence from the organisation, which is of course a face-saving measure. Secondly, ASEAN should suspend its membership for an indefinite period of time. And, thirdly, which is the most severe move of all, terminate its membership. ASEAN is drafting a charter and it can use this opportunity to define what it expects from its members. Myanmar has to be made to realise that its road to democracy must be a real one and it must bring about a better life for its people.”
“After much pressure from ASEAN and the international community, Myanmar finally relinquished its turn to take the Chair of ASEAN in 2006. In explaining its decision, the Myanmar government said that it was its desire to focus its attention on national reconciliation and the democratisation process. However, there is still tremendous doubt that Myanmar is serious about undertaking genuine democratic reforms. Aung San Suu Kyi, the leader of the National League for Democracy (NLD), who won the general elections in 1990 and has been denied its legitimate right to take power by the ruling military regime, has been in detention for the past few years. And, recently, it was announced that her detention will be further extended. Although the Myanmar government has convened a national convention to draft a new Constitution to pave the way for the new elections, many observers point to the whole thing as a fuss because the NLD is not allowed to participate. In fact, speeches to be made at the Convention have to be cleared by the authorities and criticisms of the government will not be allowed. Sir, the Myanmar government's sudden and ill-prepared move to a new capital, Pyinmana last month without informing anyone, its own people and its neighbours included, shows how secretive and isolated its rulers have become. The continued state of affairs in Myanmar constitutes a threat to ASEAN's safety and security and continues to undermine the credibility of the organisation. As an example, it has been reported that the government there spends only US$22,000 a year to fight an increasing HIV-AIDs epidemic.”
“It brings to my mind the recent incident when the Police warned a group of schoolgirls about selling T-shirts with elephants printed on them at a fund-raising event and wearing them en masse. My first reaction on hearing about this was that this was something unbelievable. What is wrong with selling white T-shirts with elephants on them, just because they were seen to be symbolising the unhappiness over the delay in opening Buangkok Station? After all, other organisations also have their members wearing white and white, no doubt without elephants. Sir, it took no less than the Minister himself - and I am glad he did it quickly - to say that the Police action was wrong. And as my colleague, Mr Charles Chong, pointed out, it was just a no brainer on the part of the Police. If not for this clarification being made quickly, I think the Police might have just lost some credibility. Sir, society is loosening up. Young people nowadays behave differently from those of my generation. It is just a loosening up of society that we are all going through. What adults may view as loitering on the part of the young, the young consider that they are merely, what they say, hanging out or chilling out with their friends. It is probably a harmless activity, and we must therefore adopt a balanced approach. Where they have done wrong, we have to take necessary steps, and the best way is preventive action through education, and that is the job of parents and teachers. Tell them that crime does not pay. But a knee-jerk approach in handling the problem may in the end cause more harm than good. Sir, I think what we need to do is to show young people that the law is with them, not against them. Curfew on Youths”
“Sir, recently the Police announced that it would check on teenagers who are found loitering on the streets after 11.00 pm. The aim of this move, according to the Police, is to reduce the incidence of crime amongst young people. I think the aim is a good one but somehow this has caused some unease amongst the people who are affected, namely, the young people, and they are unhappy about the Police playing the role of nanny. Many of them resent the notion of being stopped by the Police and being checked on although, as we know, the Police have a right to check on everyone, young and old. As a parent, I too would be concerned if my own children were to be wandering aimlessly on the streets late at night. But I think that young people have a point when they start to think that the Police action will amount to an infringement on their personal freedom. The police announcement conjures up notions of Gestapo-like checks on young people and sweeping them off the streets after 11.00 pm, and I attribute this misunderstanding on the part of young people to poor communication by the Police of what is basically a good intention. It was only when the Police clarified some days later that it was never intended to be what was obviously a misconception that perceptions changed. But I think the Police would have to go beyond merely placating young people by words now. It would have to show by its action that it will be discerning in its search and queries so that its image is not damaged in the eyes of young people. A clear communication of good intentions is a must, especially when we are dealing with young people.”
“The West is unable to accept that it will soon be overtaken by the emergence of Asian powerhouses and fears that it will become irrelevant in an increasingly globalised world it refused to wake up to. Thus, in a desperate bid to avoid the inevitable, the West seeks to use whatever means available, sometimes even in contravention of internationally agreed norms, to suppress the growth of Asian economies wherever possible." Sir, our businessmen will continue to straddle the globe to look for opportunities. Most of the time, they will come across a conducive environment abroad because our Government has negotiated and paved the way for close economic and political ties, but once in a while they can expect the unexpected and encounter hostility. Our economic success will be shaped by our own determination and our ability to be innovative and daring, but we must continue to ensure that we can play by fair rules and that our efforts are not stymied by those who continue to use unfair practices when it suits them. 1.44 pm”
“I recount all this to point out that we live in a sensitive world where trade and political tensions still and will continue to simmer. In an era of globalisation and trade liberalisation and free trade agreements notwithstanding, there are still those who, while subscribing to the principles of trade liberalisation, succumb to their own narrow interests when the crunch comes, and domestic political considerations come first at the expense of sound economic sense. To some Americans and Europeans, it is a case of "you play the game by our rules". It is easy, Sir, for the Australians to tell us that the SIA issue will not affect broader ties but Singaporeans are angry with the outcome. For a long time, the Australian's position dangled between one of reticence to giving us an occasional dash of hope, but in the end having got all the fifth freedom rights they wanted from us, and knowing that we have no more bargaining chips left on the table, they led us on a 10-year run around. The Singapore lion was simply outforced by the wily Australian kangaroo. Maybe we were not canny enough. A successful Singapore company has not been allowed to engage in a fair fight for the consumer dollar. A man from India, Arabs from the Middle East, and entrepreneurs from China are not supposed to disrupt the Western order of things, no matter what the economic rationale is. A writer to the Straits Times' Forum page yesterday summed it best when he wrote, and I quote: "The West, used to cultural and economic pre-eminence on the international stage, suddenly finds its position under threat by the unstoppable growth of a dynamic Asia.”
“Having now successfully bid for P&O, Dubai Ports World, the investment arm of the United Arab Emirates, will end up managing some of the most important ports in the world, including half a dozen ports in the United States. American legislators are up in arms over this, citing security concerns over their ports being managed by a company controlled by a foreign country, never mind if it is a country that has been America's close ally in its fight again terrorism. Nor did it matter to them to reason why it was all right for them when P&O, which was until now a British company, managed the same US ports. One can well imagine that we could have encountered similar hostility if we had won our bid for P&O. The failed bid by China National Offshore Oil Corporation (CNOOC) to acquire American oil giant Unocal in August last year is another case in point. American lawmakers argued that it was just too sensitive a matter for a State backed Chinese company to acquire a hold on valuable and strategic American energy assets. The Chinese assured the Americans that this was a purely commercial transaction, an acquisition of a company that in fact has most of its assets outside the US, and that in any case it was prepared to dispose of the US-based assets if the deal came through. Another assurance by CNOOC that the takeover, unlike that of the rival bid from Chevron, would not result in any job losses, did not cut any ice with US legislators who wanted to block the deal. Even though its bid of US$18.5 billion was way above the US$17.6 billion bid from Chevron, CNOOC's attempt was frustrated by the US lawmakers and, in the end, the Chinese decided to walk away from the whole thing. To the Americans, the maths just did not matter.”
“Whatever we do, we strive to do it well, in fact, some might say, too well, that our competitors envy or fear us, but they cannot bring it on themselves to compete with us on a level playing field. In Europe, an Indian gentleman by the name of Mr Lakshmi Mittal is causing an uproar in political circles. His company, Mittal Steel, is the world's largest steel producer and he wants to make it even bigger by merging it with Arcelor, Europe's largest steel maker in a deal that would cost him about US$23 billion. Mr Mittal is facing obstacles. He has infuriated governments in Europe. Never mind that he has built his company to become number one in the world as long as it remains outside of Europe. The refrain running through much of Europe seems to be: how can this man, what more an Indian, take on the Europeans? The Finance Minister of France, Mr Thierry Breton, is quoted as having said that Mr Mittal has a grammar problem, implying that his linguistic imperfections must be a serious barrier to his ability to run an European operation. Such a statement displays the European's xenophobia and betrays their cultural or, even worse, racial prejudices. All rationale and economic arguments for a merger that would benefit consumers in over half the world - Mr Mittal's steel interests extend from China through the Asian continent to the United States - and all hitherto pontifications on the part of the Europeans of their commitment to a free trade and to a free flow of investments have been thrown to the wind. So much for free trade agreements. Across the Atlantic another group of investors is also causing a stir elsewhere, this time in the United States.”
“Is it really, as the Australians say, that opening up the Pacific route offers no benefit to Australia, or is it simply a protectionist measure to shelter Qantas from competition? The Australians have mastered the art of telling the world with a straight face that giving Singapore Airlines the right to fly once a day on the lucrative Pacific route, where there is a shortage of seats and where prices have been kept artificially high for the consumers, would cause Qantas to axe jobs, affect its status as one of the most profitable airlines in the world and, even as they claimed, cause Qantas to go bankrupt. Yet, as has been reported, the Australians are quite happy to allow their own budget carrier, Virgin Blue, to fly this route instead. One must therefore presume that the Australians have, in the same breath, concluded suddenly that Qantas can now survive competition, as long as that competition comes from one of their own. Is this not an admission by the Australians of their inability to compete with SIA's much lauded inflight service, and does it not boil down to a case of looking after their own parochial interests? Anyone who has flown SIA and Qantas can tell the difference between the quality of service provided by the two. Qantas can be not too bad at times - if they want to - but most people would tell you without hesitation which airline consistently comes up tops. So it is the same old story again. When you feel the heat from the competition, you put up the barriers. Our competitors know that the Singapore name has done well. The Singapore brand has gained a strong reputation in the world.”
“Mr Speaker, I am afraid I will be disappointing the House as I would not be able to match Mr Steve Chia's fire and fury. Sir, about two weeks ago, a Malaysian Minister caused a little flap in business circles here when he accused Singapore traders of rebranding his country's products and relabelling them as Singapore ones. As an example, he referred to Malaysian rambutans being exported to Hongkong as Singapore lychees. In other words, we were exploiting an agricultural produce of his country in a way to benefit Singapore. I think the people of Hongkong, well known for their discerning tastes when it comes to food, and being able to get abundant supplies of fresh and good quality lychees from China and Thailand, would be the last people on earth to fall for rambutans passing off as lychees. Fortunately, the Agri-Food and Veterinary Authority of Singapore has investigated the matter and concluded that there is no truth in the accusation, be it of fruits, ornamental fish, or flowers, being passed off as Singapore's own. But this incident made me think that there is more to it than a simple case of unfounded accusation. Trade issues are always a sensitive matter in economic relations between countries. I think that even if our traders do not indulge in any such malpractices - there are strict WTO rules that prohibit this - this incident must say a lot about the unease that the Singapore name can cause when it comes to trade matters. Unease because the Singapore brand is strong, and it strikes fear in those who compete with us, or perhaps there is a case of pure envy of how far we have come. Take the failure of Singapore Airlines to get the right to fly from Sydney to Los Angeles from the Australian Government.”
“They are committed to Singapore and they want to do their National Service, but they just want MINDEF to exercise flexibility when they request for deferments. Mr Speaker, recently, MINDEF granted a deferment of three months to one Mr Stanley Aw to allow him to participate in the Singapore finals of the World Cyber Games. Mind you, Sir, it was not the World Games itself. It was just the Singapore round. It was a laudable decision as it showed MINDEF can be flexible if it wants to. But I am not sure if Mr Stanley Aw's participation in the Cyber Games would have been pivotal to his long-term career as much as that of others who need that little extra time to complete their academic pursuits. Yes, I know it was a deferment of only three months for Mr Stanley Aw. But is the World Cyber Games more important than the pursuit of a higher degree? Sir, I hope that the Minister will look into the possibility of fine-tuning further MINDEF's deferment policy. 4.20 pm”
“Recently, I came across a case of a young man who had his National Service disrupted so that he could complete a degree course abroad - well and good. Subsequently, he was allowed a further deferment to obtain a Master's degree - again, well and good. But because of the way his Master's degree course was structured, he could not complete his course by the time the deferment period ended. Having come so far, he did not want to lose his opportunity for a Master's degree. So he pleaded desperately for just another six months, but he was rejected. Every time MINDEF turns down a request for deferment, in all probability, a young man returns because he has no options left. But he is probably frustrated or even bitter that his request could not be met, and that his long-term career prospects might have been compromised. And needless to say, Sir, an unhappy soldier makes a bad soldier. I am not saying that if Melvyn Tan had been given the further deferment that he wanted, he could have come back. But I hope that we will not be bound by rigid rules that fail to take into consideration certain specific needs. We all know that our Armed Forces is an organisation where discipline and strict regulations have to be respected and adhered to for the common good of all. But in today's global economy and where opportunities abound for our young people, we cannot afford to lose precious talent, even if it is a small number each year. Every single one lost is a loss for the country. Increasing the fines and the penalties for defaulters may give us satisfaction and a greater sense of fairness and justice, but it does not necessarily bring the man back. And there are many who are not running away from their obligations. They are not quitters.”
“Sir, thank you for allowing me this opportunity to say a few words about MINDEF's deferment policy. I understand that Melvyn Tan failed to get a second deferment from National Service to further his studies at the Royal College of Music. He decided to renounce his Singapore citizenship to pursue his dreams. For that, he paid a heavy price, not just the $3,000 that he was fined recently, not just the $30,000 bond that his parents have to forgo, but he was for 39 years unable to return to the homeland where he was born and grew up in the first 12 years of his life. Sir, there are others who take the same route as Melvyn Tan. There are, however, many more who choose not to take this route. MINDEF does not allow them further deferments to complete their studies - sometimes these are extended courses - and therefore they return to complete their National Service obligations, unhappy though they may be. These are the ones who, quite rightly, have put the needs of the nation before their own self interests. But this does lead me to wonder if we could not tweak our deferment policy to allow further flexibility. As MPs, we have, from time to time, come across young men who just need a little time more - sometimes just a few months - for them to complete their academic pursuits, but MINDEF gives them a flat no. I know that there are, of course, those who when given an inch will ask for a yard or even a mile. But my feeling is that we could be more accommodating to those who can furnish good reasons to ask for an extension of their deferment for a short period, because the completion of their academic courses does not coincide with the date their National Service obligations begin.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, does the Minister of State believe that it is in the interest oftravellers between the two countries to allow what is essentially a cartel made up of MAS and SIA to exist? Because although she says that there are other carriers that ply this route, in effect, these other airlines are not having the same frequency of flights as SIA and MAS. And at any rate, the times at which they fly off are not really practical for most people, particularly business people.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, this issue of the revenue pooling between the two airlines of Singapore and Malaysia is not a new issue. But can I ask why is it that in this era of competition and trade liberalisation, we are still allowing the two airlines to have this archaic policy of revenue sharing which, in fact, results in higher prices for travellers commuting between Singapore and Kuala Lumpur? Does it not appear ludicrousto the Minister of State that it is in fact cheaper to fly from Singapore to Bangkok than to fly from Singapore to Kuala Lumpur?”
“I know of charities and, at least one, which raised $5 million in the last few years, last three years I think, but whose annual expenditure is about $20,000 per annum. So while the 30% cap is loosely bandied about like a benchmark, it behoves well for IPCs to find means and ways to scrutinise closely their expenditure and their methods of raising funds. Sometimes, the ends do not always justify the means. They have to ask themselves: do they exercise prudence in expending public donations? Mere compliance with the rules and regulations may now not be enough to satisfy the concerns of the public. Present levels of disclosure may now show to be inadequate and we may have to enhance transparency levels. I would strongly urge IPCs to voluntarily conduct themselves with standards even higher than the official requirements. They must not balk at this by arguing that this will raise administrative costs. Do not wait for the Government to impose more stringent requirements. Instead, take steps yourself to boost transparency and accountability. Better still, welcome closer scrutiny, whether it is from individuals, the donors, or from the media. In the end, you instill confidence and ensure that donations continue flowing in for your causes. Mr Speaker, Sir, charities in Singapore do a lot of good, that is what I want to remind everyone, and we must quickly remove any doubts and suspicions in our minds so that the anger can quickly dissipate. I have faith that when the dust has settled on this sad saga - and it must very quickly - Singaporeans will once again demonstrate their generosity and philanthropic nature and continue to help those who are less fortunate.”
“Of course, we all know that it is necessary to pay competitive salaries to attract good people, and, of course, we know that salary is a sensitive matter, but in ensuring that we provide information on how much we pay people in Government from the top down, how much the CEOs of listed companies are paid, we established this unshakeable principle of transparency and accountability that we did not apply to IPCs. Minority shareholders in our listed companies - and they probably number a few thousand for each company or maybe tens of thousands - have access to such information and, yet, the NKF management failed to recognise all this while that, over the years, if you take two out of three Singaporeans, that works out to 2 1/2 million Singaporeans have made contributions to the organisation, and to the salaries of the staff, surely they have a right to ask and get answers. So, when finally the truth had to be extricated in court, it came as a rude shock to all, not just for its amount, but more because people felt that, "See, I told you so, they had something to hide." I would, therefore, urge that the annual remuneration of top executives be disclosed in salary bands, the way listed companies are now required to do. Paying competitive salaries is an acceptable fact of life, but providing such information will ensure that IPCs will remove doubts in the minds of their most important stakeholders, the donors, who, in the end, are the ones who decide whether they survive or not. Sir, IPCs must exercise extreme care over their expenditure. The cap of 30% on expenditure is generous but there is that old argument that smaller charities have to spend more to raise smaller amounts. This is not entirely correct.”
“In finally accepting the recommendations of the Council on Governance of IPCs, the Government wanted to strike the right balance in ensuring certain mandatory requirements and minimum standards in critical areas on the one hand, and, on the other hand, the need to ensure that IPCs, particularly smaller ones, are not overburdened by too onerous requirements to the extent that they feel stifled. But in the light of what has happened at the NKF, perhaps we can look into some of these areas. The Government agreed with the views of the IPCs that there is no need to disclose the salaries of the top executives of IPCs. I suspect that the furore over Mr T T Durai's salary was not just only about the amount that he got. Indeed, one can argue till the cows come home over whether his pay packet was too much or whether it commensurated with the work he put in, just as we will never stop arguing about salaries of our public officials and CEOs of listed companies, but herein lies the difference: even if you disagree with what our public officials or CEOs are paid, we know that there is transparency. So I suspect that the public outcry this time stems from a deeper frustration over the NKF's persistent and steadfast refusal in the past to reveal such information when asked. The NKF is, on record, as dismissing such queries as without merit and purely of curiosity value. This is where I could not understand why the Government turned down the recommendation of the Council on Governance of IPCs.”
“Sir, no less than a full and thorough investigation into what has been happening in the NKF must take place; Singaporeans want to know what else could have come out if the court case had not abruptly ended after two days, and what else could have been rolled out from the many cartons of material that the defence lawyers brought into court. Many questions burn in the minds of the public: have there been other excesses or any misuse of funds; what is the exact number of patients treated by the NKF? Is it 1,500, 2,000 or 3,000? Do the NKF reserves last three years, or is it 30 years? Why does it cost the NKF $30,000 per patient a year to provide treatment when the Kidney Dialysis Foundation does it for about half that amount? If there have been management problems, then the new Board must seek to put them right. If individuals have committed wrong, then they must answer to a court of law, but we must avoid bashing an institution that has been around for so long and at its very core still remains an incredible organisation that has saved countless lives. The second step towards restoring public confidence is to continue to push for better disclosure and greater accountability and this must apply not just to the NKF but also to all IPCs and charities. There was much debate in the past, both inside and outside the House, about the extent to which Government should regulate their activities.”
“Two wrongs will not make a right. Patients, instead of being people who will continue to receive good quality treatment and care and who are given hope, well, they will just end up as victims of our own vitriol. Looking after the needs of the NKF's patients, and restoring the morale of the staff - because they are the ones who ensure that the patients are well taken care of - must now be our top priority, and this can only be achieved if Singaporeans do not withhold their support. Sir, to regain public support, efforts must therefore now be focused on restoring public faith and confidence in NKF, in fact in all charities, because what has happened in this NKF episode has unfortunately made many people think hard about donating to charity, which should not be the case. One swallow does not make a summer. The Board members and its CEO have resigned and the Government has moved quickly to name a new Chairman and a new Board who will have the unenviable task of cleaning up the act. Many of us know Mr Gerard Ee well. He served as a Member of this House as a Nominated Member for four years and I have confidence that he and the new Board members will know how to put things right very quickly. But, having listened to the list of names announced by the Minister earlier on, and I must say that these are people who are well regarded, and I believe that they will certainly know what to do to help Mr Gerard Ee, I could not help but wonder why there is no representation for a very important group of stakeholders, and that is the donors. Here, I would like to suggest to the Minister that he considers some representation from important donors like the foundations who give a lot of money to NKF and to charities.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the revelations in last week's court case between the National Kidney Foundation and Singapore Press Holdings have shocked Singaporeans like no other scandal in recent times. Because two out of three Singaporeans have donated to the NKF, the extent of public backlash over the way donors' funds have been used, the excesses of its CEO, the exaggeration over the number of patients it actually treats, and the misinformation over how long its reserves will actually last, is understandable. People from all walks of life, rich and poor, young and old, contribute to the NKF. For 36 years, they had unquestionable faith in the NKF and it has become Singapore's largest charity, and now they feel very emotional and they vent their anger. They have every right to feel angry about what has happened. Nobody wants to see the hard-earned money he gives away, believing it would benefit a good cause, mismanaged in any way. But I want to appeal to Singaporeans not to let their anger cloud their judgement of the larger picture. Over the years, the NKF has saved countless lives. It has become a highly regarded institution, a brand name, so to speak. And as we heard earlier on from the Minister, other countries have even come here to learn about how the NKF runs its programmes. Even as we are appalled by what has been revealed, we must not overlook the achievements of the NKF. As an MP, I have on many occasions referred constituents who suffer from kidney problems to the NKF for dialysis treatment. I know that many of these people would not be alive today if not for the NKF. To withhold our support for the NKF, to cancel our automatic GIRO deductions, to even ask for our money back, as some had done in the past few days, cannot help those who are suffering.”
“Would the Minister of State not consider relooking at the 30-month debarment period to make it easier for people who wish to rent a flat after selling, because most of these people simply cannot keep up with their mortgage payments? If you debar them for 30 months, you are just depriving them of a home, and many of them come to us and say, "Look, where do I stay after I sell my flat? Where do I stay for the next two and a half years?" So, I think it is time for the Ministry to relook the rule.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, can I ask whether these people who sold their flats in the last few years and who were allocated rental flats, were they allocated the flats immediately after they sold their flats or did they have to wait out the 30-month debarment period?”
“I may not have fully agreed with the outcome of all the discussions, but what I would urge the Prime Minister to do is to continue to allow this openness of discussion on other issues. What has happened has not shown that we have a divided Government, but it has shown to Singaporeans that views, other than the Government's, do count in the decision-making process. Whatever the decision is, for better or for worse, as he himself has put it, it is the Prime Minister who carries the ultimate responsibility. But what is also important for us to understand is that when people know that their views do count, it makes the task of setting aside our differences and moving ahead easier. Sir, finally, may I just say that, as this year-long debate comes to its conclusion, it is not about whether the pro-casino camp has won or whether the anti-casino camp has lost. In the end, it is Singapore that must win. The Government has made its call, and I can only hope that it has drawn the right card from the deck.”
“Casinos provide the perfect breeding ground for more Chia Teck Lengs who will be out to prove that they can beat the system and get away with it. Perhaps, what Chia Teck Leng could do the next time, if I may say so and if the Minister for Home Affairs permits, is to detail his modus operandi so that the banks can learn from the other side how not to get cheated. Sir, in the past year, the arguments for and against the casino had been thoroughly exhausted. I cannot recall an issue such as this one which has been so controversial and has mesmerised Singaporeans from all walks of life. What I found heartening to some extent, most of all, is the openness with which the Government has dealt with the matter. It is probably the first time that I have heard Cabinet Ministers, starting with no less than the Deputy Prime Minister, Dr Tony Tan, expressing divergent views on a single topic. I think this is the way it should be. I remember that in 2002, when I suggested that Ministers should be allowed to state their individual views outside the Cabinet, I was told by the then Prime Minister, Mr Goh Chok Tong, that this was not possible because it would undermine the principle of collective responsibility and would suggest a divided Government. But, Sir, has what has happened in the past months with all the different views from the Ministers expressed publicly caused any harm to the Government? I do not think so. In fact, in having the Ministers express their different views, and having the Prime Minister relate yesterday how the resistance of some Ministers was overcome, and how they finally realised that the concept of an IR could not be rejected, I think this approach has given Singaporeans an important insight into how decisions at the very top level are made.”
“Mr Lim Hng Kiang says that Switzerland's reputation has not suffered in spite of the country having casinos. Maybe they have been lucky so far, but we have not. Unfortunately, in spite of our tight policing of our banks, we had quite a colourful record of cheats over the years. As Mr Ravindran reminded us earlier on, you remember Elyamanis Khamis who took our banks for a ride in the 1980s. I think he took away $80 million, if I can recall. Then in the 1990s, there was Nick Leeson operating out of Singapore, but he managed to bring down one of Britain's oldest financial institutions. These were people who did not meet the downfall because of casinos, but in their own way, they were gamblers who lost and were only discovered when it was too late. So now we have Chia Teck Leng's confessions paraded in the media last weekend - five pages in the Straits Times. But what he tells us is not actually very new. First, he tells us how he was lured by the bright lights and the glamour of the casinos. It is an all too common story of many people who are like him. Next, he relates how the odds are stacked against you in a casino. It does not take a mathematician to tell you that in a casino, the house always wins! This is what I did not quite understand the make-up of the whole story he was telling. Finally, after all this, he says Singapore should go ahead and build a casino! No matter what the economic rationale that he was trying to justify in having a casino at the end of his story, if you see through him again, you will realise that, in his case, it is also a question of a matter of once you are a gambler, you are always a gambler. His would not be the last swindle we will hear of.”
“Already the Institute of Mental Health has predicted that it will need another eight psychologists to deal with this looming problem, and we know that it is not easy to recruit well-trained psychologists. So this is just one aspect of the problem that faces us when we talk about managing the matter. Last Saturday, I read in the Straits Times about a 38-year-old man who started gambling when he was a school boy and who is now a bankrupt and jobless. He gambled away his family members' savings and they threw him out. Now, he owes loan sharks about $90,000 and he is hooked on drugs. He then sought counselling and he actually quit gambling seven months ago. He confesses: "I'm so stupid to have gambled." But then, the report finally says, "When told that Singapore may have a casino, his eyes lit up and he said he would love to go." So, Sir, once a gambler, always a gambler. No, these are not my own words; this is the parting shot of this man. He says, "Once you are a gambler, you always remain a gambler." Do we really think that an entrance fee of $100 or $2,000 a year will keep out the hard core gamblers? I think the question of how the casino operators can overcome this rule by giving away free chips, which has been said many times outside this House, has not been adequately addressed. Then again, even if we do keep out people who do not have the means to be there in the first place with this $100 a day or $2,000 a year rule, do not forget it is the big fish that we must also pay attention to. The bigger they are, the harder they fall. Someone like Chia Teck Leng, he is in the multi-million-dollar league and he would not be kept out of a casino because of $100, and yet he succeeded in bringing untold damage to himself and his family as well as to the banks he swindled.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, having spoken twice on why we should not have a casino, and having heard yesterday the Prime Minister confirmed what is probably Singapore's worst kept secret, I was actually wondering what I could say today since the Government has already made up its mind. Nobody can argue with the Government's intentions of wanting to turn Singapore into a vibrant hub with these projects and their iconic architecture, top-class hotels, luxury retail outlets, fine restaurants, convention and exhibition centres, spectacular shows, theme parks and other world-class attractions. Neither can we deny that an investment of $5 billion will bring about huge gains to our economy. But to many like me, it is still the idea of the casino that gnaws uncomfortably inside me. Sir, I am not a purist nor a moralist. I am a worrier. I worry about the social fallout and whether we can manage them. I worry whether the safeguards we will put in place are adequate to deal with the problems that we will face when the lure of gambling will now be elevated to a new level of glitz and glamour hitherto not found in 4-D, Toto or horse racing. It is easy to say that only 2.1% of our population will be addicted to gambling and that we can therefore take comfort in this since this is within the same range as that found in other Asian countries. But 2.1% is 55,000 people, and this is no insignificant statistic. Then again, how do you quantify anguish, agony, broken families, neglected children and a total humiliation of one's esteem when that addiction reaches a point of no return? So I am not quite sure whether the sum of $40 million a year might be enough to deal with a problem that will affect so many people.”
“Their endurance and resistance to difficult and dangerous environment have to be tested so that they become good and tough soldiers as well as strong leaders. Sir, the SAF can take two measures to ensure safety. Firstly, it must be vigilant in its audit of training procedures to ensure proper compliance. Sir, the investigation into the dunking incident last year revealed that serious deviations from proper training measures had in fact taken place for some time. Secondly, the SAF must ensure that instructors and those supervising them are properly selected and are fully aware of their responsibilities, have the right skills and, most importantly, the right psyche to train our servicemen. I would, therefore, like to urge the Minister to continue to assure all NSmen and their families that safety is always a priority in their training.”
“Mr Chairman, Sir, the conclusion of the trial of the four SAF officers who were responsible for the death last year of NS Sergeant Hu Enhuai brought to a close a tragic and sad chapter in the history of the SAF. As a highly professional body charged with the heavy responsibility of training our young citizens in the defence of our country, the SAF must continually ensure the safety of our NSmen during their training. In a way, it is, if I may say so, fortunate that major incidents like the dunking incident and the accident involving the RSN Courageous are probably few and far between. Nevertheless, one high profile incident, even if it is a rare one, is enough to send the chills down the spines of servicemen and their parents. Still, there have been other incidents in past years, whether due to human error or faulty equipment, to merit this ever lingering concern. One single life lost, as we all know, is a loss not just to the families but as well as for the nation. Following the three training-related deaths last year, the SAF set up the 24-hour safety hotline. This is a welcome move. I understand that there have, however, not been many calls to this hotline. It means probably that, by and large, there are not too many safety issues in the SAF. But we need to encourage the servicemen to report safety breaches without fear of upsetting their superiors. We need to assure all servicemen that all such feedback will be investigated in an open and transparent way without fear of reprisal. In a way, training safety is a thorny issue. We must ensure no harm befall our servicemen, yet we cannot compromise on standards of training. We need to push our men to the limit so that they know what it is like to operate in a hostile environment.”
“Mr Chairman, I am glad that the Minister shares the same distress as Members of this House have over the situation in Myanmar. But I would like to ask him whether ASEAN or, more specifically, whether Singapore will advocate the position, within ASEAN, that unless Myanmar engages in very drastic political reforms, and immediately, and very specifically it means the release of Aung San Suu Kyi, then Myanmar should give up its chairmanship of ASEAN next year. The second question I have for the Minister is, assuming nothing happens in Myanmar, what does he see as the prospects of the ASEAN Regional Forum next year since a number of countries have indicated that if no changes happen in Myanmar, they will not take part in the ARF.”
“Can ASEAN afford to be led by a member state which has little respect from the rest of the free world? I believe that Singapore as one of the founding members of ASEAN - and certainly one of its more respected ones - can do much more to shake up the organisation and restore its credibility. We have to work with like-minded members to jolt Myanmar into action. In the 1990s, ASEAN applied pressure on Cambodia and pushed the leaders towards reform by accommodating the opposition before it allowed Cambodia to join ASEAN. Likewise, we can do the same with Myanmar. Without these concrete steps, I am afraid ASEAN will continue to be viewed as a paper mill churning out piles and piles of documents that attract little attention not only from outsiders, but even from its own people. It is time for ASEAN to take concrete steps so that its legitimacy can be further enhanced.”
“So many deadlines have been announced in the past - in fact, so many ideas and deadlines have been announced that I myself am confused whether, at times, ASEAN is talking about a FTA or a common market, or do they mean the same thing - the latest I hear is the creation of an ASEAN Economic, Social and Security Communities by 2020, but I thought that ASEAN first talked about a free trade area in 1976, and now after 29 years we are told we have to wait a further 15 years to attain some kind of economic community. So you can understand my confusion. Perhaps the next 15 years will allow time for ASEAN to set even later deadlines. Another case in point that underlines ASEAN's credibility is Myanmar's membership. Even with the continual arrest of Aung San Suu Kyi by the military regime, ASEAN continues to pretend that all is well and praises the efforts of the regime to bring about a transition to democracy. Here we have a person whose party won elections in 1990, and for 15 years has been under house arrest; so you have to really take it with a pinch of salt when the leaders of ASEAN make statements saying that what is happening in Myanmar is actually making progress towards democracy and political reform. Now, the credibility stakes for ASEAN will be raised further next year because that is when Myanmar takes over the chairmanship of the organisation. Other countries have called Myanmar all sorts of names, some are so crude that I would not even mention them in the House. But already a number of ASEAN dialogue partners have said that they will not attend ASEAN meetings next year, including the ASEAN Regional Forum in Yangon next year. So where does that leave ASEAN in the eyes of the world?”
“Sir, the reputation of ASEAN as a credible and effective regional body is a challenge that has confronted the organisation for many years and has been discussed in this House quite often. ASEAN meetings are unfortunately viewed, whether rightly or wrongly, often by outsiders as talk shops where officials hand out statements, speeches, declarations, joint communiques and memorandums of understanding, and little of substance is achieved. One has difficulty, in fact, keeping track of the scores of documents that are churned out at ASEAN Summits. At ASEAN meetings, the underlying principle is that ASEAN must resolve problems and face challenges in the spirit of solidarity, cooperation and consensus building. These are nice words and the language that flows out at such meetings is inevitably couched in diplomatic language that sometimes tells you little. A case in point is the issue of terrorism. It is a regional security issue that threatens all ASEAN countries. Yet, information and action from countries where the source of terrorism originates is difficult and slow to come by. Another case in point, hampered by the policy of non-interference in other member's affairs, Thailand's problems with Muslim insurgents in its south cannot be discussed at ASEAN level, although it is an issue that threatens to blow up and affect our member states. 12.15 pm At each annual ASEAN summit, there is grandiose talk of creating a common market and implementing a Free Trade Area.”
“Sir, I do not know what this breath test kit looks like, neither do I know how much it costs. Fortunately, I have not been stopped at any road block. So I have no idea what it is like. I was just wondering, if they do not cost a lot, would it not be possible to sell these kits to motorists? Because not all of us get drunk at nightclubs. Sometimes, we drink at friend's house or we go to private parties. And it may not be a bad idea if motorists are encouraged to keep one in their car. So every time, before you drive off, you take a puff, and you know you are above the limit, you call a taxi. Perhaps, the Traffic Police might want to look into this and make it a project to sell this. They could work with a commercial firm or do it themselves. Assoc. Prof. Ho Peng Kee: So we will have another campaign - own a breath analyser test kit campaign! Seriously, it is something that is worthy of some consideration. I suppose if it is commercially viable, then it will be out there. On the suggestion by Mr Tan, perhaps it is not so much for me or the Traffic Police, but for the commercial world. As Mr Tan has said, there may be a market out there.”
“I urge the Traffic Police to adopt this philosophy: better to prevent, than to punish. By making its presence visible on the roads and by adopting a friendly approach, the Traffic Police might be surprised how far it could gain the support of the community in its work.”
“It is, of course, easy to say that if there are no speed limits it means the limit is 50 kph. But, it is better to have the signs visible for all to see. In fact, just the other day, I was driving down the AYE at 90 kph and suddenly the speed limit sign changed to 50 kph and this is on a 4- or 5-lane expressway. I think somebody also wrote about this to the press. I had the same experience and so I had to brake quite suddenly, cut the speed by half, which means I could have caused a sudden accident if the driver behind was not paying attention, or I could slow down at my own pace, but then I risk being caught by one of the cameras of the Traffic Police. While still on the subject of speeding, I would like to ask if the Traffic Police intends to take any action against the people who hold car races in the middle of the night, particularly on weekends. I raised this before. The press still reports on it, but I think these are the real speedsters that the police should be catching. Working on the premise that the Traffic Police now understands that prevention is better than cure, I suggest that the Traffic Police also use this approach when dealing with the problem of drink driving which, as we all know, is very serious. I think that drink driving will drop dramatically if police show their faces around the carparks at our popular night spots. It might be a good idea if they conduct this breathalyser test before the drivers drive off. Maybe they could even set up a booth and table and charge them for the test. So the Traffic Police would not be booking drunken motorists but then they are actually preventing serious accidents from happening. So why waste resources trapping motorists at road blocks if our foremost objective is to prevent accidents from happening?”
“If you do not believe that this works, just notice for yourself how quickly motorists and motorcyclists slow down the moment they spot a traffic cop or police car. But, Sir, in enforcing the speed limits, the Traffic Police must also exercise some leeway. There was the case of the poor motorist who was issued three traffic summonses and received 24 demerit points on the same stretch of road one morning. As I understand it, this poor motorist had no inkling that the speed limit on the 4-lane carriageway could be only 50 kph and so he just drove a bit faster. In recent weeks too, I had some constituents coming to me with traffic summonses. They drove with a speed variation of around perhaps only 10 kph above the speed limit and, in most cases, they had no idea what the speed limits were. So, in its zeal to enforce the law, the Traffic Police must not go for the overkill and penalise many motorists whom I believe, for want of a better word, are not really speedsters. Many of these motorists are ordinary workers, delivery clerks, taxi drivers, etc, and their livelihood has been affected because they receive a lot of demerit points in a short while. I think here we have to make a fine distinction between those who speed intentionally and those who happen to drive at a fast speed momentarily. Sir, today's car engines are so powerful. Sometimes, you just press the pedal a bit, zoom you go above 50 kph and, if the camera is there, you get caught. You are not actually speeding, Sir. In many instances, in fact, if you do not drive too fast you are probably in danger of hogging the road, and that, in itself, is a hazard. I, therefore, urge the Traffic Police to review the speed limits along our roads and put up speed limit signs on all roads.”
“Sir, over the years, our Traffic Police has done a commendable job in keeping our roads safe for all road users. And of late, I notice that they have stepped up enforcement action against people who speed on our roads. In general, I think this is the right thing to do because those who speed on the roads are a hazard to other road users, as speeding results in serious injuries and even death to innocent people. Over the past few weeks, there was a lot of unease among Singaporeans over what I would call the "guerilla tactics" used by the Traffic Police in enforcing the speed limits on our roads. By this, I refer to, what I would say, the rather "sneaky" way the Traffic Police was concealing themselves and aiming the radar or laser guns at motorists from overhead bridges or viaducts, hiding themselves and doing this. But, Sir, I am glad to note that a few days ago, the Traffic Police has changed their tactics and come out in the open and announced where these speed detecting devices are located and motorists are therefore now aware of where they are when approaching these points on the roads. For the Traffic Police to do this, I would say that this is again very commendable. This is the right approach. If the Traffic Police seriously wants to curb speeding, it should let motorists know where the speed traps are. It is better to make people drive within the speed limits than try to trap them and catch them. 2.30 pm In fact, I myself realise that of late motorists appear to be driving within speed limits because they are aware that "Big Brother" is now visible and watching. So, by being more open and alerting motorists to where they have stationed themselves, the Traffic Police is, in fact, helping to improve the situation.”
“But I think this topic is important enough for us to debate it in Parliament further, maybe even lift the Whip and allow us to vote according to our conscience, so that Singaporeans know where each Member of Parliament stands. So far, only a handful of MPs have spoken on this important topic, and I am curious to know where the Opposition members stand because so far I have not heard a squeak from them at all on this issue.”
“Otherwise, you could be sure that all the casino moguls around the world are not scrambling here for a piece of the action if it is just to provide wholesome family entertainment. Sir, I shall not be repeating what I said previously in the House on this subject, except to say that just as we lament others who copy what we have done, let us also not try to copy what others are doing. The argument that we would be left behind if we do not have a casino because other countries around us are going to have casinos or already have casinos, is fallacious. Mdm Ho Geok Choo said yesterday that if we say no to a casino, we are sending a wrong message to the world, and that we would reinforce the stereotype others have of us. So we should be like Las Vegas or Monte Carlo or Macau - in Las Vegas they call it The Strip, so maybe we should have our own Singapore Strip - and then others would think well of us, that we are such an innovative people. Sir, I do not need to go into the arguments again. But I need to remind her, and others like her, that if we go ahead, they should know what the consequences are. In my years as an MP, I have seen enough cases of people coming to me for help because they are at their wits' end. They, or one of their parents, or in some cases, both parents, are deep in debt because of gambling. We do not need to perpetuate this further. In the end, Sir, we reap what we sow. This is an issue that strikes at the heart of all Singaporeans and I ask the Government not to rush into a decision. I would not go to the extent of what Dr Loo Choon Yong has suggested earlier, and that is to throw this matter to a referendum.”