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 10 of 14.
“Sir, I am grateful to the Minister for his reply and I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The following amendment stood in the name of Mr Ng Kah Ting - (7) That the sum to be allocated for Head I be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead IC-02 of the Development Estimates.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head I be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead IC-01 of the Main Estimates. In moving this amendment, I merely want to point out the difficulty of obtaining flight information from the Department of Civil Aviation. There is difficulty in getting through to the flight information telephone number at Changi Airport. It seems that there are not enough lines connected to the number as it is perpetually engaged. Although members of the public are asked to call the individual airlines for information, there is always the problem of looking for the right telephone number for the right airline. At the old Paya Lebar Airport, it was easier to get through to the flight information number. I suspect that at our larger new Changi Airport, there are insufficient telephone lines to deal with the increased low of information and, subsequently, the increased number of inquiries. I think this service should be adequately equipped. Sir, there have been a number of occasions when I have been unable to find out flight information such as when a flight would arrive, even as late as 20 minutes before it was scheduled to touch down. With the new airport quite a distance away from many parts of Singapore, I feel that flight details should be given to the Information Service as early as possible. I am given to understand that there have been occasions when flights have landed and the Information Service has not even been told of this by the Control Tower.”
“Sir, I would like to join the hon. Member for Chong Boon in thanking the Hon. Minister and Telecoms for their exemplary move in reducing telex charges and charges for International Direct Dialling calls recently. This is the second time these charges have been reduced in recent years. And it will certainly benefit a lot of business users. It is exemplary because I hope other statutory boards, like the Public Utilities Board notably, and other companies like SBS would follow instead of thinking of increasing prices and making huge profits all the time. Sir, there have been a lot of complaints for a long time regarding the Subscriber Trunk Dialling system. Under this system, telephone subscribers can make trunk calls by direct dialling. The problem here is that there are telephone subscribers who are billed by Telecoms for trunk calls they never make, in spite of having taken precautions such as putting a lock on the dial. However, the introduction of push-button telephone instruments has made this precaution quite difficult to exercise. Sir, I would like to ask the Hon. Minister what steps Telecoms is taking to deal with such complaints and to eliminate wrong billing? The Chairman: Encik Mansor is not here. Mr Ong.”
“Sir, I hope the move to make driving courses compulsory for motor-cyclists takes place soon because last year, when I made the suggestion, the Minister told the House that it was under consideration and this year it is still under consideration. Before I withdraw my amendment, can I also add my appreciation to the Traffic Police for the effort they are putting in to make our roads safer? Sir, I beg leave to withdraw. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.”
“All in all, I hope I am wrong when I say that the national road safety campaign seems to have lost some steam. Otherwise these would not have been the figures. Perhaps it is time for us, while carrying on the localized campaigns, to bring back the national road safety campaign which has not been held for quite some years. The other matter I would like to raise under this amendment concerns the use of the expressways. We now have two very long major expressways, the Pan-island Expressway (PIE) and the East Coast Parkway (ECP). Expressways like these are new to Singaporeans and my opinion is that quite a majority of road users in Singapore do not know how to use expressways, and I think we have to teach people how to use such roads before proceeding further. Expressways can be put to maximum use if people know how to use them, drive at the correct speed, but unfortunately there is a lot of road hogging at the moment by slow-moving vehicles and by heavy vehicles, especially on the fast righthand lane. I am a frequent user of the PIE and ECP and it has been my experience to see a lot of heavy vehicles occupying the left slow lane as well as the right fast lane, and if there is a centre lane they are also there. If you travel along the PIE, especially during the peak hours, i.e. in the early morning if you are going in the direction of Jurong and in the evening hours if you are coming back from Jurong, you will find quite often that traffic has to move at a snail's pace. I think that some education for motorists is necessary.”
“However, Sir, in view of the rising figures of road casualties and road deaths, I am wondering if the education part has been slackening and whether the law enforcement aspect of our road safety campaign has not been as intensive as it should be. Sir, two categories of road users come to my attention when I saw the figures. The two biggest categories of road casualties are the motor-cyclists and the pedestrians. Motor-cyclists account for 43% of the road casualties last year. I am wondering if we could again not do more to reduce the figures. Last year I made a suggestion that there should be compulsory training for motor-cyclists before they are given their licences by the Registry of Vehicles. As I pointed out then, and the situation is still the same, all it takes for somebody to be able to ride a motor-bike on the road is to get a provisional driving licence and to buy a licence plate. There is also the problem of hell drivers which, I think, is still prevalent in Singapore. With the construction of new expressways there are more opportunities for these hell drivers to tear down the roads with impunity and without regard for other road users. These hell drivers are most active, especially on week-ends. I myself have had the experience of being frightened out of my wits to suddenly see a gang of motor-cyclists tearing past me, and it is at times like this that I wonder where the Traffic Police are. The other group of road users who form a substantial majority of casualties and road deaths are the pedestrians. Here I would like to say that somehow the vigilance with which we used to monitor pedestrian crossings seems to have been lost and that probably accounts for the fact that 109 pedestrians died on our roads last year compared to 96 the year before.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head Q be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead QE-01 of the Main Estimates*. In moving this amendment, I would like to highlight once again in this House the problem of safety on our roads. About two years ago when I spoke on the same topic I suggested that perhaps we could learn from other countries which had a better record of road safety and to see how we could apply their methods to our own road safety programme. Last night I was very happy to hear the Hon. Minister saying that he had already sent a team to Japan and following that he hoped to introduce a comprehensive road safety programme for Singapore. Although I would say that it is better late than never, I feel that this study should have been undertaken much earlier to check what I believe is an alarming situation. Sir, the statistics will bear me out. Last year, there were a total of 12,692 road casualties. In other words, there were about an average of 35 road casualties a day and this compares unfavourably with the figure of 12,013 road casualties the year before, i.e. 1980. Last year, a total of 273 persons died on our roads compared to 257 the year before. This means that every 1 1/2 days somebody dies on the road in Singapore. Sir, our road safety campaigns have always been a two-prong approach. One is the education part and the other is law enforcement. On the education front, we have a lot of localized campaigns in the last few years. We directed road safety campaigns in the Housing Board estates. We enlisted the help of Residents' Committees to spread the message and we even directed the campaign towards school children by going to the schools.”
“Sir, permit me to make a little comment. I was rather intrigued by the discussion earlier on regarding Traffic policemen and road courtesy on the part of the Traffic policemen themselves. I would like to relate what I saw the other day while I was driving along the Pan-Island Expressway. I noticed a Traffic policeman making a U-turn on the PanIsland Expressway by going over the road-divider that divides the PIE. Obviously he was trying to catch hold of somebody speeding on a vehicle coming along the opposite direction and, in his zeal and enthusiasm to catch the offender, he himself committed an offence too. In so doing, he posed a hazard not only to himself but to other road users. I think the Minister should take note of this. It is very serious, and the message should be got through to Traffic policemen that they too should abide by the law and the rules governing road safety.”
“Sir, I am grateful to the Minister for his reply and I beg leave to withdraw. Amendment by leave, withdrawn. The sum of $37,151,350 for Head S ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. The sum of $38,138,000 for Head S ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. Head K -”
“My question is whether we could not have more legal officers in the Registry to expedite the process and can we not, to some extent, computerize some of the information in the Registry? The other matter I wish to raise under this amendment concerns the counterfeiting of trade marks. Singapore has gained a reputation as a manufacturing centre but at the same time it must not gain notoriety as a centre for fakes or imitation goods. Sir, in recent years there have been a few cases of people caught making imitation goods, i.e. they produced goods similar to those of well-known brands and they labelled these goods with the names of these well-known brands. When they are caught and brought to court, the sentences are very light. This is because under the Trade Marks Act (Chapter 206 of the Revised Edition), the penalty for counterfeiting is an imprisonment for a term not exceeding one year or to a fine not exceeding $2,000 or to both. The Hon. Minister can correct me if I am wrong, but I think in most of the recent cases the culprits concerned have got off with only very light sentences. If we think of the amount of money they must have raked in by passing off the imitation goods as genuine items, one is inclined to believe that the light sentence or the small fine imposed on them makes the whole venture quite a worthwhile proposition. So I think we have to tighten our laws to protect our manufacturers as well as our investors. My question to the Hon. Minister is whether he will consider amending the existing laws so as to enhance the penalties under the Trade Marks Act.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head S be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead SC-02 of the Main Estimates. Sir, in moving this amendment, I would like to express some concern in this House over two matters relating to trade marks in Singapore. The first involves the registration of trade marks and I would like to relate my own experiences concerning the registration of trade marks. I have been involved in making applications through my solicitors for registering trade marks, and I find that the process of getting a trade mark registered and approved takes a rather long time. From the time an application is submitted to the Registry of Trade Marks, it takes about a year before a reply is forthcoming from the Registrar as to whether there is any objection to the trade mark concerned. Then it has to be gazetted and, by the time it is finally approved, it takes all in all about two years. I find this is rather long because it then hampers the manufacturers who need formal approval of the trade marks in order that they may carry out their marketing activities. I have been informed that part of the reason for this delay is because in the Registry of Trade Marks there are only two legal officers and there is a backlog of work. The job is not made easier for lawyers who have to go through the intricacies of making searches at the Registry because a lot of the documents are not properly indexed. Sir, if we are to encourage our manufacturers to shift away from purely contract work and to market their products under their own brand names, I think we will have to do something to expedite the process of registering trade marks.”
“Sir, the Senior Parliamentary Secretary has asked me to give specific instances. Now, in Chinatown along Smith Street, Trengganu Street, why are the tables and chairs allowed to be put on the roadside, and why is it that in Alexandra, Leng Kee and Delta they cannot put even one table outside the coffee shop? Mr Chor Yeok Eng( In Mandarin): Sir, I believe this question was posed by other Members in this House in the past for which we gave an appropriate reply. As regards Chinatown area like Smith Street and Trengganu Street, we have issued quite a lot of notices to the offenders. The situation is the same this year. If the business is good, the fine is insignificant to the vendor who is fined. So, they can still carry on with their old ways.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, it is his duty to find out where these offences take place, and then to take the necessary action.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the Senior Parliamentary Secretary must surely be aware that in certain older parts of Singapore we find street hawkers and also tables and chairs clogging up the whole street. I would like to know why that situation is allowed to exist. Why is it that in my constituency action is swiftly taken the moment one single table is put outside the premises of the coffee shop? Mr Chor Yeok Eng( In Mandarin): Sir, first, may I answer the Member for Leng Kee? He has asked how long do we take to come to a compromise with eating shop operators. I would say that it may take about one or two months before we can come out with some regulations. He has also mentioned that in some of the newer residential areas there are some open spaces near eating shops to serve the purpose. If the space is on the five-foot way or the road, the possibility is not very great. Many of the residential areas are in the HDB housing estates and under the control of the HDB also. There, eating shops are sited usually in a corner where there is some space for use and may qualify. Sometimes when we take action, some of my staff will tell the Member of Parliament concerned that this extension has been opposed by the Ministry of the Environment. If the Member wants the shopkeepers to be allowed to put some tables out, will he then please make an application? Perhaps after we have stipulated all the regulations, the situation will be clearer. Where there is a bottleneck, I think we can clear it up later on. The Member for Alexandra has said that in certain older areas of the City this situation is allowed to exist. If the Member does not pinpoint any particular area, we would still not be able to know where such a situation exists.”
“The eating shops are situated in a corner with plenty of open space. So it is not a question of pollution. As regards the point concerning rats, the number quoted has been taken from the statistics of the Annual Report of the Ministry. I do not know whether the figures include rats in Parliament House. The other point is my suggestion of a compromise, and the regulations such as placing of a deposit. His Ministry is now considering it and negotiating with the departments concerned. I would like to know how long would it take his Ministry to arrive at a decision?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I have asked, not only this time but many times in the past, why coffee-shop owners are not allowed to put their tables and chairs outside their premises. What I would like to know from the Senior Parliamentary Secretary is why in some constituencies, particularly the Ministers' constituencies, tables and chairs are allowed to be put outside premises, not only on five-foot ways but also on the roadsides, thus obstructing pedestrians and vehicles. Why is there a discrimination against the hawkers and stall owners in my Constituency and also the constituency of the Member for Leng Kee? Mr Chor Yeok Eng( In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, first, I would like to reply to the points raised by the Member for Delta. The statistics were given by the Member for Leng Kee, not me. He has also asked whether I have received complaints of rats in this House. So far, I myself have not seen any rat in Parliament House. As regards the Member for Alexandra, he says that my Ministry takes action only in the constituencies of Members of Parliament and not those of the Ministers. I do not think this is true. If he could give me concrete instances, we will take action to deal with them. Dr Ow Chin Hock( In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to clarify one or two points before I withdraw my amendment. Perhaps the Senior Parliamentary Secretary has misunderstood me. The first point: there is a difference between a city area and a Housing Board estate. In the old built-up areas in the city, the shops have a different kind of environment which might cause obstruction to traffic if tables and chairs are allowed to be put on the five-foot way. In the new Housing Board estates, however, the situation is different.”
“Let us hope the warning signs are as wrong as those who predicted the end of the world last week, but if the trying times do come it will be the test of all of us as a nation and as a people. It would not be simple for Singaporeans, acclimatized to conditions of plenty and affluence, to imagine themselves to be in the same position as those who are in wartorn places like Cambodia, or in drought-stricken countries like Uganda, or in parts of India where we read last week of villagers resorting to picking grain from cow excrement. Let us hope that such misfortune does not befall us. In such places, starvation is the order of the day and therefore let us as a Government and as responsible leaders continue to exhort our people to practise the virtues of thrift and frugality. These are values our young people are unfortunately in danger of losing, helped along no doubt by the distortion of life painted for them by an emerging breed of gift-bearing prophets promising a new heaven on earth. Singaporeans could well learn from Greek mythology which tells of some Trojans who should have known better. The euphoria that greeted the wooden horse - a gift of the gods they said made them lose sight of the values that saw them through 10 years of siege by an enemy and through correspondingly difficult times, and brought them in the end to imminent grief and calamity. This is the tragedy that befell a city-state and it is a tragedy that could just as well befall us if we lose sight of our values and of our objectives. 3.26 p.m.”
“It was stated last year that steps would be taken, including the possibility of presumptive taxation of individuals who claim they do not keep accounts, to bring more people into the income tax net. I would like to know what steps are being formalized in this direction. The sooner we do something about this, the faster we reduce the inequity in our income tax system where the taxes are borne largely by wage-earners. The more people there are paying taxes, the less tax each and every one of us hopefully has to pay. The financial community has expressed some disappointment with the lack of further tax concessions to them. During the past decade or so, many measures have been introduced to promote a range of financial activities to make Singapore the financial centre in this region. Additional incentives should have been introduced to allow us to compete more effectively with other financial centres such as Hong Kong. As an example, only 50% of the management fee paid by an investment holding company or a unit trust is tax deductible, whereas in Hong Kong this is fully deductible. A concession here would no doubt have given greater impetus to the funds management industry. Another area where something ought to be done is in the exemption of withholding tax on interest paid on balances derived from gold trading of non-residents. There is again no such tax on interest relating to such transactions in Hong Kong and in London, and such an exemption would have encouraged the development of Singapore as an international gold market. In conclusion, I would like to state once again that I do not quarrel with the basic philosophy underlining the Budget Statement, and that is, we are in for some rough weather and we should therefore fasten our seat belts.”
“I just overheard my good Friend, the hon. Member for Delta, saying that it is not enough. But I think it could not have come at a better time, especially when we are trying to preserve our traditional Asian values. But let us hope that Singaporeans bear in mind that tax relief or no tax relief, it is still our moral duty to look after our old parents and grandparents. It would be a sad reflection of our time and of our people if we need to take tax measures and to introduce laws to make us carry out our moral obligations. As I am now touching on the matter of taxes, I would like to raise another fundamental question. Our income tax policy has always been to spread the income tax net to cover as many individuals as possible. Allow me once again, Sir, to quote rom Hansard, Vol. 40, No. 6, col. 348, the words of the previous Hon. Minister for Trade and Industry when he presented the Budget this time last year. He said: 'The more citizens we have paying income tax, the greater will be the appreciation amongst Singaporeans of the basic fact of life - how to finance various programmes, like health, housing and social welfare. Our people will have a keener understanding that more expenditure on welfare programmes and subsidies must mean an increase in their income tax. Those who have to pay income tax to meet the costs of welfare programmes will at once ask themselves why they must work to subsidize the laggards and the indolent who are able-bodied but reluctant to work.' He then went on to point out that the majority of our taxpayers are wage-earners who cannot evade tax but there were still those, largely the self-employed, who continued to evade the tax net.”
“I wonder how many homes there are that still have the bucket system to benefit by the removal of the tax on nightsoil removal charges! (4) Most of us will no doubt applaud the Hon. Minister for raising the relief for aged dependants from $750 to $1,000 per aged dependant.”
“In 1977 I spoke in this House on this subject and, as recent as four days before the Budget, I raised this matter again. I am glad that the cries of Backbenchers like myself are heard occasionally even if it has been a long time coming, even if it is few and far between. I hope the Hon. Minister will listen just as well to a lot of other suggestions that my colleagues and I on the Backbench will no doubt be putting to him during the course of this debate. While I am therefore pleasantly surprised by this concession, I must at the same time add that I am still a little bit disappointed that the same has not been done in respect of life insurance premiums. I am sure the Hon. Minister appreciates the need to encourage our people to take out life insurance policies especially our younger people, and I can think of nothing that could be more encouraging to them than an appropriate tax relief. (2) Exemption for residential properties from estate duty will be revised to include the full value of any one residential property. Unfortunately, this concession will not benefit the majority of the people in the lower income group as at any rate they do not own large properties at all. It is easy to see that the rich, however, can now avoid paying some estate duty by putting as much as possible into one single property. (3) Fixed charges in PUB bills will now be excluded from the calculation of the 10% tax charge. This concession in my opinion is not just modest; it is unshamedly cosmetic in nature and must have fallen short of expectations of a lot of people, including PAP Backbenchers. Water-borne fee, domestic refuse and sanitary appliances fees are but a mere fraction of a household's PUB bill. And 10% of that, Sir, is a mere, mere fraction of a fraction.”
“The tourist who returns home satisfied is our best advertisement, but he is not going to do us any service or any favour if the memories he takes back of Singapore are of high room charges, high food prices, expensive shopping and of having hardly seen anything interesting. True, this does not explain why 2 1/2 million people came to our shores last year. But it is worthy to note that our closest neighbours are also competing very hard for the tourist dollar. They have got more reasonable hotel room rates. One of our neighbours has just removed import duties and taxes on a range of consumer goods that tourists normally buy home. Their shopkeepers have lower overheads and can obviously pass on lower prices to their customers, thereby undermining our position as a shopping paradise. Above all, our neighbours are endowed with natural scenic beauty that we sadly lack. A thorough study of the tourist sector is what is needed. It has to be a probing one, encompassing everything from prices to attractions to attitudes of those in the services sector. We must learn why Hong Kong, which not long ago had more tourists a year than we had, is now trailing behind us. There is an important lesson to be learnt there. As in everything else, we cannot take things for granted in the tourist industry. We must take measures quickly before we unwittingly kill the goose that is now laying the golden eggs. Tax Changes A number of tax concessions have been given by the Hon. Minister. These are modest concessions not likely to create ripples of excitement but in line with the cautious approach he has adopted. I would like to comment briefly on some of them. (1) The ceiling on tax relief for CPF contributions has been removed.”
“And if our tourist would like to venture into some of our restaurants, he will find that, unlike the practice at home, our restaurants do not display their menu outside their premises for a little preview so that he can have an idea of the prices before entering. Nor will he find it easy to digest his food when, at the end of the meal, he is presented with a bill that does not give a breakdown of the items of food he has consumed but merely a lumpsum figure under one single item - "food", and also that he has to pay for the peanuts and towels which he thought came free. The tourist who comes to take advantage of our shopping bargains will find that the interesting little shops that used to flank North Bridge Road and Change Alley are gone. Instead, he will find large shopping centres and swank departmental stores which are no different from what he finds back home. What he will notice is that prices here are not cheap after all. The shopkeeper, with whom he hopes to strike a bargain, will tell him of the high overheads he has because the developer of the building is charging him an exorbitant rent; the developer of the building would no doubt have already told his tenants, including our shopkeeper, how much it had cost him to put up the building because he had paid enormous sums to the URA in tendering for the land and another hefty sum in development charges to the Ministry of National Development. What I am trying to say is that we face the danger of pricing ourselves out of the tourist market. And it would not be just rising hotel room rates that will cause it. If eating is no more a delight because it is so expensive, and if shopping is not so cheap after all, what else is there to draw tourists to Singapore?”
“And London Bridge. We would be naive to expect the tourist to come that far to gawk at our OCBC Centre, or to see our Merlion spouting water at the harbour front, or to find out where Sir Stamford Raffles first stepped foot on Singapore some 163 years ago. So what does that leave our tourist with? Well, for one thing, he discovers, on checking into his hotel, that the roof over his head which he will have for a few hours a day will burn a big hole in his pocket. That leaves him with possibly two things that could attract him to Singapore. Thanks to the efforts of the Singapore Tourist Promotion Board, he would have been, informed that this is a land of a thousand-and-one culinary delights, where eating is a national pastime and where the biggest and prosperous area of growth and development is around the waistline of its 2 1/2 million inhabitants. He would also have been told that this is the shopping paradise of the world where bargains galore abound. So his appetite already whetted, it will not be too long before our tourist friend discovers, to his horror, that the cup of coffee in his hotel costs $4.00 and that a plate of chicken rice costs $12.00. And it is not just in the hotels where he will be amazed by the dazzling prices. At hawker centres, or some hawker centres, in particular one which is not far from the tourist belt, he will discover that there are those who are as eager as our hoteliers to charge him astronomical prices, only this time the place is not air-conditioned and the fellow serving him is dressed in a pair of shorts and slippers.”
“The fun of sitting at open-air stalls and tables along places like Albert Street and the thrill of wandering through Chinatown with its old buildings and oriental flavour have gone, as the old are torn down to make way for the new in the name of progress. If, finally, all there is to see in Singapore are our spanking-clean high rise buildings and man-made parks, then the tourist might as well stay at home where he can admire the grandeur of the Empire State Building, the Eiffel Tower, and Mount Fuji. An hon. Member: London Bridge.”
“For them, it is one or two meals in a year with a little bit of the extras, not just for themselves but for their children so that they can all have a really happy new year. But when they end up paying more, they are forced to stretch their purse strings in order to have this enjoyable time, Clearly it is time the Government took steps to prevent this ripping-off of the majority of the people by the unscrupulous minority each time a festive occasion comes around. Tourism Rising prices, which I have just touched on, do not just afflict Singaporeans. Unfortunately it is creeping its way very quickly into one of our most important foreign exchange spinners, namely, the tourist sector. The Hon. Minister for Trade and Industry was right when he said that our hotel room rates "have increased substantially in the past few years and threaten to price Singapore out of the tourist circuit". Hoteliers would no doubt gleefully disagree with the Hon. Minister, pointing to healthy room occupancy figures and to glowing projections of three million visitors in 1982. But they forget all too soon something very basic to our tourist industry. We have to ask ourselves why does the tourist come to Singapore. Is it because of our beaches where ocean waves roll continuously on to the sand? No, there are thousands of beaches with sand whiter than ours, with sea-water much cleaner than ours, tucked away in every corner of the world. And it is the same sun that shines everywhere. Is it for sightseeing? True to some extent, more so in days gone by. What the tourist wants to see, whether it be in Singapore or anywhere in the world, is the quaint, the unusual, the picturesque, something very different from what he sees back home. Bugis Street has disappeared but in name.”
“Too often has it been said that our inflation is an imported one and that there is not much we can do about it. To some extent, I think this is true because a lot of our needs are imported. But in quite a number of instances I do not think the Government should just sit back. Take, for instance, the recent controversy over pork prices. As pig farmers, pork merchants and butchers, and even CASE, started to slice up one another in public as to who was to blame for the rising prices, those in the lower-income group watching from the sidelines found themselves with another hardship. With a lot of pussyfooting on the part of those concerned and less-than-firm action on the part of the Primary Production Department the man-in-the-street found himself facing higher prices for a very basic food item. And it is not just with pork prices. Look, what happens each year around the festive seasons, especially during the Lunar New Year? Food prices shoot up astronomically. Let us not pretend that it is the law of supply and demand that determines prices. Clearly there are people exploiting the situation, pushing prices up at a time when they know everyone would like a little extra fish, meat, poultry and vegetables to celebrate a happy occasion. Consumers are at the mercy of profiteers, and what we would like to know are who are these profiteers? What is the rationale for allowing a few or a small minority to blatantly manipulate food prices for their own selfish ends and bleeding the consumer of his hard-earned money on a happy occasion? A festive occasion is a time for rejoicing. For many people, especially those in the lower income group, it is the time to enjoy the fruits of their hard labour.”
“Where national interest prevails and short-sightedness takes the place of international cooperation during difficult times, even the best of friends can turn against you. The doctrine of free trade, of which we are one of the strongest advocates, has yet to be universally accepted and under economically difficult conditions there will be growing trade friction amongst countries as governments, mindful of votes, hurry-scurry to protect their industries with quotas, tariffs, orderly market arrangements, product graduation schemes and what-have-you. What is more valuable a lesson to us is that we must be continually alert to changing circumstances and to re-adapt ourselves to meet these changes, and this we have done. The restructuring of our economy and the move into the production of higher value-added goods is our best bet in beating protectionism. Inflation The Hon. Minister has stated that inflation in 1981 did not subside as much as he would like it to have, mainly due to rising food prices. I quote him: 'Consumer prices rose by 8.2% marginally, less than in 1980. However, inflation in Singapore was again lower than the inflation in the industrialized countries and that of our neighbouring countries'. Some consolation it is to the Singaporean to know that although he pays more for everything in general, his neighbours have to pay even more. Today the Singaporean pays more for a bus ride, for poultry, for pork, for a cup of coffee, for his clothes, for housing. And he has less to spend with as he finds that he has to contribute 4% more to the CPF. What he is interested in is not to be told how lucky he is to pay less than his neighbours, but what his Government is doing to make sure that the value of his dollar has not eroded faster than he can earn it.”
“Trade Protectionism Sir, this is something which has bothered us for many years. It is a well-known fact already that to make ourselves less vulnerable to protectionism we have to continue restructuring our economy and move into the production of more higher value-added products. As the recession in the world economy continues, protectionistic action will increase and it will not be long before we discover who our friends are on the international scene. Take, for instance, the recent controversy in West Germany over the low fares offered by our national airline, Singapore Airlines. With memories of the Australian ICAP policy still fresh in our minds, we were treated to another example of protectionism. Singapore Airlines found itself the subject of a campaign of harassment by the West German authorities because it was in a position to offer better services to travellers at prices lower and more competitive than others, including of course West Germany's own Lufthansa. Under the pretext of cleaning up the so-called "discounting" mark9t in their country, they imposed barriers and difficulties on SIA. Throwing all principles of free competition to the wind, the West German authorities succeeded in excluding SIA from what is apparently a lucrative market and in which their own airline was unable to compete efficiently. In what must surely amount to plain deceit on the part of the West German authorities, SIA found itself forced to sell fares at published rates, thus losing passengers and invaluable revenue to other airlines which continued giving rampant discounts. Suddenly not one eye, but all eyes of the West German authorities were closed. The lesson we learn from this episode is invaluable.”
“True to his background as a former banker, the Minister has not betrayed the prudence and conservatism that bankers are normally associated with when he warns us of the turbulence afflicting some of the most significant economies in the world. It is not without justification too, for the statistics bear him out: 16 million people unemployed in Europe, of whom 3 million are found in a now-not-so-Great Britain; 9 1/2 million unemployed in the United States, and 1/2 million in Australia. Certainly the outlook for 1982 is grim and the road so hazardous that to make any sweeping changes now in Singapore would amount to taking a risky gamble that we can ill-afford. In the light of prevailing world conditions, the Budget is as practical and pragmatic as it can be. It will not set off fireworks but it will give us all a little breathing space in a world full of economic uncertainty. It is, in short, a "playsafe" Budget. But there is another side to the coin: if we do nothing, we end up achieving nothing. True, there are positive aspects to the Budget. For one thing our housing programme will continue unabated and proper incentives have been introduced in the construction industry to enable it to mechanize its methods and upgrade expertise. And, most important of all, to make sure that Singaporeans get their homes faster. But what I am just wondering is if more could not have been done to pump-prime our economy at a time when increased efforts by all is so essential. Have we been so cautious in under-scoring the economic storms ahead that Singaporeans may in the end not be able to see the light at the end of the tunnel? I would like now to make some comments on certain aspects of the Budget Statement.”
“As any businessman worth his salt will tell you, during bad times one has to be extremely cautious and prepare for the worst, and I think that is what he is preparing for us and we know that the worst can be ahead of us. Last night we heard the news on television that prominent economists forecasted that America was heading for a deep recession, with a wave of bankruptcies so severe that it would be as bad as the Great Depression of the 1930s. The warning sounded by the Minister is not a new one. His predecessor had also sounded these warnings to us. Let me quote from Hansard (Vol. 39, col. 635, 5th March 1980): 'We face the uncertainty of superpower conflicts in the political and military arena. We face the certainty of higher fuel prices. We face the grim prospect of the region being destabilized by external forces, and the oil life-line being cut. . . we are sure of sluggish world economic growth cohabitating with inflation. We, therefore, have the perfect recipe for trouble.' Last year, again in presenting his Budget Statement, the Minister said, and I quote (Vol. 40, col. 354, 6th March 1981): 'We face difficult times. It is an uncertain world. There is disharmony between the superpowers. The political equilibrium in the world is precarious. We must be prepared for the worst but the worst must hold no fear for us. Recession, unemployment, higher oil prices, protectionism, regional conflict, security threats, international turbulence - all these threaten our livelihood. We cannot avoid getting wet in bad weather, but if we have made adequate preparations, we can put our raincoats on, and when we get indoors, change into dry clothes.' Sir, these are the warnings which have been sounded to us previously. They have been sounded Again with good reason.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker, Sir, for the opportunity to start off this debate. I rise in support of the motion standing in the name of the Hon. Minister for Trade and Industry. Notwithstanding the presence of an opposition in this House, the Hon. Minister would no doubt be receiving overwhelming support from hon. Members, for even the hon. Member for Anson was seen to be applauding him at the end of his lengthy Budget Statement some 10 days ago. The Budget is not the "go-getter" Budgets of previous years. If anything, it will be noted not so much for what it tries to achieve but for what it does not try to do, and there are reasons for this. In preparing this year's Budget Statement, the Hon. Minister has sought the views of various business groups, trade unions, CASE, National University of Singapore, and I find this move a highly commendable one. I hope this is the start of future trends for future Budgets, and I hope too that as often and where it is possible and practical, other Ministers will also do what the Minister for Trade and Industry has done. He has told us that he has taken the views of these various groups into consideration "where appropriate". In view of the disappointment of businessmen that there is a lack of sufficient incentives in this year's Budget to stimulate business, I wonder if the Minister has considered that most of the views presented to him have not been too appropriate. Much has been said about the fact that this year's Budget Statement is a cautionary one. There are, of course, good reasons for it being so, as the Minister has explained. This is not the time for giveaways.”
“However, with much persistence from the Backbenchers, we can see that the policy has been changed. May I then end on a note that I hope the Hon. Minister for Finance listens as well as did his other Ministerial colleagues to the Backbenchers.”
“Members for Pasir Panjang, Boon Lay, Henderson, Changi and Punggol also raised this matter. No doubt, if I were to go further back into Hansard, I would not be surprised to discover that practically everyone on the Backbench has raised this matter sometime or other. Similarly, we have on many occasions asked for the limit on the tax relief for CPF contributions and life insurance premiums to be raised. In 1977 I was one of those who spoke on this matter, and subsequently the Member for Punggol also spoke. In 1979 the ceiling was raised to $5,000. I think this is a good illustration that the Government does not turn a deaf ear to the pleas of Members of Parliament. Sir, I do not intend to go further into the reasons for asking for more reliefs here, as the hon. Member for Delta has already covered that subject. But I think it would not be inappropriate to ask that perhaps, to simplify matters, CPF contributions and life insurance premiums should be fully granted relief from taxation. As I have said, requests for further income tax reliefs of various types are topics which have been raised before countless numbers of times in this House. Undoubtedly, I do not expect the Hon. Minister to say "Yes". I think he will say "No" again today. But he can have the assurance that as long as he keeps saying "No", so will the Backbenchers continue to ask him the same question year after year. I have no doubt that in the coming Budget debate some of us will do so. But I am optimistic that, with repetition, the Hon. Minister will concede. If I may recall the memory of hon. Members. We had on many occasions asked for CPF contributions to be used for the purchase of private homes. But the Minister, or rather the former Minister for Labour, had insisted that this could not be done.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to join my good Friend, the hon. Member for Delta, in speaking on this Bill, in particular to ask for further income tax reliefs. Income tax legislation is of utmost importance to everyone in Singapore and each year, around Budget time, everyone looks forward to matters concerning income tax to see how generous the Hon. Minister would be. Sir, in formulating these policies not just pertaining to income tax but on all aspects of the Budget, the Minister has always taken into consideration the views of Members as well as the views expressed by members of the public. Indeed it is gratifying to note that the Hon. Minister for Trade and Industry, who has been charged with the duty of preparing the Budget this year, has taken great pains to meet and to consult various groups of people in the preparation of the Budget. Sir, it is this style of government - being alive and responsive to views and opinions expressed by others, whether it be in this House or outside this House - that has kept our Government in close touch with reality and to changing circumstances that affect the lives and the destinies of Singaporeans. Likewise, Backbenchers have been very vocal in this House in expressing matters that affect our citizens, especially those that affect the pockets of our citizens, and indeed income tax is no exception. Sir, my Friend, the Member for Delta, is correct in saying that requests for personal reliefs and earned income reliefs have been talking points in many a Parliamentary debate. A check through Hansard reveals that in the last two years alone this matter was raised nine times. In 1980, the Members for Whampoa, Bedok, Changi and Khe Bong raised this matter. In 1981 the hon.”
“At a time when OPEC is reducing the price of oil owing to a decline in global demand and a glut in supply, it seems that the advantage of such a situation is not being passed on to Singaporeans, and instead the Government is seeking to raise the prices of petrol in Singapore. Even stranger must be the fact that this latest move runs counter to the Government's position that prices of oil products must reflect world market conditions. Pump prices were decontrolled about three years ago, so that consumers could pay according to world-wide rates. Now at a time when prices are falling or stabilizing, the Government chooses to increase the cost of petrol to Singaporeans. In the end it is not only the hard-pressed motorist who suffers. Everyone knows what happened the last time petrol prices went up by a substantial amount. Everything else followed suit. There would always be those who would be the first to increase their prices thereby causing further difficulties to Singaporeans, particularly those in the lower income group. With the inflation rate running around 8% this year, can we afford any round of Government-induced price increases? A survey was made recently by the Automobile Association of Britain on the cost of owning a car in various countries around the world. In this list of countries which included developed countries like the United States, Japan and Great Britain, Singapore was placed the second most expensive country in the world to own a car. With the astonishingly high duties and taxes one pays just to own a car, our unenviable position on this list is not surprising. And it will not be surprising if, with the passing of this Bill, Singapore succeeds in making it to the top of this unflattering list.”
“Sir, I rise in support of this Bill and would like to draw the attention of this House to a particular provision. Clause 4 of the Bill seeks to change the mode of valuation of petrol duties from the present fixed rate to a percentage based on petrol pump prices. Presently fixed duties on petrol are 36 cents per litre for premium grade and 34.5 cents per litre for regular. Following this, petrol duties will be at 40% of pump prices as stated by the hon. Minister earlier. With this proposed change, we can expect that petrol duties will go up by an additional 12 cents for premium petrol and nine cents for regular petrol. It is unlikely that oil companies will absorb these increases in duty. In fact, they will be passed on to the motorists. As a result motorists in Singapore can expect to pay $1.19 per litre for premium grade and $1.08 for regular grade petrol. Present prices are already expensive enough. With the additional duties, Singapore will be one of the most expensive places in the world to buy petrol, notwithstanding the fact that it has one of the biggest refineries in the world. People in Hongkong pay the equivalent of only 85 Singapore cents per litre. In the United States where prices differ from city to city, the average retail price is only about 82 Singapore cents per litre for premium grade. Our friends across the Causeway pay only 92 Singapore cents per litre for regular and 98 Singapore cents per litre for premium grade, What is the justification of the Government to increase the cost of petrol to motorists in Singapore?”
“Sir, it seems to me that the problem is one of organization rather than productivity. Will this task of reorganizing the Work Permit Division not be better left to the Management Services Department of the Ministry of Finance, rather than to the Productivity Enhancement Team of the Ministry of Labour?”
“What I would like to know is whether the security deposit provided for under clause 8 can be used to compensate innocent members of the public who will lose their money if the libraries they subscribe to are forced to close, in the same way as we provide for travellers to be compensated if they are victimized by unscrupulous travel agents. Sir, I have another point to raise and this relates to clause 14. Under clause 14, every film must be submitted for censorship. As was reported not long ago, films which have been submitted to the Board of Film Censors take a long time to be censored. There have been instances of films taking up till six months to a year before they are approved. I would like to ask the Minister whether there is now sufficient manpower in the Board of Film Censors to ensure that films are censored quickly.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, this Bill seeks to strengthen as well as to amend the existing laws relating to the possession, distribution and the exhibition of films. No doubt, it has been prompted by the growing popularity of video tapes as can be seen by clause 2 which now seeks to extend the definition of "film" to include video tapes as well as the latest development, video discs. Sir, all of us in this House are aware of the necessity for this Bill, particularly with the revelation by the Minister in this House earlier this year and again just a while ago that some operators of video libraries are characters of less than desirable standing. Adequate protection must be given to members of the public to ensure that they are protected against those who seek to enrich themselves by catering to baser needs through the distribution of films that contain excessive sex and pornography, As we all know, whenever there is something popular going on, there will always be those who are out to make a fast buck from innocent victims. Those who do their business honestly have nothing to fear on the implementation of this legislation. It is those flyby-night operators that some of the provisions of this legislation is directed. Sir, I feel, however, that this Bill does not provide sufficient protection for members of the public. Some operators of video libraries are still charging subscription fees as well as entrance fees for those who intend to borrow films from them. If their licence is revoked or suspended because they have contravened the Act, the subscribers will lose everything.”
“Sir, the Hon. Minister of State has spoken of the intention to introduce legislation to make audiometric examinations compulsory for workers exposed to high levels of noise. My question is: how high is a high level of noise? Does his Ministry have a permissible dBA level for workers exposed to high noise levels?”
“Sir, will the use of national servicemen in the construction industry be on a voluntary basis too?”
“Sir, in view of the fact that hotels depend on the provision of good service to their guests, would it not be dangerous to rely on imported workers to solve the problem, without first ensuring that they are properly trained? Mr Eugene Yap Giau Cheng: First, I would like to stress that it is important for the hotel industry to mechanize, and through mechanization the unnecessary labour in the various sectors of the hotel industry will be released to perform work in areas where service is most required. On the other hand, by liberalizing the work permit schemes, people will be brought in to fill in the areas where chambermaids and waitresses will be used, and training will certainly have to be provided by the hotel if they want to remain viable.”
“Sir, the Hon. Minister and the Senior Minister of State have given us very satisfactory replies. But I cannot resist telling my good Friend, the Member for Mountbatten, once again that our people and children are intelligent enough to know how to wash their hands without having to be told on prime time TV how to do it. And, Sir, you do not have to be married to know how to wash your hands too! Sir, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment by leave, withdrawn.”
“Again, I must say here that I was a bit disappointed the other day when my good Friend, the hon. Member for Mountbatten, mentioned that the SBC should show on prime time educational programmes on teaching people how to wash their hands. I hope the Member for Mountbatten was not serious about it because if the SBC were to take up his suggestion, I think I am going to sell my TV set and ask for a refund of my TV licence. Let us not go overboard with the moral concept and adopt this holier-than-thou attitude all the time. I believe very much and I am sure all of us here agree with the views of our Government that we have to take all steps necessary to reinforce our moral and cultural values. But put very simply, let us not take the fun out of living from our people. After all, Singaporeans are human beings. When we exhort them to work hard, they all work hard. But let us allow them the chance to play and have some fun in the evenings. When they come home after a hard day's work and switch on the TV set, do not confront them with a lot of slogans and messages on how to be good, how to work hard, and how to wash their hands. So far, the SBC is moving on the right track and I would like to say, "Keep up the good work". I hope I will be here next year to give more words of praise for the SBC.”
“Sir, the video tape is increasing in popularity and there is nothing we can do or we should do to check its popularity. In Singapore this popularity may have come about partly because many people still consider SBC not good enough in so far as the types of programmes are concerned. As far as I am concerned, I think the SBC has come a long way since its first year of incorporation. I was one of those who used to hurl a lot of brickbats at the old RTS. But under the first Chairmanship of the Hon. Minister for Communications, the SBC has come a long way since its incorporation. I remember there used to be a joke that RTS stands for "Repeat Television Singapore" and the new SBC would stand for "Same Boring Channel". But after one year I can safely say that the SBC has done much more than I really thought it could do. But there is still room for improvement. I am sure we can provide much more by way of entertainment for our people. I would urge the SBC to seriously study or maybe make a survey of the programmes which our people enjoy most and to act accordingly. I was a bit disillusioned the other day when I read that the SBC was bargaining very hard over payments for drama serials from Hong Kong. Apparently they are paying US$200 per episode at the moment. The Hong Kong people wanted to raise it to US$800, and there was a talk that we would probably see the last of the serials. I would urge the SBC to keep a more open mind on such matters. After all, it is reaping tens of thousands of dollars per episode by way of advertising revenue. What is US$800 compared to the amount of revenue which is coming in? I would seriously remind the Minister that the SBC should never forget that its prime objective is to entertain.”
“I suggest that the Ministry of Culture should require operators to place a deposit with the Ministry or to provide a banker's guarantee so that, if and when they cease business, their members can recover their deposits through the Ministry of Culture. Sir, operators should also not be allowed to collect entrance fees but they may, of course, be allowed to collect deposits against renting of tapes. But such deposits should be refunded to the member on the termination of his membership. The other problem with video tape libraries is censorship. A lot of video tape library operators do not submit their tapes to the Censorship Board for censorship although they are required to do so under the law, because the Censorship Board sometimes takes as long as six months or even up to a year to screen a tape. I understand this is because of the manpower shortage which the Censorship Board has with regard to screening of such tapes. I would suggest that the video tape libraries be allowed to implement a self-censorship scheme. This would be similar to the scheme which is presently applicable to book importers. Book importers are not required to submit every copy of a book to the Ministry of Culture for censorship or screening. Instead, they are given the discretion to decide for themselves what is suitable and what is not suitable within the general policy guidelines. I would suggest that a similar system be adopted for video tape libraries and importers of video tapes. The Ministry should, therefore, provide clear policies and guidelines and it can also conduct spot checks on such people. Of course, if there are any infringements, then heavy penalties should be imposed on them.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head J be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead JA-01 of the Main Estimates*. *The same amendment also stood in the name of Mr Eugene Yap Giau Cheng. Sir, lately there has been growing concern over the proliferation of video tape libraries in Singapore. The Government has already stated that legislation will be intro- duced at a later stage to check the proliferation of video tape libraries. Sir, legislation is necessary because we have to control tapes which are pornographic and undesirable in terms of content and theme. But here I would like to add a word of caution. In so far as video tapes are concerned, the object of legislation should be to prevent undesirable people from operating video tape libraries, in other words, the fly-by-night operators who are out to exploit the situation or to make a quick buck. The legislation, which is to be introduced should not make it difficult for the individual to borrow or to possess tapes purely for his own enjoyment. The video tape, after all, is a useful medium which, if properly utilized, can increase our fun and enrich our own cultural life. Socially I would prefer to see members of a family crowding round the video and TV sets in the evenings rather than to see members of a family playing mahjong or the children running about in the streets. Sir, there is concern over video tape library operators because many of them are collecting entrance fees and subscription fees. As a result, if an operator were to close his operations, the people who have paid entrance fees and subscription fees will stand to lose everything.”
“I am told that one solution would be to cast the gas pipes in concrete and lay them above ground. This would minimize any risk of accident should there be a leakage, as the gas would then filter into the air. I am told that this new system is already being used in the newer housing estates. But in the old housing estates like mine, the gas pipes are still laid underground. I shudder to think that all of us may be walking above possible death traps. Is it possible then, Sir, for us to undertake a complete study of our underground gas pipe system to see what improvements can be made? Another solution which has been suggested to me is that we could set some kind of a device which triggers off an alarm whenever there is a leakage of gas. But what I feel most important for us and for the PUB to do now is to educate the people as to what to do in the event they detect a leakage of gas from the pipe, and not only in the matter of gas but also what to do if there is a short circuit of electrical wires or in the cable system. If our people know what to do when they come across such faults, then perhaps we could reduce the risk of any accident.”
“Sir, thank you for allowing me to speak. I would like to raise a matter of great public importance. Last Saturday, an explosion occurred in the electrical meter room in a block of flats in my constituency, just next to the PAP Alexandra Branch. 6.00 p.m. Sir, initial investigations revealed that there was a leakage in the underground gas pipe system. The gas seeped its way along the underground electrical wire duct and accumulated in the electrical meter room, causing it to explode. The impact of the explosion was so great and of such magnitude that the whole building shook and the glass panes were broken. Fortunately, the explosion did not take place while the kindergarten classes were in session or while the meet-the-people session was going on, at which time there would have been a lot of people or children milling just outside the room. However, fate played its cruel hand. At that very split second of the explosion, three children happened to walk by. As a result, two of them suffered severe burns and one little girl died of brain injuries yesterday. Sir, in speaking on this topic, I am not here to pinpoint any blame on anyone or what was at fault. What I am interested in is to see how we can take steps to prevent a recurrence of such a tragedy. Sir, I have been told, and it is disquieting for me to note, that this is not the first time that such an explosion has occurred. In late 1979, the same kind of incident also occurred outside a block of flats at Farrer Road. There was an underground leakage of gas, but this time the gas accumulated beneath a car park and it exploded. In that incident, Sir, no cars were parked there at that moment. Nobody was walking by; nobody was driving in the car park, and therefore no one was injured.”