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 11 of 14.
“Sir, this brings me to the perennial question of whether there is or there is not a shortage of taxis in Singapore. Taxi drivers, of course, say that there are already more than enough taxis. The passengers say there are not enough. All we have to do is to take a look at the long queues outside the hotels in Orchard Road or the more popular shopping complexes like Lucky Plaza, Plaza Singapura and People's Park. We see that people have to wait a long time for taxis. Sir, we can argue till the cows come home but I think we will never find the perfect balance as to how many taxis are needed for Singapore. In my own constituency, for example, people complain that they have to wait at least an hour for a taxi to come by. Sir, I suspect that even if we have enough taxis, one of the reasons that causes a shortage may be due to the present system of self-ownership of taxis. It is a very good system, but what happens is that when people own their own taxis they can choose when to drive or when not to drive their taxis out to look for business. As a result, during the peak hours in the morning or lunch time or in the evenings where traffic is very heavy, many such taxi drivers choose not to ply their taxis because they will end up in traffic jams. Take a look at the car-parks in housing estates during the peak hours, and you find a lot of taxis parked in these places. I would therefore urge that there should be, more competition and more taxi driving licences should be issued. My question now is: since the ROV has already closed the applications for taxi driver's vocational licences quite a long time ago, when will the ROV allow applications to be submitted again?”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head I be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead IF-01 of the Main Estimates.* *The same amendment also stood in the name of Mr Rohan bin Kamis. Sir, last year in reply to questions raised by hon. Members, the Hon. Minister said that the Registrar of Vehicles did not expect a high standard of English from applicants for a taxi driver's vocational licence but just enough for normal conversation. Quite a number of my constituents who have applied for such licences have complained to me that this is not so. From the questions put to them by the ROV, it seems that they expect these applicants to engage into a conversation in English with the passengers. Therefore, I would like to pose this question again: is English really a necessary requirement for applicants for taxi driver's licence? Sir, my feeling is that this is really not necessary. For example, if a tourist wants to go somewhere in Singapore, say, Bugis Street, all he has to say is "Bugis Street" and I think the taxi driver understands where he wants to go. A taxi driver is not expected to give a discourse or a running commentary on what is going on in Bugis Street. Sir, if you get into a taxi in Hong Kong the taxi driver will ask you in Cantonese where you are going, and if you tell him in English you will still end up where you want to go. And if, for example, in Paris you are asked the same question in French and you reply in English, you will still get to where you want to go. In these places, there is no insistence that the taxi drivers have to know English. Therefore, I contend that the ROV's insistence that our taxi drivers must know English is depriving many people of a means of livelihood.”
“Sir, I am grateful to the Minister for his reply and I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.”
“What surprises me is that some mail from the same postal district takes an even longer time than mail from other postal districts to reach their destination. Why is it so? Sir, I do not doubt the work attitude and the efficiency of mail delivery of the postmen. But I do believe that this is caused by poor management methods. Therefore, I would like to ask the Hon. Minister for Communications whether the Postal Services Department is going to make a further study into its management methods and the mail-processing procedure? Is there a shortage of postal staff? Is the Minister going to suggest to the Minister for Finance raising the salary scales of the postmen in order to attract more people to work as postmen and so solve the problem of late delivery of mail?”
“On the contrary, local mail has taken an even longer time to reach the addressees. My constituents frequently show me mail which has been delayed and complained to me that their mail has taken too long a time to reach them, resulting in their important official and private business being disrupted. Sir, I believe I should mention an incident that actually happened. One constituent of mine owned a house which did not meet the requirements of the Building Control Department and was ordered to be demolished within a short period of time. As he had brought up some valid reasons for an extension of time, I wrote on his behalf a letter dated the 7th March to the BCD requesting for an extension of time. However, on the 12th of March the BCD still proceeded with their action, turning up to demolish the house. When I received his telephone call, I immediately enquired of the BCD. The reply was, "Just received your letter." I was then in an awkward position, because my constituent might doubt the efficiency of my work. Now this house has been demolished. I would therefore like to ask the Minister for Communications how many days does it take local mail to reach the addressee? From the 7th March to 12th March, there were six days, and minus a Sunday, it means that altogether it takes five days to reach the addressee. I would like to ask whether those machines for the Postal Authority which I mentioned earlier have already been bought. Sir, new postal district code numbers have already been allotted by the Postal Authority. The various post offices have also set up special mail boxes for mail meant for their own postal district to facilitate faster delivery of mail within their own district.”
“It seems that we are trying to increase the postal rates by promising an improvement in the services when, in fact, the services are already very much improved. If 97% of the legal mail are already being delivered one day after the day of posting, how much better can we improve on that? Sir, I foresee that if we are to go ahead with this system, eventually many people will end up posting their mail as first-class priority mail, given the pace of life that we have today. And in the end, if it is really a question of manpower problem, we are back to square one. Then the beneficiary, of course, will be the Postal Services Department which would receive an additional boost to its surplus earnings which incidentally totalled $27.2 million in 1979. The figure for 1980 is still not available. And the loser would, of course, be the man-in-the-street who has to pay more for his mail for the so-called improvement which really is already there. I suggest, Sir, if the Postal Services Department is, in fact, already making so much money, why cannot the Department use the surplus to engage more staff or to obtain better equipment so as to speed up the mail services? 5.00 p.m. Mr Teo Chong Tee (Changi)( In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, once again I wish to raise the problem of improvement of the postal services. The Hon. Minister for Communications had indicated last year that the Postal Services Department would during the fiscal year 1980 install one letter sorting machine and two stamp-cancelling machines to improve the standard of service to solve the problem of shortage of manpower and to expedite the delivery of mail. One year has elapsed and yet there has been no improvement in the delivery of mail.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head I be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead IE-01 of the Main Estimates.* *The same amendment also stood in the names of Messrs Teo Chong Tee and Rohan bin Kamis. Sir, in moving this amendment, I would like to speak on another price increase, one which has not been given as much publicity as the bus fares but no doubt will have as much significance on the public at large. Last month, the Postal Services Department announced that the mail system will be reorganized and divided into first-class priority mail and second-class non-priority mail for local mail, regardless of the content. For a little more postage than second-class non-priority mail, the first-class mail will be delivered the next day after it has been posted. And the second-class non-priority mail will be delivered within three working days. This, we are told, is to ease the manpower shortage which is faced by the department and to make better use of the staff. Sir, I would like to ask whether this division of local mail into first-class and second-class followed by an increase in the postage rate is really a necessary move. Last year, in reply to questions raised by me and the hon. Member for Changi, the Hon. Minister told us, and I quote Hansard, Vol. 39, col. 1260: 'We are satisfied that the standard of service that is being maintained is satisfactory. . On the average, over 97% of the local ordinary mail are delivered one day after the day of posting, and only about 3% take more than two days to deliver.' It seems to me, Sir, that the coming increase in postal rates is probably a device to raise additional revenue for the Postal Services Department.”
“Sir, from the lack of Members standing up to respond to the Minister's reply, I take it that we are all very grateful to him for his answer, and I beg leave to withdraw. Amendment by leave, withdrawn.”
“Sir, nowadays it seems that the better-off you are the more difficult it is for you, insofar as housing is concerned. Now I see there is one set of rules for HDB applicants and another set of rules for HUDC. Sir, I would not like to add further to this debate except to express to the Minister how dissatisfied I am with his explanations today.”
“Sir, will the Hon. Minister consider whether it is possible for a single applicant to retain his position on the waiting list if, like in the case of the HDB, such an applicant submits the name of his or her spouse-to-be?”
“On the point about single applicants again, I have already mentioned earlier that I put forth the case for single persons and I have already mentioned that single persons need not remain single all the time; neither will they remain single when they finally get their flats. If, as the Minister has said, that he does not have enough resources to sustain the policy to meet the demand of all single persons, then why in the first place did he allow single applicants to apply? Secondly, Sir, why was it that as close as December last year, just three months ago, the Ministry allowed single applicants to use their full CPF contributions, i.e. their employer's contributions as well as their own, when previously they could only use their own contributions? Why did he allow them to use their full contributions to pay for HUDC flats, if it was against the policy to give flats to singles? Mr Eric Cheong Yuen Chee: Sir, I am not at all satisfied with the explanation given by the Minister with regard to the application of the cut-off date. In view of the fact that the HUDC has been consistently changing its policies in such a short period of time, I think it is fair that those whose applications have been accepted should be offered a cut-off date. We are not quarrelling with any future changes in policy. We are only saying that those whose applications have been accepted should not be deprived of an opportunity to own an HUDC flat.”
“Sir, I think it is unfair of the Minister to say that if an applicant cannot come up with $18,000 now, how can he be expected to pay for the balance of the flat? Sir, $18,000, as I said, is a rather big sum. Applicants have been given a very short time to come up with this money. This is the result of a sudden change in policy. All these years they have been on the waiting list and they have never been told at all that they have to make a deposit payment. Suddenly this policy is announced. I must also say that it is not fair to draw a comparison between the HDB and HUDC, because HDB flats are heavily subsidized. I agree that HUDC flats are subsidized a little, to the extent of the cost of the land, but HUDC flats generally cost so much more. May I remind Members that HUDC flats are sold at a profit whereas HDB flats are not. I also cannot see the rationale behind the argument that for every one HUDC flat the same resources could be used to build three HDB flats. I agree that our resources are limited. I am not an economist but if I could recall. I think there is a word for this and we call it the "opportunity cost", deciding what are the alternative uses to which our resources could be applied. Sir, here we are talking of a very special group of people, people who are not qualified to buy HDB flats because they are too rich. But at the same time they cannot afford to buy houses built by private developers because they are too poor. This then was the objective of the HUDC when it was first formed. I maintain that the HUDC has not met its objective fully.”
“Sir, does the HUDC intend to pay up this amount of interest to each single applicant, or is it simply raking in the money? Lastly, I would like to say that HUDC applicants are middle-class people. They are educated people, be they civil servants, professionals or young executives. These are the people who contribute in no small way to nation-building and who constitute a very strong pillar in our society. They are here because they love this country and they, together with their fathers, have laid a strong foundation on which they and their families, and their children after, hope to build further and to live upon. This is therefore no laughing or trivial matter. 6,200 frustrated but well-educated, well-meaning, middle-class applicants plus their brothers and sisters can be a focal point of social discontent: and all it takes is for somebody to rally them round and I think, as the Government, we will be in for a lot of political problems. There would be social discontent because this group of people then finds that they are unable to get a roof over their heads. No amount of tax rebates, tax cuts, whatever privileges you may call it, will stop the brain drain if these people find that for all their talents, their brains, their professionalism and the contributions that they make to our country and our economy, in the end they cannot even own a home of their own. Sir, I rest my case and that of 6,200 other persons.”
“Indeed, when their children move out to live on their own, some parents see this as a time when they themselves could finally get some privacy in their old age, free from respon- sibility towards their children who are now grown-up and who, they believe, are in a position to take care of themselves. Sir, I am all for filial piety towards our older folks but just because a single person wants to start his own family by first ensuring a roof over his head so that he does not have to go house-hunting with his new bride and baby, it does not make him any less filial towards his parents. The other part of the HUDC magic is, of course, its sudden ruling that $18,000 deposit must be paid by all applicants if they want to remain on the waiting list. I have already stated earlier the very unfair conditions under which an HUDC applicant makes his application. This kind of "no money, no talk" attitude is not typical of a PAP socialist Government. $18,000 is a very large sum of money and not everybody can afford it, not to say having to cough out the money in the next three months. Let us take the case of a single person aged 26 years old. I use "26 years old" because the other day we were told that 51% of the single applicants were in this age group. If this single applicant has to wait until he is 40 years old before he could get a flat, he will be losing a tremendous amount of interest on this money. I compounded this sum over 14 years at the interest rate of 6 1/2% paid quarterly, because that is what the CPF pays us and we already know that the CPF pays below the market rate. But it may interest Members to know that by the time this single applicant reaches the age of 40 years, $18,000 becomes $43,693. So he loses, in fact, $25,096 in interest.”
“Yes, they do not want to get married first because they are prudent enough to plan ahead. Sir, let me illustrate further with an example. MPs normally get requests from young constituents, asking them to try to get HDB flats for them faster, and a lot of them come to the MPs just after they have got married. All of us sympathize with such people but there is really nothing much we can do. And here HUDC single applicants are, in fact, trying to avoid such a problem and I think we should give them credit for their sense of responsibility and prudence. As the Minister has said, Sir, all 10 members of a family do not all arrive suddenly, and so be prepared with proper housing. Then why does he fault these young people who are doing exactly what he has said? Sir, the other premise which the HUDC seems to have based on is that single applicants are less responsible than married persons in their responsibility and duty to their parents. Sir, I know, in fact, of some parents who urge their children to move out and find a home of their own, not because parent and child love each other less, but because the home is already overcrowded and some parents know that the only way to get their single sons or daughters married is to make sure that they get their homes first. In fact, knowing the overcrowded conditions under which some families live in and the friction that can sometimes arise as a result of overcrowding, we may be doing them a favour by allowing some of these people to live out on their own. We may be fostering closer ties eventually and promoting better harmony amongst members of the family.”
“Then in the next breath, the statement adds that this scheme comes under the HUDC umbrella. Anybody knows that any scheme under HUDC, whether it is a separate one or one with different conditions, is still an HUDC project, and that means HUDC is building the flats for these people. And if these people get special priority, the general public applicants must suffer. I have already spoken briefly on the HUDC's discriminating policy towards applicants who are single, and today I would like to add further. The HUDC has very brilliantly superseded all previously known definitions of a single person, and today a single person has been defined by the HUDC as an applicant who is frivolous and who is not a bona fide buyer. But, according to the HUDC, if you are still single by the time you are 40 years old, then you are no longer frivolous and you are a genuine buyer. On the other hand, it seems very simple - get married first and you get a flat. Sir, I suddenly remember this. The other day, when my good Friend, the Member for Delta, asked the Minister for Social Affairs whether he would start a marriage bureau, he should have properly directed the question to the Minister for National Development as to whether he would start a marriage bureau in the HUDC and then perhaps he could match the single applicants together so that they can get their flats faster! Sir, why do single persons want to apply for a flat? The fact that they want to live on their own can be regarded as a sign of maturity and responsibility. Many of them are at the stage of life where they are building up their careers. An hon. Member: They want to be alone!”
“It illustrates the very lethargic and snail's pace at which the HUDC is proceeding with its building programme. All we hear is an announcement once in a blue moon that there would be a building phase of a few hundred units, at most a thousand units. It is small wonder some applicants have to wait for up to four years. Suddenly the HUDC has waved a magic wand. Two days ago it came out with an announcement that henceforth applicants need not wait for more than 2 1/2 years. So overnight, from four years you find yourself able to get a flat in 2 1/2 years. All I can see in this announcement is that it is a desperate attempt to take the heat off the issue because they know that we are debating the issue today. The announcement, in fact, raises more questions than answers. How do they propose to carry out this so-called reduction in waiting time? The HUDC has come out with a very simple solution by eliminating people on the waiting list, people whom the HUDC considers frivolous and not bona fide. Sir, I would have stood up today to give a pat on the HUDC if, in its announcement, it had come up with concrete plans as to what it intends to build or how it intends to go about it, or when the new flats will be ready. The HUDC should build more flats to shorten the waiting time, not shorten the waiting time by eliminating people from the waiting list. Can you imagine, Sir, the HDB doing the same thing - telling its applicants, "Look. Half of you get off the list so that the other half can get their flats within a year." There would be a great public uproar. This, Sir, in my mind, is not efficiency on the part of the HUDC but frivolity. The announcement also goes on to say that the housing scheme for civil servants and NUS staff is a separate one with different conditions.”
“Sir, I think the Member for Toa Payoh is being kind to the Hon. Minister when he said that applicants for HUDC housing are fed up, I think they are more than fed up. They are disgusted, and they are seething with anger today. If there is ever a group of people in Singapore today who are very frustrated, very mystified and very desperate, they are the 6,200 applicants for HUDC housing. I must declare at this stage that I happen to be one such person but, may I add, a bona fide applicant and certainly not a frivolous one. These people are very mystified because when they submit an application, they know not when they will get the flat, where will their flat be and how much it is going to cost them. They are very frustrated too because every now and then the HUDC changes its policy. They can wake up one day to find themselves further down the waiting list because another group of persons have suddenly been accorded priority over them. They are very desperate because, in spite of being so mystified and so very frustrated, they are really faced with a Hobson's choice. They have to fork out $18,000 as deposit, without knowing what they are paying for, what the full price will be, and when the goods will be delivered. Sir, the HUDC was established in 1975 and its objective at that time, I hope it still is, was to provide housing for middle income people. How well has the HUDC succeeded in doing this? In the seven years of its existence, only two phases in its building programme have been built. These comprise a total of 2,086 units, that is to say, an average of less than 300 units per year, since 1974. If you were to ask me, I would say this is a very shameful figure.”
“Sir, I wrote to him but it was his Permanent Secretary who replied to me. Anyway, Sir, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment by leave, withdrawn.”
“Sir, I am not entirely satisfied with the Minister's reply. But in bringing up these two cases, I would like to seek an assurance from the Minister that he will personally examine these two cases more closely and give me a reply by letter. This is because I have written to him but I did not get any reply, at least to one of the cases.”
“Sir, I am not questioning the competence of the doctors at the Drug Rehabilitation Centre. I am sure they are more than qualified to judge. What I am trying to say is that we have a variety of ways to determine whether a person is addicted. Why do we use only one method? Why can we not be more conclusive and prove his guilt, in the Minister's own words, "beyond all reasonable doubt"?”
“Sir, I am pleased to learn from the Minister that he agrees with me that there should be a closer rapport between the officers at the Drug Rehabilitation Centre and the parents. But I am not so sure that I can agree with him on the point of medical observation. I am given to understand that withdrawal symptoms can be due to a variety of reasons. For example, if we were to take aspirin to relieve our headache continuously, and suddenly we stop taking aspirin we can also have withdrawal symptoms. Therefore, -such withdrawal symptoms would not be due to narcotics. My point therefore is that medical observation need not be conclusive if we do not accompany it with a urine test.”
“Sir, if we are to help these people, the least we could do is to properly inform the parents where the children are being kept.”
“So here we have two cases, one of somebody who was not given a urine test which would have proved conclusively and beyond any doubt his guilt or innocence; and in another case, of a person who had a urine test conducted and found negative and yet asked to remain in the DRC. Sir, I would like to ask the Minister to explain this anomaly. Sir, the other point I would like to raise is that when parents of drug addicts come to Members of Parliament for assistance, inevitably most of them tell us that their children are innocent. That is the starting point. And upon inquiries and investigation, we find that in many cases this is not the case. My poil-ii here is that the very word "rehabilitation" implies an effort on our part to bring back these drug addicts into society so that they can lead a normal life. They have been led along the wrong path and they deserve our sympathies. The real criminals here are the drug traffickers and pediars. And in that sense, they are different from common criminals. I think we have to show some sympathy and understanding towards these drug addicts. The job of the MPs would be made a lot easier if the Central Narcotics Bureau would be more helpful to parents. In one of the cases that I have just mentioned, the parents of the boy could not receive any information from either the police station or the CN B for days on end as to where that boy was detained. Nobody could tell them until they received a letter about two weeks later. The other point is that when this boy was transferred to another rehabilitation centre, no notification of any kind was given to the parents of the boy and it was only on one of the scheduled visits when they went to the centre where they thought he was being detained were they told that he had been transferred.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head Q be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead QG-01 of the Main Estimates. Sir, Singapore has gained international fame for her success in fighting drug abuse and, for this, credit must be given to the Central Narcotics Bureau and its officers for their constant efforts and vigilance to eradicate this social menace. In moving this amendment, I would like the Minister to throw some light on the administration of certain aspects of the Misuse of Drugs Act. I would like to draw the attention of the House to two different cases involving my constituents and to what I believe are anomalies in the administration of the Act and in the implementation of justice. Sir, case number one involves a person who was detained and was not given a urine test. This particular person was arrested because one day officers from the Central Narcotics Bureau conducted a raid at a flat in my constituency. This particular person had gone there, so he claimed, to retum a set of keys of a vehicle he had borrowed from someone living in the flat. Knocking on the door of the flat, he was immediately detained by the CN B officers who were already there. Following this, he was sent to one of the DRCs and I understand that up till today he has still not been given a urine test. The only answer I have received from the Ministry of Home Affairs is that medical observation has shown that he is in need of rehabilitation. Sir, case number two is even stranger. This case involves another person who was detained but was given a urine test and the result of the urine test was negative. However, at the DRC, he was asked to sign a document giving his agreement that he be allowed to remain in the DRC to undergo rehabilitative training.”
“Sir, I am grateful to the Minister for his reply and I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment by leave, withdrawn.”
“It has been established that there is a problem reaching people who are 60 years and above, particularly when they do not understand Mandarin. It is for this reason that I suggested that a little exception be made here. I think the Minister has replied that this matter could be looked into.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, can I just clarify the point raised by the Member for Mountbatten? What I said was: could we not make an exception to the Speak Mandarin Campaign for this particular age group, those who are 60 years and above?”
“Sir, on a point of clarification. I did not say that it was an increase over 1979. My point was that there were 257 lives lost on our roads. Whether it is an increase over 1979 or a decrease over 1979 is besides the point. The point is that people lost their lives on the roads.”
“Sir, I wish to make another point. It is not that we have been having new towns only this year or last year. We have been having new towns for umpteen years. Does the Minister mean to tell me that it has taken the Police and the Treasury so many long years to iron out their differences? Still they cannot come up with a proper agreement as to how many police stations are needed in the new towns.”
“Sir, I was about to speak just now when the Member for Punggol practically took the same words out of my mouth. I think the question here is very basic. Why cannot the Police make it a point to work with the HDB to ensure that police stations are constructed when the new towns are being built? Sir, I do not think it is just a matter of planning. We hear the same story year after year - the Minister cannot get the money from the Minister for Finance. Is the Minister not pressing his case hard enough? Or is it because he does not seem to be able to get along with the Minister for Finance?”
“Sir, in view of the relatively small amount that has been paid out by the Fund and the number of applications that have been approved, does it imply that the Fund has been too rigid in its consideration of applications? Mr Hon Sui Sen: The answer to that is "No." I accept that the Fund has been a bit slow in getting started, as all new institutions must: but the applications are now accelerating and they are being dealt with more expeditiously. More staff have been taken. I am told the applications should be dealt with within two months in the very near future. There are other schemes for use of the monies, such as grants towards the subsidization of interest on capital investments for improvement of skills. This will, I think, make pretty good use of the monies that are remaining, and I hope that the Member will soon see that the disbursements from this Fund will be much more than the numbers that are given so far.”
“Worse still, the joke that goes round today is that the HUDC is indirectly encouraging single persons to get married early so that they can get a flat, and how inconsistent this is with the Family Planning Association's call not to have early marriages. More of the HUDC's policies of prejudice against single persons will be raised by me in the Committee of Supply, but today's illustration is just to draw a point. Two years ago there was a suggestion that a casino should be built in Singapore to attract more tourists. The Government rejected this on moral grounds which I feel is fair enough. But what did we read in the newspapers two weeks ago? The Sentosa Development Corporation hosted a delegation of people from a casino in Macau to look into the possibility of starting a casino in Sentosa Island. What happened to those moral grounds on which the Government stood so steadfastly just two years ago? It is true that a government must be flexible in implementing its policies. It must move with the times and meet changing conditions, adapting and amending where necessary in order to benefit our people. This the PAP Government has never failed to do; otherwise we would not have achieved the social and economic progress that we have made all these years. But when policies are changed with a frequency that is more than necessary, causing confusion, agony and anguish, that is not flexibility but inconsistency, and a government noted for inconsistency loses its credibility over time. Sir, I do not say that the Government is inconsistent all the time but if signs are already emerging that its policies can be interpreted as such, then it must take immediate corrective action. Sir, I support the motion. 4.45 p.m.”
“The Government must, therefore, adopt a receptive attitude towards differing opinions, and it must balance its views with those of others in order to arrive at a correct mix in making its policies. The other area of policy-making which gives rise to concern is the inconsistency with which policies are made. Again, let me illustrate by way of examples. Last December, the Ministry of Labour announced that all single members of the Central Provident Fund would be allowed to use their total savings, comprising their personal and their employer's contributions, to pay for HUDC flats. The Ministry stated that unmarried men and women would then be free to use their entire CPF savings to buy HUDC houses or flats and live on their own if they chose to. That was three days before the General Elections. Today, single applicants for HUDC flats have been told by the Ministry of National Development that they have to wait till they are 40 years of age before they can get a flat. When the Ministry of Labour's announcement was first made, single persons were elated. Here was an unexpected bonus from a Government that seemed to realize their needs and was doing all it can to facilitate their purchase of a basic necessity. Then in a complete U-turn, the Ministry of National Development dashed all the false hopes that were raised in December. Today another group of frustrated Singaporeans are wondering if the Government could not be more consistent in deciding whether or not they should be allowed to own flats. Or did this simply imply a lack of co-ordination between two Ministries as to policies towards single applicants?”
“But in having made its earlier decision at the end of 1975, the Government left behind a trail of frustrated people who had to dispose of their good cars. And today these people, minus their cars, are even more frustrated to find out that the Government has taken so long to see the point which they have been trying to register all these long years. This is not to say that the reversal of these two decisions by the Government is not welcome. Certainly no one can deny that the reversal of both decisions will benefit the public at large. But it makes food for thought to reflect on just how many motor-cyclists have been injured or, worse still, killed because of a tiny speck of dust that blew into the eye or because of a flying pebble that hit the unprotected face. How many people have seen good cars, and good money, go down the drain because they were forced to dispose of their cars, and because today it costs so much more to purchase another one. What is perhaps more significant to note in both cases is that when the Government made its earlier decisions there were tremendous public outcries against these decisions. Now after many long years, the Government has reversed its decisions for the very same reasons the public put forth years ago. It shows that the public foresaw years ago what it took the Government many years to realize. This leads me to a more fundamental point. If we are going to get our people to speak up and have open discussions on issues, as the Government has been saying so often, then the Government must be prepared to accept the fact that sometimes the public can be right in its outcries and in what it proposes.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I congratulate the Hon. Minister on his Budget Statement and for giving Singaporeans another "painless" budget. Two disturbing trends have emerged in recent times with regard to policy-making by the Government. One is the slowness with which Government realizes its mistakes in certain policies it has made. This morning we read in the newspapers that the Government will lift its ban on the use of crash helmets with clear visors by motor-cyclists. In lifting the ban, the Hon. Minister for Communications is quoted as having said that the lifting of the ban demonstrated the Government's willingness to admit its mistakes and correct them, and that the previous ban was a hasty decision. Very noble, indeed, for the Government to stand up to admit its mistake, but what I am wondering is, how come it took the Government seven long years to realize this. And if that decision was a "hasty" one, how many more similar hasty wrong decisions have been made in the past that still stand today? A few years ago the Government imposed a surcharge on road taxes for cars over 10 years old. This was to ensure that only cars in good condition remained on our roads. It assumed, therefore, that cars over 10 years old were not road-worthy. As it became more expensive to maintain cars over 10 years old, many owners of such cars were compelled on financial grounds to scrap or re-export their cars, many of which were in tip-top condition. Now, after almost six years the Government has decided that no surcharge on the road taxes of such cars need be paid. The reason for this change of heart is that the Government has realized that such cars can be in road-worthy condition after all.”
“We do not deny our racial origins and we make no apologies for the fact that we are of Malay origin or of Indian origin or of Chinese origin. We all know what our cultural roots are but we know also that we are first and foremost Singaporeans. But events have shown that we must cast our sights further. The lesson we have learnt from this unpleasant incident is that Singaporeans must at all times remain sensitive to the feelings of those close to us. Hon. Members have touched on our closeness to ASEAN, and I think it was the Member for Jalan Kayu who said that we have to get our people now to think of ASEAN. On the political level and on the economic level, there is no doubt that ASEAN has made headway as a regional grouping. But what does ASEAN mean to the man-in-the-street? I think we have to examine this question closer. As a Member of Parliament, I have had opportunities to attend international conferences abroad. My first instinct at each of these conferences is always to look around for my fellow Parliamentarians from ASEAN countries. We know that at such conferences we have much at stake together as partners in ASEAN, and this is the message we must get through to the man-in-the-street. Every responsible person, Government leaders, MPs, community leaders and the press have a role to play in this. Sir, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment by leave, withdrawn. The sum of $20.315,260 for Head J ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. The sum of $11,928.300 for Head J ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.”
“Sir, in summing up, I would like to say that what has come across today is very clear, and that is, the Singapore identity has been forged without doubt. We have forged a cohesiveness that cuts across ethnic barriers. We have forged one people out of disparate groups and we are doubtless a more integrated society than ever before in the past. Even as recent as ton years ago there might have been gnawing doubts of this but, today, there is a wealth of evidence that we are Singaporeans first more than anything else. Some hon. Members: Hear, hear!”
“The Singaporean knows what it is like to struggle against odds, for in the process of nation-building he has been pitted against, and overcome seemingly insurmountable obstacles and, likewise in the field of sports, he can be forgiven if he chooses, like sports fans everywhere, to favour the underdog when his own national team is not involved. For the underdog too faces an uphill struggle and David, not Goliath, has always been the hero. But in his enthusiasm and zeal, the Singapore sports fan must not go overboard, especially when the underdog is from the land of his forefathers, and the protagonist his close neighbour. For then the Singaporean unwittingly allows himself to be charged with displaying bias out of ethnic considerations. That this has happened in the foreign press has been most unfortunate, for the Singaporean must in sports be a sporting fellow and, as in all other facets of life, display fairness, courtesy and consideration to others and the Singaporean must at all times remain sensitive to the feelings of those close to us. This is what maturity is all about. The Singaporean must realize that his neighbours also count on him, and he too will have occasion to count on them another day. It is the close neighbour and friend - not the distant relative - who will come to us when we are in need, for they too have as much at stake as we have. Much as we have directed our efforts to forge a national identity, so too must we now do the necessary to drive home this point.”
“No more tears are shed when our young ones answer the call of the nation, for each knows that it is his due to his country. Months later, we see scenes of proud parents beaming with delight as they see their sons marching resplendently past during passing-out parades. Singaporeans who go abroad return with the feeling that there is nothing like their own country. They are all proud to be Singaporeans, whatever their experiences abroad. A Singaporean abroad identifies himself as one from Singapore. When asked, he does not deny that he is of Chinese or of Indian, or of Malay origin, for the cultural roots are still there, and he cannot hide the colour of his skin. But he is first and foremost a Singaporean, coming from a nation that his father, and his father before him, have helped to build. The strong sense of identity as a Singaporean has been forged since young - at home and in the schools. No doubt when called upon to do so, our younger generation will repeat the sacrifices made by the older generation in the process of nation building. That Government policies have been geared towards this end have never been in doubt. That our crowds chorused in unison when our national football team won a decisive victory over the Chinese team, as distinct from what happened long ago when our people cheered the visiting Chinese table-tennis team against our very own, is indicative of our having acquired a Singapore identity. In fact, we have been cheering for our home team for years. Our people even travel to Malaysia to support the national team in the "away" matches. They know that every man on the field has made his sacrifice in terms of time and effort spent in training, and when it comes to the time of reckoning he must be backed to the hilt.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the total sum to be allocated for Head J of the Main Estimates be reduced by $100. Sir, bold and firm policies implemented by a Government guided by pragmatism since the early 60's, together with the collective and intelligent response of the people, have enabled us to overcome the grim question of our survival as a nation. Whereas other countries, bathing in the throes of newly acquired independence, grabbled around with immaterial and emotive issues of political dogma, language and religion, we took steady and calculative steps forward into the future by marking out for ourselves the fundamentals that shaped our nation. Steeled by memories of colonial suppression and of an even earlier era of persecution by Occupation forces, motivated by the realization that only they can be masters of their own destinies, one generation has built in 15 years of independence, a nation each and every one of us is proud of. In arriving at political stability and economic and social progress, sacrifices have been made in the past by our people. That they have so responded is indicative of their commitment to this country and its future. No less than a true Singaporean would have participated in the process of nation building, and we have built a nation. That even later generations will be even more Singaporean is without doubt. Implicit in any sound national education policy must be the need to instil and inculcate good citizenship, good neighbourliness and patriotism. When this is achieved, the individual will think not just of himself but in terms of others. In this respect, it cannot be doubted that we have succeeded. Our young take pride in serving in the defence of our country.”
“(8) That the total sum to be allocated for Head I of the Main Estimates be reduced by $100. The Chairman: Mr Cheong is not here. Mr Tan Soo Khoon is not moving. The sum of $83,952,930 for Head I ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. The sum of $264,668,480 for Head I ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. Head K -”
“Sir, in view of the answers given, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment by leave, withdrawn.”
“We certainly appreciate the good work being done by our postal authority in this respect. But the problem usually lies with the other destination countries. If we send something from Singapore by express mail, experience has shown that with certain countries where we have such arrangements, a letter sent by express mail can sometimes take a longer time than a letter sent by ordinary air mail. While I do realise that we have no control over the operation of postal authorities in other countries, I feel it is necessary to draw this matter to the attention of the Hon. Minister so that it can be brought up with countries where such delays are generally experienced.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head I be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead Code IE-01 of the Main Estimates. Sir, last Christmas and New Year, because of the unusually heavy volume of mail, the Nelson Road Mails and Parcels Centre utilised the services of about a dozen national servicemen to sort the mail. The Amalgamated Union of Public Employees (AUPE), which represents the staff in the Centre, agreed that it was necessary for the national servicemen to be engaged as the entire staff at the Centre could not cope with the additional volume of work, even with overtime. However, the AUPE has expressed its concern that the Centre may have created a precedent in that the assistance of national servicemen would be sought on other occasions in order that overtime work for the staff may be cut, thereby depriving them of overtime earnings. An assurance is, therefore, sought from the Minister that national servicemen will not be used unnecessarily, especially when the staff can cope with the mail by working overtime so that they can earn more pay. My next point on this topic concerns the postal express mail service arrangements which Singapore has with other countries. Under such arrangements, the postal authority in the sender countries has to arrange for express mail, in other words, mail with "express" label on the envelope, to be sent by the fastest possible means to the country of destination. The postal authority in the receiving country is obliged to deliver such mail to the addressee immediately, normally by special despatch. Sir, from my own experience and that of my friends, I find that the express mail sent to people in Singapore is usually delivered very fast.”
“Sir, I am satisfied with the replies given by the Minister. Before I withdraw, I would like to record again my appreciation for the good work being done by the Traffic Police in combating this problem. Sir, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment by leave, withdrawn. The following amendment stood in the name of Mr Tan Soo Khoon - (6) That the sum to be allocated for Head Q be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead Code QF-01 of the Main Estimates. The Chairman: Mr Tan is not moving amendment (6). Amendment (7), Encik Sidek bin Saniff.”
“Sir, there is one question which I think the Minister has missed out. I asked whether it would not be possible for us to learn from the experiences of other countries which have a better record of road, safety. In other words, can officials from the Traffic Police be sent to such countries to see how they have managed to achieve a better record of road safety? There is another point which I would like to mention. In view of the various points raised by hon. Members, I wonder whether it would not be possible to set up an inter-Ministry committee on a permanent basis to study this problem. It appears to me that since road safety has become a serious matter, it can no longer be a topic just within the purview of the Ministry of Home Affairs. Obviously other Ministries should be involved. Would it not be possible to have a committee comprising officers from the Ministry of Home Affairs, the Ministry of Communications, the Ministry of National Development (since it involves the PWD), the Ministry of Education (since it involves driving home the message of road safety to our young people) and, of course, the Ministry of Finance (since the funds must come from them)?”
“Incidentally, may I also add that some of the older bridges are in a bad condition and these should be repaired in order that people will not be deterred from using them. Our approach to the problem of road safety has been two-fold; firstly, one of law enforcement and secondly, intensifying education for the public. Sir, I would like to suggest that we also look into improving road conditions. There are bad roads and there are also roads with poor lighting which make it difficult for motorists to drive at night. Sir, I suggest that the Ministry take steps to liaise closely with the PWD to improve the condition of our roads with a view to making them safer for driving. I do realise that we have to do our best to save energy, but in the interest of road safety we need more lights along certain roads. There are many countries with better records of road safety than ours. Can we not learn from the experience of such countries? Can officials from the Traffic Police be sent to such countries to see how they have managed to achieve a better record of road safety? Perhaps learning from others might help the Traffic Police in what must certainly be a most trying task.”
“The lesson here is that only the presence of policemen at such points could deter pedestrians from committing the offence. In many of the road accidents, the blame is as much on the pedestrian as it is on the motorist. However, pedestrian-crossings at signalised junctions are not necessarily safe. Even worse accidents can happen at a pedestrian crossing if there is a careless driver around. The recent case involving a bus driver who killed two children at a signalised pedestrian crossing in Kim Seng Road bears this out. There is, therefore, a need to erect more overhead bridges. The Minister has stated, also two days ago, that the Traffic Police together with the PWD have identified a total of 104 places where overhead bridges should be erected. But what surprises me is that these bridges have not been put up long before. Let me give an example, Sir. The road just outside the Cathay Cinema can be very treacherous. It is difficult to cross this stretch of road with traffic coming persistently from Orchard Road and Stamford Road. For years this stretch of road outside the Cathay Cinema has been very dangerous, and pedestrians risk their lives each time they cross. Yet it was only recently that a decision was made to build a pedestrian subway at this place. Perhaps it takes a fatal accident to shock the Government into making such a decision. I wonder how many more such danger zones in busy roads there must be and which must have escaped the attention of the Traffic Police and the PWD. How many more accidents have to happen before more funds are allocated for the construction of overhead bridges and pedestrian subways. I would urge the hon. Minister to press for more funds to build pedestrian overhead bridges and subways.”
“I would strongly urge the Traffic Police to concentrate on roads which are heavily used by lorries and containers and to take very strong action. In fact, Sir, I might add that sometimes I wish the Traffic Police would channel their resources more effectively, rather then laying speed traps along relatively safe roads where motorists sometimes exceed the speed limit only marginally. It is not uncommon to see the Traffic Police laying speed traps along roads where the limit is 50 kilometres per hour and booking motorists who exceed the limit only slightly because they have been trapped by the electronic speed trap equipment. In fact, Sir, I am just wondering how effective or reliable these electronic gadgets are because we read in the newspapers that in America some of these gadgets were tested and were found to clock trees moving at a speed of over 90 kilometres per hour. However, Sir, this is not the point I want to stress today. I am appreciative of the good work being done by the Traffic Police, but I think that in certain areas they could deploy their energies more effectively and fruitfully. Catch the more obvious offenders first, that is, the drivers of the heavy vehicles, and to do this the Traffic Police do not need complicated electronic gadgets. Sir, the Minister also mentioned two days ago that "the Traffic Police will also step up enforcement against careless pedestrians who flout the Pedestrian Crossing Rules." I think this is a move in the right direction. I remember when the Rules were first introduced, policemen and Vigilante Corps members were stationed at traffic junctions to take action against offenders. But this is not being done today.”