Viswa Sadasivan
Singapore
“Having met some of the faculty and students of SOTA, I am confident the ideas that are likely to be catalysed will be fresh, bold and surprising! The NAC programme could have SOTA alumni coming together to apply for funding directly from NAC, or it could be more structured such that applications would be processed through SOTA.”
“Worse, there could be a transfer of cost, resulting in a further rise in inflation. As such, it would be useful if the Government could consider a six-month delay in implementing the foreign worker levy whilst sticking to the end date.”
“Sir, I see the value of ethnic category-based results to ethnic self-help groups, for example. Could the Ministry consider at the mass media level when the information is released to the general public – in other words, the announcement to the public – that it is presented as a whole instead of being divided along ethnic lines…”
“I thank the Minister for his comprehensive response as well as the assurance he has provided. I am just wondering if the Government would be able to give further assurance to the ground, and in particular netizens, some of whom were concerned that this particular act of gazetting the TOC is politically motivated.”
“I brought up the minimum wage scheme as a proposal that I feel requires further debate, whether within Cabinet or outside. I am urging that before we push it aside or say that it may not be effective in our society – there are valid reasons for that argument as well – I am urging that we look at it once more, review it once mo…”
“Could the Minister give his opinion as to whether there is a correlation between the number of people who have registered and the convenience or inconvenience factor in voting? In some countries, I gather that Singaporeans living abroad have to travel seven hours to get to a polling station.”
The complete record
Every one of 174 lines we hold for Viswa Sadasivan, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 2 of 4.
“We should certainly not take away the rich entrepreneurial spirit we see in many who run these kindergartens – that ensures the children have fun and are engaged as they learn. Also, choice is important. However, we need to accept the reality that kindergartens today, unlike in the 1960s and 1970s, play a more significant critical role in preparing our children for primary school education. Children who will go to an overseas primary school operating in Singapore with a curriculum that is less rigorous than a primary school governed by MOE need not have the same concerns. As I have highlighted earlier in my speech, there appears to be too wide a variance in the quality of kindergarten education offered by the different operators – resulting in some children being highly proficient in literacy and numeracy skills, while others not being able to read or count even at a basic level when they go to Primary 1 and end up struggling to catch up for years even though they went to kindergarten. And regrettably, it would appear that the quality of kindergarten education has a correlation with the fees charged, which in turn means that those who can afford to pay more appear to be better assured of outcomes. The Straits Times ran a feature on 17th October this year, titled "Tuition for Tots". It highlighted a growing number of parents who send their children for extra tuition classes on top of their pre-school programme. The main reason cited by these parents was that they felt pre-school programme did not do enough to prepare their children for primary school. We can choose to dismiss this as an act by a typical kiasu Singaporean parent.”
“It is explained as follows: (a) Invest in educational and development resources for disadvantaged families to provide equal access to successful early human development; plus (b) Nurture early development of cognitive and social skills in children from birth to age five; plus (c) Sustain early development with effective education through to adulthood; equals (d) Gaining a more capable, productive and valuable workforce that pays dividends for generations to come. Prof. Heckman argues that the cognitive, linguistic, social and emotional competencies of the individual are shaped by the experiences of the developing child. Investing more in quality pre-school education and making it accessible reduces the occurrence of poverty, low-income related crime and delinquency. This means fewer resources would have to be committed to address the social burden imposed on the State’s increasingly limited resources. Mr Speaker, Sir, allow me now to suggest three key areas that I feel the proposed review could look at or focus on. First, the need to improve the quality and consistency of kindergarten education across the board. Currently, there are a total of 498 kindergartens operating in Singapore, with the PAP Foundation managing 247 of them. This has resulted in a wide range of offerings by the various vendors in terms of curriculum and teaching methodology. I am not going to suggest that we should aim for a complete standardisation – this goes against efforts by MOE to open up the system, and for good reasons. I am all in favour of letting a thousand flowers bloom in this space. After all, the charm of pre-school education is that there are diversely interesting ways to stimulate our children cognitively and to build character.”
“Emeritus Professor of Psychology and expert in Child Development at Yale University, Edward Ziegler, argues that it is not only children from low-income families who benefit from early childhood education, but also children from middle-income families who are able to close the gap between themselves and children from wealthy backgrounds. Therefore, it is not just pre-school education but quality pre-school education, made affordable to a wide cross-section of society, that is important. Let me now move on to studies that have shown a strong correlation between investment in accessible quality early childhood education and strong, sustainable economic growth. This is especially relevant for countries such as Singapore where human capital is the primary resource. A report in 2007 by Harvard University’s National Scientific Council summed up the connection between early childhood experiences and national development in the following words: "… all aspects of adult human capital, from workforce skills to cooperative and lawful behaviour, build on capacities that are developed during childhood, beginning at birth." Perhaps, the most authoritative thesis on this subject was presented by Nobel Laureate Economist James Heckman. Through his research, Prof. Heckman devised a simple equation that related investing in young children’s education early to future productivity growth: Invest + Nurture + Sustain = Gain.”
“In a seminal report published in the year 2002, researchers from the University of Michigan, Valerie Lee and David Burkham, conducted a scientific study of the cognitive abilities of pre-school children. The study found that the average cognitive scores of children from the highest socio-economic group are about 60% above the scores of children in the lowest group. Children from middle-income families were found to know about three times as much vocabulary as their counterparts from low-income families with less educated parents. Another seminal study, which focused on evaluating childcare subsidies, was conducted in 2007 by ABT Associates, a top government and business research firm in America. It showed that four-year-old children below the poverty line can be up to 18 months behind what is considered normal at this age group, and this gap persists throughout that child’s life. Timely intervention at pre-school level is seen as the most effective way to reverse this trend. Likewise, the Millennium Cohort Study conducted in the UK documented how significant socio-economic inequalities that a child faces from the age of three can persist throughout the individual’s life. The report of the 1998 Committee on the Prevention of Reading Difficulties in Young Children in Washington D.C., alongside other studies, pointed to how early childhood education can break poverty cycles and give all children a stronger start in life in a more equitable manner. Other studies have emphasised the importance of quality pre-school education that is accessible to the rich and poor alike, that will effectively reduce achievement variations between children of well-educated, affluent parents and children who are from less-educated families.”
“Many OECD countries, where social inequalities have widened in tandem with strong economic development, have national development plans that emphasise access to quality early childhood education, focusing on children from disadvantaged backgrounds. Similarly, the European Parliament has formally affirmed the power of pre-school education in preventing delinquency, school dropouts as well as improving the upward mobility of children from low-income or disadvantaged backgrounds. It is actively seeking ways to consolidate education policies with a focus on access to quality pre-school education to better manage what appears to be an increasing incidence of these problems. Apart from teaching basic literacy and numeracy, it has been established that early education is fundamental in building character and practical life-skills. Research from The Centre on the Developing Child at Harvard University points to the cognitive skills, emotional well-being, social competence as well as physical and mental health developed in a child’s pre-school education. The study concludes that these are vital in building the necessary foundation for the individual’s success in school and adult life. Significantly, this Harvard research highlights that all aspects of human capital are built on capacities developed during one’s childhood. Let me now move on to the effect of pre-school education or its absence on socio-economic equity. Several studies in the UK, USA and Australia have shown that while in school, children already display striking disparities in development, which are predictive of their later academic and occupational achievements.”
“Numerous studies have drawn attention to direct links between early childhood experience, brain development and social outcomes. It has been shown that early intervention can improve the life outcomes of the individual, minimise inequality and mobility gaps, and boost the national human capital necessary to face today’s challenges. As a result, there has been growing recognition, especially amongst developed countries, of the importance of pre-school education. The Obama administration, for example, has pledged a US$10 billion investment in early childhood education, one of the largest initiatives to boost childhood education in the USA since the 1960s. US Education Secretary Arne Duncan explains the reason for this emphasis, and I quote him: "Early learning has come into its own and is recognised as the first and most critical stage in human development. It is time to transform early learning from a system of uneven quality and access into a system that truly and consistently prepares children for success." For the same reason, major philanthropic foundations have also committed significant investments in pre-school education in the USA. The Buffet Early Childhood Education Fund has pledged more than US$18 million a year on advocacy projects for high-quality early childhood education, especially for disadvantaged children. The W K Kellogg Foundation pledged US$16.5 million in 2009 for similar projects. Recently, the member states of the European Union have pledged to provide free or subsidised full pre-school education for at least 90% of children under the age of six. This is in line with the trend amongst OECD countries to raise pre-school education standards and move towards a more universalised system.”
“Educationalists I spoke to are of the view that such children would benefit especially from exposure to pre-school education which will help socialise them early to being in a controlled, group environment. In most circumstances, it will also help to compensate for their home environment and boost their self-esteem and confidence. Thirdly, in some cases even when the children have undergone kindergarten education, they are not able to read or count when they enter Primary 1. Thankfully, it would appear that such cases are minimal. I have been serving as a SINDA volunteer for the Reading Programme – where once a week, I read to a primary school child for an hour at his home. A Primary 4 boy I used to read to was not able to read even one sentence in English when I first met him. I was told by some educationalists and social workers that many of these children come to Primary 1 without being able to read and struggle to catch up after that because of the general pace of the class and especially when there are more than 40 students per class. It is a challenge for the teacher to pay enough attention to kids who are trailing far behind. It is not for want of interest – it is just a practical problem. This throws up the question of what is taught in our kindergartens and the quality of pre-school education. I was hoping to present some findings of local studies on the state of pre-school education. Unfortunately, I have not been able to come across any. In comparison, there are numerous studies on the subject conducted outside of Singapore – all of which appear to stress the growing importance of pre-school education. Mr Speaker, Sir, allow me now to spend a few minutes to highlight some global trends and key findings in the area of pre-school education.”
“This is because at Primary 1, a child is assumed to be able to read or at least is expected to know his ABC and has basic numeracy skills. The fact is that more than 90% of the cohort would fit the bill somewhat, having gone through kindergarten. The educationalists I spoke to were all in agreement that a child who goes to Primary 1 today without attending kindergarten education is seriously disadvantaged. There are crash courses in school for such students in Primary 1 – to level up their reading and numeracy skills – but it would appear that their effectiveness is limited. After all, we are trying to pump-prime a child in a few months when other children would have taken two whole years to achieve the same! Secondly, the vast majority of those who go to Primary 1 without going to kindergarten are from families in the lower-income segment of the society where their parents have limited education. This means that the children who come from homes where the exposure to English is limited and whose parents may not be in a position to teach or guide them in language or numeracy skills. Many of the parents may not even have the luxury of spending quality time with their children, let alone teach them because they work shifts or, in some cases, double shifts. Social workers I spoke to are of the view that children are in a particularly worse off situation if they come from dysfunctional families – and we know that there is a higher incidence of this in lower-income households. In such cases, not only do the children go to Primary 1 without language or numeracy skills, they carry the baggage of low confidence and low self-esteem. We know that these have a retarding effect on educational performance.”
“It is in the same spirit as the legislation in the year 2000 and the PERI Report that I am now urging the Government, through this motion, to conduct a comprehensive review of pre-school education. The aim is for us to examine the state of pre-school education in a deeper, more focused manner – to study its impact on the individual and society as a whole in the context of today’s realities. My sense is that, overall, our pre-school and primary school education systems are on the right track. What is needed is some significant fine-tuning to reduce the incidence of unintended, undesired outcomes. On the other hand, the review could very well conclude that we do not need to make any significant changes to the system, but at least we will know that we have arrived at this conclusion after giving this important matter sufficient holistic consideration. It is also my hope that such a review will be conducted in an inclusive, consultative and transparent manner – very much like how Senior Minister of State Grace Fu’s Committee conducted its study. This is important because there are many stakeholders in pre-school education who have perspectives that are based on expertise and experience. More importantly, I hope that a lively, honest debate in this House and public participation in the process will help foster deeper awareness of the considerations and importance of pre-school education, especially among our parents. Mr Speaker, Sir, let me now briefly highlight three key observations on the state of pre-school education in Singapore. First, it is evident that a child who goes to Primary 1 today without attending kindergarten classes is highly disadvantaged, unless he comes from a socio-economic background where home tutoring is an option.”
“In fact, the education system, instead of being a social-leveller, I fear, could become an active contributor to the widening socio-economic gap, unwittingly albeit. Several Members of this House have in the recent past raised concerns on this subject. There have been questions about inequality, access to quality pre-school education, whether we should nationalise pre-schooling and what the goals of pre-school education should be. There is clearly interest expressed in this House to see an improvement in the quality of pre-school education, making it more affordable and accessible to all our children regardless of their socio-economic backgrounds. It is evident that, for a maximum shift towards a desirable outcome, we need to focus more on early intervention in education. To this end, the introduction of legislation in the year 2000 to make primary school education compulsory and the recent PERI Report on Primary Education by a Committee chaired by Senior Minister of State, Ms Grace Fu, are significant milestones. *The motion also stood in the name of Ms Audrey Wong Wai Yen. Both have sent powerful and much needed signals to parents and educationalists alike on the importance of early intervention to strengthen the foundation for a child’s ability to reach his potential. I applaud the Government for doing this. It has been 10 years since primary school education was made compulsory. In many ways, during this time pre-school education has come to have the same impact as primary education in determining the trajectory of the individual over the years, not only in terms of school performance but also the potential to succeed in life.”
“This, in turn, meant that the goals of producing better qualified and skilled individuals, and fulfilling the aspirations of an increasingly affluent society assumed primacy. I believe that this was an underpinning consideration for our educational policies, such as streaming. There was growing pressure to address the needs of more educated and demanding parents who did not want to see their children's performance in school retarded by them having to keep pace with the slower performing students in class. The socio-economic demographics of Singapore society has also changed significantly over the past 45 years. An outcome of economic prosperity is that the "haves" today outnumber the "have-nots" in our society. This means that the gap between the mean and median student has widened. For the reasons that I have highlighted earlier, if economic growth is an overriding imperative, then the mean student becomes the benchmark. Consequently, helping to propel those above the mean to attain peak performance in school naturally becomes the focus as this is the segment that has the strongest bearing on economic growth. I am not suggesting that there is a deliberate policy to ignore the needs of students who do not perform as well in school. Credit has to be given to the Government for continuing to seek ways to lift the overall performance of these students. Regardless, there appears to be a widening gap between the better and weaker performers in school that, in turn, translates to an exacerbation of the widening socio-economic gap in society. If there is no intervention, by way of policy shifts, the gap between the "haves" and "have-nots" will continue to widen at a faster pace.”
“Seeing how serious the Government was in ensuring that this remains sacrosanct – there was a strong buy-in from the ground. This belief, coupled with a deep trust in our political leaders – their integrity and sincerity – proved to be a powerful incentive for parents to be that much more driven to push their children to excel. The rewards of hard work were eminently evident. Over the years, we have continued to benefit from our political leadership's unstinting emphasis on education. The result – generations of Singaporeans went to school, got qualifications and skills that meant jobs and, over time, better paying jobs and, with that, the opportunity for a better life. We would be remiss if we take this for granted and are not grateful. A better educated workforce provided the ballast for continued economic growth. This, in turn, meant a more sophisticated populace, which, having tasted the good life started to demand even more. The result – growing aspirations. At the macro level, growing regional and global competition meant that to continue to grow as an economy, we needed more people with even better qualifications and skills. The challenge of managing and maintaining success became acute, especially from the 1980s. This meant having to balance three goals: (1) providing a level playing field for all, based on equal opportunities and meritocracy; (2) fulfilling the aspirations of an increasingly affluent and demanding population; and (3) producing more better qualified and skilled individuals as prime-movers of economic growth. Clearly, economic growth was, and continues to be, a key determinant of our survivability as a country. To a large extent, therefore, economic considerations underpin educational policies.”
“We had equal opportunities to do well, regardless of whether we were from rich, middle-income or poor families – essentially because, from what I could see, teaching was benchmarked on the median performer in class. And at that time, there was not much difference between the median and mean because the socio-economic disparity was not significant. And the clear emphasis on merit – where the best performer, regardless of his background, would be rewarded – gave parents from the lower-income segment of society enough incentive to push and motivate their children to do their best and have a crack at success in life. And for us, the pupils – because we saw fairly immediate results of hard work, we were motivated to continue working hard. As such, top schools like Raffles Institution (RI) and Raffles Girls' Secondary School (RGS) – which had the pick of the top 2% of each cohort – had a significant proportion of students coming from families in the lower-income segment of society. Many of these students, such as Mr Lee Kuan Yew, Mr Goh Chok Tong, Prof. S. Jayakumar, went on to lead the country. In fact, many of us of the right vintage would be familiar with the line, "RI ruled the country, and ACS owned it", because unlike in RI and RGS, students from ACS tended to come from families that were financially and socially well-heeled! This was the strength of our education system. Indeed, this was the strength of Singapore society then – where an enlightened and forward looking Government acted on the cardinal twin principles of meritocracy and equal opportunity to give enough hope to parents, rich or poor, that their children would have a fair crack at success and, with that, a good life. And education was the ultimate social leveller.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I thank you for the opportunity to move this motion*. I beg to move, That this House, with a view to better preparing our children for school and life, urges the Government to conduct a comprehensive review of pre-school education in Singapore by rationalising issues of continuity to formal schooling, variance in standards and fees, and equal opportunities. I started formal schooling in 1966 in the now defunct Cantonment Primary – a typical neighbourhood school where most of us were from lower-income families. I did not go to kindergarten, but was fortunate to have parents who emphasised education – even though they were hardly educated themselves. More importantly, being the youngest family of six children, I had the benefit of being taught how to read and to count at home when I was five. Yet, when I went to Primary 1, the teacher worked on the assumption that we could not read or count and so we started with basic lessons on the alphabet ABC and basic numbers. A handful of us were ahead of the class, but we enjoyed the relaxed pace and saw it as revision and, of course, more time to play! Quite a few of those from fairly poor family background, who did not attend kindergarten and did not have the benefit of home tutoring before primary school, I observed, caught up fairly fast and became star performers in a year or two. This is only possible because the majority of us were from similar socio-economic backgrounds and the pace of teaching was measured, catering to those who could not read or count. By the time we were in Primary 3, it was more or less a level playing field. The differentiating factors were hard work, parental guidance and, to a lesser extent, intelligence.”
“There is now a tacit acceptance that the MPA does not go against these values. There is no contradiction in my view. It is just one part of the total solution to help ensure that in our society, the needs of the vulnerable are not put on the back-burners. The State, the family, the private sector and the people sector all play a role in helping to ensure this through various means – legal or otherwise. Even though the Maintenance of Parents Act and the proposed amendments are statutory in nature, in essence, they play a role in reminding each one of us of why we should not neglect our parents – not so much because it is our duty or our obligation, or because the law says so, but because, in a vast majority of cases, our parents have loved and cared for us unconditionally. With that, Mdm Deputy Speaker, I support the Bill. EXEMPTED BUSINESS (Motion) 6.18 pm Resolved, That the proceedings on the business set down on the Order Paper for today be exempted at this day's sitting from the provisions of Standing Order No. 2. – [Mr Lim Swee Say]. MAINTENANCE OF PARENTS (AMENDMENT) BILL Debate resumed.”
“This could mean the power to access critical information, to make conciliation sessions compulsory at the pre-filing stage, or to dismiss cases deemed to be frivolous or vexatious in nature. Similarly, the Commissioner’s office is encouraged to work closely with the FSCs and other centres to bring to their attention genuine cases of neglect. This is to help ensure that such cases do not fall through the cracks because of a lack of awareness or other reasons. But even in such situations, the case will be processed by the Commissioner’s office only if the parents are comfortable and agreeable. There will be no coercion. For the implementation and post-implementation stages, the proposed amendments seek to ensure a less tedious and less stressful process especially at the application stage. The proposed amendments also seek to ensure close case monitoring afterwards to ensure prompt fulfilment of the Maintenance Order and to take into consideration material changes to the financial circumstances of the children. Essentially, therefore, all proposed amendments are to enhance not just the Commissioner’s or the Tribunal’s ability, but that of the system as a whole, to ensure that genuine cases get on the radar screens and that parents find recourse in a fair and prompt manner, as far as possible, without affecting family ties. Mdm Deputy Speaker, let me conclude by reiterating that the process for coming up with this amendment Bill was inclusive and provided clarity of intent, and therefore helped engender a stronger buy-in from the ground. If anything, I believe that the many honest discourses have only served to deepen our collective commitment to filial piety and family values.”
“While there are legal and statutory provisions in the MPA and the proposed amendments, recourse is essentially through an all hands-on-deck approach. It is my assumption that in the event that the children are seen as clearly not being in a position to assist their parents financially, the State will step in to ensure that the needs of the parents in these cases will be taken care of. The MPA or the amendments thereof should not translate to an abdication by the Government of its responsibilities that have been highlighted by my colleague, Assoc. Prof. Paulin Straughan. I do not believe that is the intention of the MPA nor the amendments that are being proposed. This is also a point that was reiterated by my colleague, Ms Denise Phua. Mr Seah Kian Peng captured this aptly by calling it a "beneficiary-centric process" – where the various Government agencies such as the Commissioner's Office and the Tribunal, and other Government agencies will step forward with the relevant information when approached, and work closely with the Family Service Centres (FSCs) and other welfare providers, such as old age homes and nursing homes as well as family members, relatives, friends and even concerned neighbours, to help ensure we do the right thing. The operative word is the "right thing" – which is why the amendment seeks to provide greater access to critical information from many reliable sources, so that the Commissioner and/or the Tribunal can make the right judgement call that is fair – to all parties – and is enforceable. It is for the same reason that the Commissioner and the President and the Deputy Presidents of the Tribunal are given greater latitude and power to make judgement calls – to ensure just and effective outcomes to all.”
“At the same time, we also know that we do not want the MPA – by its very existence – to artificially stoke demand for its intercession. It must be clear that the MPA, as a legal recourse, must remain the very last resort – that is, when all efforts within the family to seek reconciliation fail. It is to help ensure this that the Workgroup decided against a tough, punitive approach when dealing with recalcitrants. We feel that it would send the wrong signal which, in turn, could discourage families from trying hard enough to work things out through discussion and mediation. I hope that what I just shared would help address the concern raised by my colleague, Assoc. Prof. Paulin Straughan, that the MPA, to quote her, "trivialises family ties". My view is that the amendments we are proposing serve to hold up family ties and values like filial piety, by increasing the focus on counselling and mediation to help families find solutions without affecting their ties. Allow me now to move on to the second key argument: remaining faithful to the purpose of the MPA. When it was enacted in 1995, the Maintenance of Parents Act was intended to benefit parents – especially ageing or helpless parents – who were wantonly neglected by their children. These children were in a position to render financial assistance. It was not to become a lever for parents to abuse the system. Fifteen years on, this intent remains unchanged. The spirit behind the amendments we are seeking to introduce here today is to enhance the ability of society, which includes the State, to ensure that parents get the financial assistance they can rightly and reasonably expect from their children. The focus is on genuine cases based on the principles of fairness and justice.”
“I do believe that we are now a lot clearer about what we want to achieve through the MPA, and what we certainly do not. For example, we want a more conciliatory approach that respects and values the sanctity of family ties and the feelings thereof. Given the multitude of stresses of modern-day life today, there are many families out there that I and other Members are aware of, that are going through on a regular basis, disputes and strife, often financial in nature, that are tearing apart the families – the very families we are talking about, here – and many of them are suffering in silence. So, the Workgroup's view is that mediation and the emphasise on mediation can be a welcome relief for these families and the Members. And our hope is that when the families come to mediation – which is now we are proposing to be compulsory – many of these cases would be settled there and the families could actually, if the mediation is conducted well by professionals, have a chance to discuss some of these issues openly and resolve some of them without having the case go to a Tribunal. That is an important point. So, for the individuals and agencies tasked to protect the interests of parents who have been wantonly neglected, such as the Commissioner, the President and the Deputy Presidents of the Tribunal, they need to be adequately armed and empowered. Not only does this help them to do what they are required to do, but it also serves, in my view, as a deterrent where the very existence of the law and a system that has teeth can influence and shape behaviour positively. This is not dissimilar from the speed cameras that we have that we know can actually force us to slow down when we approach them.”
“This, in turn, forces us to acknowledge that: (1) the issue is multi-dimensional and therefore a one-size-fits-all approach is inadequate; (2) just because there does not appear to be a problem in general, it does not mean that there are not specific instances where the problem does exist and in a significant way; and (3) when we address a complex issue such as this, we need to balance private sensibilities with public interest and pragmatism – a puritanical approach can be self-destructive in the longer run. Common wisdom tells us that it is not organisations that persuade people; it is people who persuade people. So, just as how the debate on the Maintenance of Parents Act (MPA) serves us well, this time too, the process of developing this Amendment Bill, I feel, has forced us as individuals and as a people to ask inconvenient questions pertaining to filial piety, family values, the role of the State and the ideal approach to adopt. In particular, I found my colleague Assoc. Prof. Paulin Straughan's arguments, although I may not agree with them, forced me to think about important considerations. I do not think there is a clear black or white, neither should we move towards a litigious mode of arguing this. I think there needs to be mutual respect because individuals have the right to take a position, and I respect my colleague for having the gumption to articulate the point of view even though she is very aware that she is a minority. As highlighted by Mr Seah Kian Peng in his speech, the various discussions on the issue at multiple levels on several platforms, involving thousands of people that were conducted over the last six months, have put us in good stead.”
“Mdm Deputy Speaker, thank you for the opportunity to join in this debate. I speak as a member of the Workgroup on the Bill. Most of the substantive points on the Bill have been articulated quite ably by the Workgroup Chairman, Mr Seah Kian Peng, and the other members. I would like to reinforce two key arguments: the process as a legitimising factor and remaining faithful to the purpose. First, the process – how it has been a legitimising factor. When the Maintenance of Parents Bill was tabled 15 years ago by the then NMP Walter Woon, I must admit I asked myself, "Is this necessary? Are we creating an issue when, perhaps, there isn't one? Are we opening up a Pandora's box for Government intervention into the citizen's private space? Would we end up sending the wrong signal to the public?" Much as I was impressed with Prof. Walter Woon's conviction and confidence in tabling the Bill, not just as a backbencher but as an NMP, I was also concerned with what we could possibly unleash. So, I followed the proceedings then with more than casual interest, and was soon forced to rescind my misgivings. More importantly, I was heartened that the process catalysed what I saw as a reaffirmation of the importance of family values and filial piety – not only in this House but amongst a vast majority of people I met in society. What is paradoxical but true is that the very purpose in the very process of debating on an issue as emotionally charged and therefore controversial such as this, if conducted with honesty, sensitivity and transparency, serves to strengthen a collective reflex in support of the very underlying values. This is because the debate conducted over a period of time, throws up a multitude of aspects and sensibilities of the issue.”
“I thank the Minister for making the statement and for his clarifications. Like my colleague, Mr Hri Kumar, I am quite disturbed that given the fact that there cannot be that many immediate members of the family, on the day of the escape, should it not have been standard operating procedure for the security forces to actually go down to the homes of the immediate family members? I would imagine that is standard operating procedure. Would the Minister please comment? Mr Shanmugam: Sir, let me start by saying that we are naturally disappointed that despite the intensive and massive effort made to track him down, Mas Selamat managed to slip through and to take shelter with Asmom and his family. That having been said, the Member will remember that I said that on Mas Selamat's side alone, excluding his wife's side, just taking into account his relatives, a loose network, numbered more than a hundred, and if you take into account contacts, they numbered many more. I do not want to go into details of when what was done or what surveillance was done because they are really operational security matters and it is not in the interests of our country for us to disclose these matters. However, the Member can be assured that what was done has been reviewed and I am satisfied that all the necessary steps were taken.”
“Could the Minister give his opinion as to whether there is a correlation between the number of people who have registered and the convenience or inconvenience factor in voting? In some countries, I gather that Singaporeans living abroad have to travel seven hours to get to a polling station. I am wondering whether a factor like this is keeping the number of people from registering even though they are interested to exercise their duty to vote? If so, is the Government doing enough to try and make it easier? I understand some of the limitations that the Minister has highlighted. They are reasonable. We need to make sure that we keep election fraud and other such issues at bay. But it is a question of balancing that with continuing to strive to make it easier for our overseas voters to cast their votes. I gather that countries like the United States of America do go out of their way to allow for their voters to cast their votes by mail. I am really wondering whether we would reconsider that because there are quite a few developed countries that do it.”
“I thank the Minister. Could the Minister give one or two specific examples of measures that the Government has started taking which do not inflict a social, economic cost on Singaporeans? Assoc. Prof. Dr Yaacob Ibrahim: Sir, there are already measures that were put in place. One of the most effective is behavioural change where users, such as you and me, can adopt energy efficient appliances at home so that we can lower our energy demand. We have already moved to label energy-efficient appliances so that we provide the opportunity for consumers to make informed choices. In fact, several agencies, including the TCs, will switch over to more energy-saving light bulbs when they change the light bulbs along the corridors. These are the things in which we can do progressively to ensure that the economy and society can adjust to the commitments. Other measures will take time. I have mentioned in my reply that we have already imposed a new minimum Green Mark Standard for new buildings. This will be imposed on all new buildings. In terms of existing buildings, this will progressively be incorporated as building owners, for example, change the chillers and so on. Meanwhile, we have put in place incentive schemes for building owners to tap on so that they can do an energy audit to decide on the energy savings that they can make within their buildings.”
“Mdm Halimah Yacob asked the Minister for National Development whether he will consider reviving the Transitional Rental Housing Scheme which allowed newly-wed couples to rent flats from the HDB pending allocation of their new purchase flats to assist them in their efforts to set up a home.”
“Thank you. I understand and most Singaporeans understand the principle of why we need the EIP. But the question is that if an individual, especially from an ethnic minority community, feels that he is disadvantaged financially through the resale flat process because of his ethnic minority status, that is not going to be good. In the instance where they come from one of the 14% of neighbourhoods that the Parliamentary Secretary has talked about, if it is true that he has been disadvantaged because he is from an ethnic minority community, should the Government not find a way to reach out to that individual and help him out? Dr Mohamad Maliki Bin Osman: Sir, the point I am making is that it is not conclusive that a sale is necessarily disadvantaged because of the EIP restrictions. There are many attributes that relate to the resale prices, whether he is able to sell the flat at market valuation, above market valuation or below market valuation, it is not necessarily affected by the EIP alone. As I have mentioned earlier, there are sellers who are affected by EIP restrictions and can command very high resale prices. It is not that because of the effect of the EIP, that necessarily flat prices will be depressed. We have to look at the individual cases. The point we are making is that EIP affects everyone, and it has been shown that it is not just the EIP that is depressing prices, because those who are affected by EIP policies have been able to sell their flats way above market valuation, too. TRANSITIONAL RENTAL HOUSING SCHEME 8.”
“I thank the Parliamentary Secretary for his response. The reason I raised this question is because quite a few of my friends and their friends have highlighted that they have had difficulties selling their flats at market rates because of their ethnic background, especially because they are in the minority groups. I am wondering if this perception is pervasive on the ground. It does not augur well for the multi-cultural nature of our society, if people feel that they are disadvantaged as a result of their ethnic minority status. That is the concern with which I have raised this question. What is the Parliamentary Secretary's response to that?”
“As the hon. Minister has highlighted, there has been a misrepresentation of sorts. This incident has caused a fair bit of concern on the ground, and I appreciate the Minister's explanation which comes across fairly reasonable. My question is why was this explanation not provided until now?”
“This inconvenience must be seen as an investment in building trust between the Government and the people, and evolving a more engaged society. This is necessary to help us move forward together even better, our priorities and goals synchronised.”
“The third step that I suggest, as in the case of the GDP and non-oil exports which is reported on a monthly basis, there should be quarterly or, at least, half-yearly reporting by the Government on a handful of new indicators, some measuring non-market externalities. Ideally, these should be aggregated or composite indices to measure productivity and job-satisfaction, household consumption, income distribution, welfare, quality of life and general well-being. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, to conclude, I would like to acknowledge, once again, our admirable economic achievement over the past 45 years because of sound economic policies and good governance. What I am recommending is an improvement of a good system and practice as a necessary step in managing the success we have achieved – where a better educated, sophisticated people's needs have certainly moved up the value chain. It is about aligning our practices with the aspirations of today’s Singapore residents, both the citizens and PRs. It is about moving in tandem with the best practices in other developed economies facing similar challenges – best practices that have evolved through learning from lessons from recent history. I urge the Government to view my observations with an open mind to see it not as a criticism of current practice but as a considered appeal for a review that will help provide greater clarity in policy formulation, resulting in policies and programmes that are likely to resonate better with the ground. Yes, the increased level of transparency and public disclosure is likely to result in more questions asked about the Government's policies and the considerations behind them.”
“Apart from the currently used key indicators of GDP, Consumer Price Index (CPI), Industrial Production Index and Total Exports/Imports, we could consider including other economic indicators that measure median wages, income distribution, productivity, job satisfaction and household consumption. The new framework should also include indicators for quality of life and general well-being – a range of indices that measure income, public services, health, leisure, wealth, mobility, the environment and connectedness. Experts I have spoken to, especially economists and researchers, are in agreement that what we have at present is not sufficiently versatile to anticipate, unearth and red-flag problem areas. This is because problems are complex and multifaceted, and because we do not have enough data on non-market externalities, they do not appear on the radar screens. Even if these problems are identified, solutions tend to be shallow and technical in nature because we rely primarily on economic indicators. To get a clearer, more accurate resolution of the situation and the issues thereof, we need to study the mixed bag of indicators in combination and where possible how they interface. Let us take the current challenge of boosting productivity in the workplace. A key solution is skills training and innovation, and rightly so. Another underlying problem is low job satisfaction, lack of ownership or empowerment, and poor work-life balance. Currently, these are indicators that are not readily available and therefore likely not to be given sufficient or prompt attention in addressing the productivity challenge.”
“The increased level of education and technology usage has made people more informed and exposed, and therefore demanding greater levels of transparency and accountability in seeking a better quality of life. Needs are shifting. The increasing demand for information is linked directly to each individual's life and priorities. When the Government announces that the economy is recovering or doing well, people are asking how this is benefiting them directly. It is incumbent on the Government to make available broad information to facilitate informed decisions by the people. I would, therefore, suggest a three-step approach for the Government to consider, with a view to evolving a new collective reflex in balancing economic growth with other goals that the people increasingly desire. First step, the Government should commit resources to ensure that we collect and collate information on what the people want – their priorities. It is evident that some of these determinants – job satisfaction, happiness, work-life balance, feeling connected, environmental degradation, pollution – are qualitative in nature. In economic parlance, they are non-market externalities. From what I understand, currently there is little available data on these factors, and it would appear they are not sufficiently accounted for in public policy. Secondly, the Government should develop a framework for broad-based public policy analysis. It should create a mixed bag of social and economic indicators. This would be in line with the OECD recommendation of "institutionalising a range of indicators".”
“Perhaps the most noteworthy and thorough reports on the need for this shift in practice is the "Report on Economic Performance and Social Progress". This was commissioned by French President Nicholas Sarkozy in the aftermath of the global crisis that started in 2007. The Report states that conventional market-based measurements of income, wealth and consumption are insufficient to assess human well-being. It emphasised the need to give greater prominence to factors, such as income distribution, personal consumption and individual wealth, while assessing qualitative aspects such as health, education, the environment, employment, material well-being, interpersonal connectedness and political engagement. The "Report on Economic Performance and Social Progress" was tabled at the 2009 G20 Summit in Pittsburg, USA. The leaders endorsed the need to include indicators other than the GDP to have a better measurement of progress. The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) is actively challenging the pre-eminent status of the GDP as the "end all" of all indicators. They strongly support the "institutionalisation of a range of indicators". Similarly, the Europe 2020 Strategy will see the European Commission monitor member states based on a set of indicators to track overall progress. The idea is not to lose the plot yet again. In Canada, the "Canadian Index of Well Being" measures social connections, in addition to standard of living, health, environmental quality, education and skill levels, and participation in the democratic process. So, what does all this mean for Singapore, which today is recognised as a developed society, aspiring to become a global city of excellence?”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, in many ways the recent global economic meltdown has served as a wake up call for political leaders. It has sparked introspection and close examination of the systemic flaws in the way we manage economic growth, and consequently, the way prosperity is measured. Many eminent economists, for example, have pointed to GDP figures "masking the true health" of the economy in the lead up to and during the recent global economic crisis in the USA. They argue that if policymakers had focused on a broader set of indicators, there is a good chance the adverse situation would have been prevented, or at least managed better with early detection. Consequently, now in the USA, a new system of national measurements called the "State of the USA" has emerged, with several hundred new measures and indices pushed to policymakers, and at the same time made available to the public. The idea is for this to evolve into a "national indicators panel". President Obama’s recently passed Healthcare Bill included a provision requiring Congress to finance and oversee the creation of a key "national indicators system". These indicators include crime, energy, infrastructure, housing, health, education, the environment, in addition to and interfaced with key economic indicators such as the GDP and consumption index. US Federal Reserve Chairman, Ben Bernanke, is another proponent of this line of thought. He has argued passionately for an acknowledgement of the inherent limitations of the GDP as a policy tool for policymakers, as it focused primarily on what he terms "material determinants of social welfare". He calls for a "broader measurement of human welfare" which includes what he refers to as the "economics of happiness".”
“Yes, our GDP has risen as a result of this policy but it has, over the years, systematically depressed wages of lower-skilled workers, and contributed to a surge in rental costs and inflation. Secondly, the economic growth-centred model focused on GDP can come at a social and ecological cost. Given that social and environmental factors such as work-life balance, job satisfaction and happiness have been proved to be essential especially in developed societies. For economic sustainability, it is necessary to stop seeing social and economic policies as tradeoffs. Take the Kelly Global Workforce Index, for example. It measures work-life balance and the use of technology in countries. In 2009, it was stated that only 54% of Singaporeans are satisfied with their work-life balance, compared to 69% in the USA. We were even significantly lower than other Asian countries – India had 64% and Indonesia, 68%. The Grant Thornton study in 2007 ranked Singapore sixth globally in terms of stress level of the population. In a 2009 survey conducted by Robert Half Singapore, a HR consultancy firm, Singapore ranked second lowest worldwide in terms of job satisfaction, with only 53% of respondents being satisfied with their work. From all this, it is clear that the equity versus efficiency debate needs to be adjusted from being a zero-sum issue to one of balance and complementarity. Economic growth and general well-being must be seen as equally important societal goals. After all, the end goal of economic policies should be to benefit the citizens and improve their well-being and give happiness. It is difficult, even for the best intentioned policy makers to develop this reflex, if the GDP remains the default indicator.”
“However, our Prime Minister's recent statement in Huston indicating that with the blow-out economic growth rate, we would need another 100,000 foreign workers, is a cause for concern. It appears to go against to the ESC's recommendation to reduce our dependency on foreign workers and for good reasons. The other area that the GDP figures tend to mask is income distribution – which for most developed, affluent economies remain a challenge. While we have one of the highest per capita GDP in the world, according to figures from the CIA World Factbook for 2009, Singapore ranks as one of the highest in the world in terms of income inequality. The Gini coefficient is the measurement of income inequality – the higher the Gini coefficient, the worse the level of inequality. Based on 2008 figures, Singapore has a Gini coefficient of 48.10 – which is much higher than other countries in Asia, including China, Malaysia and the Philippines. In fact, it would appear that Singapore is closer to many under-developed countries in the Gini coefficient. This should certainly be a cause for concern for us, but it will be red-flagged only if we pay enough attention, and prompt attention, to this indicator together with the GDP. One evident cost when pursuing an economic growth-centred model is a possible short-sightedness that could lead to short-cut solutions. We lose peripheral vision, which is an important public policy imperative. Take the policy of importing foreign workers in large numbers into Singapore – something that we have only recently started putting the brakes on.”
“According to data, profits take about 46% of Singapore’s GDP, which according to the economists I spoke to, is extremely high compared to other developed economies. From what I understand, half of this high profit share is repatriated, ie, it goes to the coffers of foreign-owned companies with operations here. What is left in the GDP pie to directly benefit Singaporeans is therefore a relatively small amount. With such a significant amount of growth driven by foreign MNCs, the net welfare benefit to the average Singaporean is unclear. According to economist, Manu Bhaskaran, and I quote, "This could be why even though Singapore’s per capita GDP is roughly 11% higher than Hong Kong’s, our per capita consumption is about 21% lower that Hong Kong’s. If we take per capita consumption as a better indicator of welfare, then simply going for high growth per se does not guarantee that we will achieve the best possible welfare outcome for Singaporeans" Similarly, if you look at the wage component of GDP, you will see that the Singaporean workers’ wages account for less than half of Singapore’s GDP. In other developed countries, these wages take up more than half of the total GDP. In Singapore, wages account for about 43% of our GDP, compared to 58% in the USA and 57% in Japan, according to a report published by Singstat. This is due to a conscious effort by the Government to moderate wage increases to manage the cost of doing business here. Another cause of the low wage level in Singapore is the influx of foreign workers, which has had the effect of pushing wages down. I believe the Government is addressing these issues through our concerted efforts to boost productivity and innovation in the workplace.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, while one cannot dispute the correlation between economic growth and standard of living, the GDP was never meant to measure the well-being of people. Simon Kuznets, one of the founders of the GDP calculations, made this quite clear, and I quote him, "distinctions must be kept in mind between quantity and quality of growth, between costs and returns, and between the short and the long run. Goals for more growth should specify more growth of what and for what" GDP figures limit the assessment of both objective as well as subjective elements of well-being and development. Objective elements refer to issues of income distribution, purchasing power parity, per capita consumption, and wage shares. Subjective elements refer to issues such as health and mental well-being, life and job satisfaction, work-life balance, happiness and social and environmental capital. I believe that some of the socio-economic dysfunctions we see in Singapore today have been exacerbated by a combination of a strong focus on GDP growth and the inherent limitations and the skewing effects of the GDP figures. Let me highlight a few of these dysfunctions, by way of illustration. First, let us look at some of the market-driven negative externalities that the GDP figures do not highlight. As I brought up in my speech made in this House last August, Singapore’s per capita GDP has risen exponentially over the past 44 years. According to figures from the Department of Statistics, in Sing dollar and nominal terms, Singapore’s per capita GDP grew from $1,567 in 1965 to $53,192 in 2008, certainly one of the highest in the world. But when we look closer at what constitutes the GDP, there is cause for concern.”
“My concern is that if we do not develop a formalised framework for analysis, these other indicators will continue to play second fiddle to GDP, instead of being considered together with GDP and with the same level of importance. Sustained economic growth is necessary for job creation and employment which in turn is a key determinant of standard of living. This Government has delivered this consistently. Paradoxically, continued economic growth and progress over the years have resulted in the cause of the challenges we face today – balancing the needs of an increasingly educated and sophisticated populace with those from the middle- and lower middle-class sector who are struggling to match up and keep up. In the first 30 years of Singapore, the population was less bifurcated, socially and economically – so, GDP as a key indicator was sufficient. We just needed to grow fast, create jobs and build affordable houses. Today, it is no more about how fast we grow. Increasingly, it is about how we grow, where we grow, are we prepared to pay the price for growth, and whether we are growing together. These are all challenges that developed societies face – challenges of managing success. The GDP is not equipped to prompt us or provide answers in these increasingly critical areas. Worse is if we focus too much and for too long on the GDP, it could paint too rosy a picture – a false positive, so to speak – and distract us from these issues. The GDP is essentially a measurement of economic activity not economic benefit. Used on its own, it can be a misleading indicator of economic progress and welfare of the individual Singaporean.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I thank you for the opportunity to move this motion. Before commencing my speech, I would like to convey my congratulations and gratitude to the Government for steering an impressive economic recovery – far exceeding expectations. The Gross Domestic Product (GDP) has been and I foresee will continue to remain the most commonly used indicator of economic performance and growth. This speech will not contest that reality. My intent in making this speech is to highlight that the changed circumstances today require a broader framework where policymakers have the benefit of being prompted by socio-economic indicators other than GDP. This helps us better address important issues that are not strictly economic in nature, such as aspirations, equity and happiness which in turn have an increasing impact on national goals such as sustained economic growth, productivity, innovation, work-life balance and, of course, procreation. In this year’s Committee of Supply debate, the Government made it clear that it no longer adopts a "GDP growth at all cost" approach. I am heartened by this assurance, and I have reason to believe that the Government is already looking at other indicators to ensure that negative externalities of policies and programmes are identified early and addressed or mitigated. The Economic Strategies Committee (ESC) also highlighted the importance of evolving a more qualitative, "sustained economic growth". However, its recommendations are still focused on economic growth and productivity which a growth-centred model tends to emphasise, with too little consideration of social and environmental factors.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to ask the Deputy Prime Minister this – a concern that arises as a result of these incidents is an erosion of trust between people of different religious groups that could lead to finger-pointing or even victimisation. How does the Government monitor these developments? And if we come across such situations, how do we handle and manage them on the ground?”
“That is why I am saying if the Government decides in the end that it is all right to have campaign reports – which I do believe having been involved in the broadcast media before about coming up with campaign reports – I am not talking about intentionally being biased but opinions and suggestions of the editors actually can be imputed into the programme. So I am not stating that there is an inherent bias that the mainstream media has, but I am saying that it is important for us to prevent any form of subjectivity on that day in the spirit of the reason why we are having a cooling-off period. Sir, I would like to clarify these points. Ultimately, I completely agree with the Minister that trust is crucial and it is precisely because I feel that trust is crucial we need to build on what trust we have today that I made the suggestions.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, it looks to me like the hon. Minister has not moved on from his past life because he has, clearly to me at least, adopted the classic lawyer's technique of ascribing things to me and then making it a point to debunk them. In particular, by suggesting that I was saying that I do not have confidence in the system as it is. That is not what I said. That is not what I meant. The reason why I suggested having a watchdog body, for example, is not because I do not have confidence in the Commissioner of Police or the establishment. I think it is important that the public understands and public sees this as being neutral, as being fair. Secondly, it is also because the Commissioner of Police, I would imagine, would be very, very occupied at that point in time with policing matters. And, thirdly, very importantly, a lot of the issues that we are dealing with – as it is evident from the points raised by other hon. Members – a lot of the points are grey, they are not black and white. A lot of these points may require careful study and collective wisdom which can come about when you have a watchdog body. That is where I am coming from. Whether it is practicable or not is a different issue but I would like to clarify, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, that I was not suggesting that I have no confidence in the system as it is. Similarly, there was a suggestion that I feel that the media would be less than neutral – the mainstream media. That is not what I was suggesting either. I think it is important that there should be fairness in the way we deal with this.”
“Such a watchdog body would not only help serve as a much needed neutral arbiter, but would also lend credibility to the electoral process and strengthen and sustain public trust. Mr Speaker, Sir, in conclusion, even with the rules and regulations in place, there will be many moving parts and grey areas when it comes to effectively and correctly implementing the measures to reap the desired outcomes. This is why it is crucial that the reasons and considerations for the amendments to the Parliamentary Elections Act are not only intuitive and fair, but seen to be so. The points I have raised and the suggestions thereof are in keeping with this spirit – to help sustain and enhance public trust, not just to maintain confidence, in the electoral process. For this, the realities of politics aside, the residual impression on the ground has to be that the amendments are intended to serve the larger, long-term interest of the citizenry and not just the interests of parties contesting in the election. I believe that, indeed, this is the motivation for the amendments. With that, Mr Speaker, Sir, I support the Bill. 4.17 pm”
“It is quite evident that the mainstream and online media perspectives, especially on social and political matters, can be quite different. As such, their campaign summaries are likely to differ – giving voters the benefit of a broader range of views to choose from without being influenced by one point of view. But the better option, Mr Speaker, Sir, is not to have to mitigate the pitfalls of external influence and prevent it from happening in any form in the first place. Finally, with all these rules and regulations in place to ensure the objective of a cooling-off period is achieved, there is the question of who monitors and who enforces. As it stands, it would appear that the Commissioner of Police is entrusted with this responsibility. But is it fair to expect him to take on this additional and difficult responsibility of making a judgement call on a matter such as this when he would be very, very busy at that point in time, and this is an area that may not fall within his core expertise or responsibility? Would it not be more appropriate and make more sense to create a high level electoral body – a committee of sorts – to serve as a watchdog empowered to closely monitor the conduct of the media and the political parties for adherence to the rules and to ensure that no party – incumbent or challenger – is given undue advantage? The committee would blow the whistle when it sees a transgression. The Commissioner of Police would then step in to enforce the rule of law. Today, there are enough individuals in our society with the seniority and expertise to serve on such an electoral watchdog body – persons who have earned public trust for their integrity and wisdom, and whose neutrality is beyond question.”
“However, if the aim is to prevent undue external influence that directly or indirectly "promotes or procures the electoral success" or "enhances the standing of any such political parties, candidates or groups of candidates", then, by extension, the Bill should seek to eliminate all other means of external influence during the cooling-off period. In this regard, any event or activity, not just those that are directly linked to the election, that involves interaction with the public by candidates, should be disallowed. This would include ceremonies, festivals and commemorative events, even if they were scheduled way before the date of the election was announced. Even though, strictly speaking, such events fall outside the definition of "election meetings", it is evident that they can "enhance the standing" of any political party and its candidates and, by doing so, indirectly influence voting and, therefore, the outcome of the election. Similarly, any media reporting that could directly or indirectly influence the way votes are cast, should be disallowed. As such, editorials, campaign summary reports or any other form of content that is subjective in nature and that gives the media latitude to publish opinions should not be allowed during the cooling-off period. Party political broadcasts and a pure listing of candidates for easy reference by voters would be content that does not transgress this principal of being even-handed and, therefore, can be allowed. If the residual view held by the Government is that it is all right for the mainstream media to publish campaign summary reports on the eve of Polling Day, then it is only fair and appropriate that the Internet-based media, such as online bulletins, be allowed to do the same.”
“He said, and I quote: "After a very exciting and emotional election campaign, you really ought to have some time to calm down, reflect on the issues and the arguments, and analyse what is at stake, logically, rationally, and then to go in to the polls to cast your vote in a calm and steady state of mind". This makes sense to me. Calm and quiet is important as we are making up our minds on how to cast the vote. It is for the same reason that countries such as Australia, Indonesia, Italy and Mexico have a similar practice, and from what I gather – other countries are considering the same. The underlying assumption appears to be that during the cooling-off period, there should be no actions or distractions that could influence voters. Having had the benefit of hearing, seeing and reading about the different perspectives during the campaign period, the final decision on how to cast the vote has to be the individual’s. It is for this reason that the Bill seeks to disallow "election meetings" on the eve of Polling Day. And an "election meeting" is defined as "a public assembly organised by or on behalf of a candidate nominated for election to: (a) promote or procure the electoral success at the election for one or more identifiable political parties, candidates or groups of candidates; or (b) to otherwise enhance the standing of any such political parties, candidates or groups of candidates with the electorate in connection with the election". I support this proposed amendment.”
“If the Government is concerned about irresponsible conduct, which is justifiable, surely there is adequate recourse through legislative means – the Sedition Act, the Penal Code, libel laws, just to list a few. This Amendment is, firstly, difficult to justify; secondly, a challenge to enforce; and, thirdly, likely to be counter-productive because it could stimulate increased traffic to these sites. It is imperative and useful for the Minister to explain how "election advertising" is defined, and whether there is any form of restriction in communicating personal points of view pertaining to the election through the Internet and other electronic and telephonic means such as through Facebook, Twitter, blogs and podcasts. And if indeed there are restrictions, what might the reasons be? More importantly, why does the Bill seek to deny Internet and telephone-based sites the right to publish news and perspectives on the election? As we continue to project ourselves as a open, progressive society, it is increasingly important that any restriction on the use of telephones, the Internet or other electronic means for communicating ideas and views is justifiable, not just from the Government’s perspective but, more importantly, from the people’s point-of-view. Given the widespread use of these communication means – a rapidly growing phenomenon – any restriction that is deemed unjustified will be seen as an erosion of basic rights, and is likely to be defied or circumvented, which we know, is not difficult to do. Mr Speaker, Sir, I would now like to move on to talk about the cooling-off period – 24 hours just before Polling Day. This idea was first brought to light by the Prime Minister in December last year.”
“Unless there is some other intent for restricting it to a one-to-one communication – in which case, it is important for the Minister to explain the reasons. Also, under section 61 of the principal Act, in paragraph (d) of subsection (6), it is stated that, "the publication of any news relating to an election in a newspaper in any medium or in a radio or television broadcast" is permitted. However, in the Amendment Bill, this paragraph is deleted and replaced with two new clauses under a new paragraph (c). It would appear, Mr Speaker, Sir, that the Bill seeks now to restrict the publication of election news to a newspaper in any medium that is "permitted to do so under the Newspaper and Printing Presses Act". Similarly, the Bill proposes that only radio and TV broadcasts by those licensed under the Broadcasting Act will now be permitted to provide election news coverage. What this means is that online publications – which include popular bulletins such as theonlinecitizen.com, Yawning Bread and Temasek Review, as well as some very popular blogs – which, by their very nature, are not officially licensed, will now not be permitted to publish election news. If this interpretation of the Bill is correct, it is disappointing. In an election, is it not important for voters to have the benefit of a wide spectrum of views, interpretations and perspectives to help them make a choice on Polling Day? Have not Government leaders themselves stressed the need for people to make considered, informed and, ultimately, balanced choices at the polls? How does restricting non-mainstream perspectives serve this end?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I thank you for the opportunity to participate in this debate. I would like to speak on two aspects of the Parliamentary Elections (Amendment) Bill: first, what constitutes election advertising; and second, the implications of the 24-hour cooling-off period on the eve of Polling Day. Section 61 of the principal Act, paragraph (c) of subsection (6) states that "the transmission by an individual to another individual, on a non-commercial basis on what is commonly known as the Internet, of his own political views", is allowed. But in the Amendment Bill, this is deleted and substituted with a new paragraph (d), which says that "telephonic or electronic transmission by an individual to another individual" for the same purpose, is allowed. I would like to ask the Minister what is the reason for this change. Can we take it that the term "electronic transmission" includes the Internet as well as other new means of electronic transmission, such as podcasts, and, if so, that there is no material change to using the Internet in election advertising on a one-to-one basis? As we know, the way the Internet is used has evolved significantly over the years. From a one-to-one communication, to one-to-many, and now, it is not uncommon to have many-to-many communication through Facebook, YouTube and other sites. As such, under the broad definition of election advertising, why does it appear that the Bill seeks to restrict the use of the Internet to a one-to-one communication? To me, this restriction is not necessary. I would suggest that the Bill avoid specifying the nature of communication on the Internet, and simply state that the use of the Internet for communication during the "election period" is permitted.”