Wang Kai Yuen
Singapore
“Sir, would MDA not, in monitoring these sites and when they have found such a content on its own, make it as tenable evidence and pass it to the Police rather than have the complaint from the public?”
“I would like to find out from the Minister of State when will the content of these blogs start becoming from being just mere offensive to tenable and verifiable evidence that could be tendered in court for an act committed in Singapore that is punishable under the Penal Code, such as homosexual act, oral sex and sex with underaged ladies.”
“Once they are disqualified, they might as well close shop. Sir, I am sympathetic to their plight and that it is unfair to apply the demerit points to a single company as a whole, regardless of the number of ongoing construction projects. This could act against big companies with multiple projects.”
“Individuals just make less money when they sell their flats. Hopefully, if they were to buy another flat, they could also pay proportionately less as well. However, when the market is on the way down, like in the last few years, or stagnate like now, the loss would be substantial, as many would be saddled with negative equity.”
“Sir, would the Minister agree that since the Singapore law is primarily based on the common law and since the UK Parliament has found it necessary to legislate that glorification of terrorism is a crime, would he agree that there might be a gap in our laws that our current law would not cover where the current UK law would now cover?”
“Thank you, Sir. The Minister indicated that he would monitor and would plug the hole when the need arises. Would he want to follow the UK example that they would only pass such a law after a terrorist attack in the tube? If a similar event happens in Singapore, would it be a bit too late to plug the gap? Assoc. Prof.”
The complete record
Every one of 1,025 lines we hold for Wang Kai Yuen, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 11 of 21.
“Sir, I have listened with great interest the opening remarks by Mr Lim Swee Say. He defined what is a knowledge-based company. He outlined some of the criteria and, in fact, six total capabilities of a knowledge-based company. But at the end of it, I am still not very sure what is a knowledge-based company. In fact, my colleague, Mr Ahmad Magad, had already very eloquently touched upon this topic by saying that there is a lot of confusion surrounding what is a knowledge-based enterprise. In fact, most people associate it with anything to do with computers and, therefore, any products and services associated with computers are considered a knowledge-based enterprise. But how about products and services based on other fields of human endeavours? As Mr Ahmad Magad said, a knowledge-based economy is primarily about unleashing and potentially utilising knowledge locked up in people's mind. Mr Lim Swee Say also defined six criteria. So I would like to ask him whether a drug like Viagra will fulfil this definition of a product of a knowledge-based company. However we define it, if Singapore could produce a product like that, it would provide a very comfortable lifestyle for all those associated with the discovery and marketing of this particular product. Sir, this is just one example to show that there are in fact immense potentials for breakthroughs in other fields of human endeavours like life sciences and genetics. There are already glimpses of promise of drugs and remedies for killer diseases like cancer, as well as medical problems linked to genetic defects. So when we talk about knowledge-based enterprise, knowledge-based company and knowledge-based industry, it actually covers a very wide field.”
“Sir, the point that I would like to raise has been adequately covered by the speakers preceding me, Mr Inderjit Singh and Mrs Lim Hwee Hua. So I just want to join in by urging the Government to evaluate the possibility of establishing a single agency to provide greater leadership and sharper focus in our attempt to help the SMEs.”
“Sir, HDB has a policy to maintain the distribution of ethnic households in a neighbourhood to reflect the racial composition of our nation. I support this policy. This is a wise policy. However, strict implementation of this policy might cause difficulties when the owners try to sell their flats in the resale market. This is especially so for the precincts that are physically small in size. One case in point is the Toh Yi Estate in the Bukit Timah GRC. There are altogether only 19 blocks in the precinct, in fact two of which are 4-storey shophouse blocks and two more are walk-up 4-storey maisonette apartments. So actually we are talking about a very small precinct here, and this is a precinct favoured by the Chinese without too many facilities that the other races would normally prefer. In fact, there are many cases of Malay owners trying to sell their flats in the open market and the only buyers they could find are Chinese families. HDB would typically disapprove of such sales. This has caused great financial hardship to these Malay families, especially during this time of economic downturn. I would like to ask the Minister whether the HDB could be flexible in implementing this policy to take into consideration situations like the Toh Yi Estate.”
“Sir, I too echo Mr Sin Boon Ann's concern about the possibility that some National Servicemen who happen to be the sole breadwinners of the family may be suffering hardship at this time of economic downturn. It is possible that even with the various financial schemes provided by MINDEF, some of which Mr Sin has also touched upon, these families would still endure hardship. So, therefore, I too would like the Minister to consider enhancing the MINDEF hardship allowance by providing a bigger monthly cash pay-out in the first instance. Furthermore, Sir, I always believe that MINDEF should pay a fair salary to our full-time National Servicemen, and this amount should be roughly equivalent to the market rate in the labour market. Last year, when I spoke on the same subject, I pointed out that other than having more cash in the pockets, paying our NSF a fair wage would also increase the CPF savings of these NSF after their two-and-a-half to three years in the service of the nation. We all know that CPF savings today are not just for old age but for a whole host of commitments such as Medisave, housing, and so on. For instance, their Medisave contributions could be used to pay for the medical care of their aged parents. Furthermore, paying NSF their market rate would truly reflect the value of using these young men as a precious resource. Perhaps by pegging it to the right value, this would minimise wastage of their time through poor planning, waiting time, misallocation, and so forth. So I hope the Minister would consider some of my suggestions.”
“Sir, the use of smart bombs and cruise missiles by the US Armed Forces in the conflicts in Iraq has demonstrated the superiority of these weapon systems. In fact, the threat of air superiority and precision bombing has forced many combatants to come to the negotiating tables. The latest example is Kosova, the Albanian enclave which is trying to break away from Serbia. Of course, these weapon systems are very expensive. I understand that each cruise missile costs $1 million. But they are effective force multipliers and could minimise the exposure of our troops to casualties. Furthermore, they are also weapon systems of tomorrow. I would like to find out from the Minister how MINDEF intends to take advantage of these technologies and whether our defence doctrine takes into consideration such weapon systems, both on our side as well as on the other side.”
“Furthermore, in supporting our defence policy, the Nominated Member, Mr Simon Tay, suggested that we should carry out dialogues to explain our defence expenditure so as not to project an aggressive image. This is so, especially at a time when the countries in the region could not even maintain their previous expenditures because of their economic difficulties. Sir, I think we should remember that it takes time and money to maintain a constant level of competence, expertise and readiness in our armed forces. It would be unwise to reduce our expenditure just because we are concerned about being perceived as being aggressive. May I borrow another saying from Chuge Liang, the famous military strategist from the Three Kingdoms in ancient China, chiong ku tze ping pai how tung. This could roughly be translated as since the old time, those who master the skills on the use of arms are not necessarily the aggressors. Perhaps, those who are concerned that we are adopting a very aggressive defence posture should also read the ancient literature as well. Sir, I support the budget allocated to the Ministry.”
“In those cases, the cost of refurbishing to bring those capabilities back on line might even be higher. Some might question why not defer the purchase of new weapon systems like the Apache Attack helicopters until the finance of the nation improves. I think it will depend on the lead time of putting such a defence capability in place. Typically, a sophisticated system like Apache needs a long lead time to place the order, for the machines to be delivered and the pilots and maintenance crew to be trained. The elapsed time is typically three to four years. Therefore, we should look at the need of those weapon systems rather than to be too constrained by our decision based on budget consideration. The NCMP, Mr Jeyaretnam, has asked who are our enemies in his speech yesterday. He further said that instead of building up our strong and credible defence capability, why not we depend on international peace-keeping forces. He even pointed out Kuwait as a good example of international intervention in aggression. I think perhaps he has forgotten that by the time Kuwait was liberated by the international forces, it was in total ruin. In asking to identify our enemies, the NCMP has violated a taboo of international relationship. Singapore wants to maintain friendly relationship with every nation. Hopefully, we will never have an enemy. I think the NCMP knew this very well because he has been told previously. In fact, last year I suggested that he look up the origin of the Chinese proverb chian un tse wei to understand the need for a strong defence in peace time. Perhaps, he has not bothered to look it up. Therefore, he asks the same question again and again. Perhaps, he has also other motives in asking this question.”
“Sir, in this year of recession, our defence budget for FY99, standing at $7.27 billion, is roughly the same as that for FY98. As the GDP is projected to shrink, in terms of percentage of GDP, the expenditure has in fact increased to 5.1%, instead of 4.6% in FY98. Both FY98 and FY99 expenditures are higher than those in FY97 of $6.12 billion, ie, 4.17% of GDP. Yet, FY97 was a year of budget surplus while FY98 and FY99 are both deficit years. So it is quite natural that some among us might ask: what is the need to maintain or increase our defence expenditure in this time of tight budget? It is also quite natural to ask what is so urgent about our defence such that we must maintain our defence expenditure. Why should MINDEF be exempted from belt-tightening as required by other Ministries? Sir, I support the expenditure policy of the Ministry. If we look at the expenditure pattern of a defence capability comprising a weapon system and trained personnel, we will realise that it would consist of an initial purchase expenditure plus a series of annual expenditures over its life time. In other words, it does have a long tail of expenditure. So even if we stop acquiring new weapon systems today, it is not equivalent to an immediate reduction of our defence expenditure because much of the annual expenditure has already been pre-established. We could only reduce expenditure if we are prepared to let these functioning capabilities go to waste. Therefore, often times, a steady stream of expenditure for defence capabilities is indeed cheaper in the long run versus a feast or famine approach. In the latter case, the weapon systems will fall into disrepair, personnel would be reallocated or lost their readiness due to lack of training.”
“Is the Minister of State aware that there are still instances of extortion of protection money by members of either secret societies or what he terms "street gangs"? Is he aware that when such instances were brought to the attention of the Police, the Police has asked the victim to come out and identify those gang members? As a result, I am sure he is aware that most of these instances were not reported to the police. Assoc. Prof. Ho Peng Kee: Yes, Sir, police is aware of this. As I have said, about 70% are street gang types, and the 30%, which are the more traditional type of secret societies, have extortion activities. In fact, a few gangs were broken up in the Woodlands area just last year. That is why we have the Criminal Law (Temporary Provisions) Act to act against people who are operating such activities where it is difficult to get people to testify. SUPPLY AND SUPPLEMENTARY SUPPLY BILLS (Business Motion) Resolved, That, notwithstanding the Standing Orders, the second and third readings of the Supply Bill for FY 1999/2000 and the Supplementary Supply Bill for FY 1998/1999 may be proceeded with immediately after the conclusion of the proceedings on the Main and Development Estimates for FY 1999/2000. - [Dr Richard Hu Tsu Tau]. SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDERS (Business Motion)”
“There is a saying, if you are fortunate, it will float, otherwise it will sink. In conclusion, for the first time, there is a budget deficit of $5 billion for the estimates of 1999-2000 and the measures that have been taken have not yet shown any result. What happens if the economy does not recover or becomes worse? Is the Minister for Finance ready to face such a situation? Although the Prime Minister has said that fellow Singaporeans should not be worried, because we are able to use the reserves of 1997 to face this economic recession, I hope the Minister for Finance will look for other means to use the reserves so that we need not be worried when we face a worse situation if it were to come. In conclusion, I support the motion in the name of the Minister for Finance.”
“I believe it is the duty of the children to look after their parents, even though they are not their natural parents. The duty to take care of their parents-in-law is also burdensome, especially in terms of the household expenses. I believe that the number in this category is small and it will not affect the expenditure of 1999. The moderate expenditure of 1999 is a surprise. Because in a situation where we promote savings and spending according to our ability, the water tariffs have suddenly gone up. I think in an uncertain economic situation, it is not proper to increase water tariffs. Therefore, I hope, and for the citizens of Singapore as a whole, water tariffs should not be increased at this time, but it could probably be implemented when the economic situation is stable or when salary increase and bonus are reinstated. I was given to understand that 6,000 motorcyclists were fined for offences in connection with entering the Restricted Zone, either intentionally or otherwise, in the last five months. For the whole year, this number may increase by two or three times. It also involves other vehicles like cars and lorries. The payment for entering this zone is aimed at reducing congestion. I am thankful to LTA for granting a road tax rebate. But it would be better if the road tax be further reduced so that motorists would be relieved of the expenses and use it for their children's school expenses and household expenses. I believe the Minister will say that Singaporeans are always not satisfied. When given a piece, they always want a bigger share. But this is the reality of life for Singaporeans. In fact, this is the time for us to ask the Minister for Finance to consider whatever problems that they face, especially relating to money.”
“As Members of Parliament, we are thankful for the generosity of the Minister for Finance to grant rebates to the flat dwellers, and this is most encouraging. I hope this will be treated as a privilege and not regarded as a matter of right, because if these rebates were to be granted every year in this bad economic situation, it is a question which will not be difficult for the Minister for Finance to decide. But when the economic situation is unstable, it will be difficult for the Minister to make a decision. I believe the grant of these rebates has been fully considered. Despite that, I hope that the Minister will be able to consider my appeal. It all depends on whether we could meet the expenditure for this financial year despite the deficit of more than $5 billion. The 5% tax rebate for the Year of Assessment 1998 should remain. It will be able to assist the expenses of taxpayers. But if we take into account the unemployment situation where there are 28,300 retrenched workers, I believe some of them would still have to pay their income tax, and it would be onerous on them. Therefore, I hope the Minister for Finance will consider increasing the income tax rebate for 1998 from 5% to 10%. If it cannot be granted to all the taxpayers, it should be granted to taxpayers who are unemployed or who have remained unemployed till today. The Budget Statement for 1999 is good and has been expected. But once again this year, I will ask the Minister for Finance to consider the financial problems of those taxpayers who are taking care of their parents-in-law. This is the third time that I have raised this issue. And I would also urge the Minister to consider giving rebates for full-time housewives who are without income.”
“Well, we can actually do a mental experiment and have Mr Low Thia Khiang transported to America with complete freedom and see whether Mr Low would become more creative! Encik Harun A. Ghani (Hong Kah)(In Malay): Mr Speaker, Sir, at a time when our country is facing an economic crisis, we are fortunate because we have leaders who have the calibre, ability and honesty in discharging their duties. If it is not because of them, our country, which has no natural resources and also limited land area and having a population of less than 3 million, will be turned into chaos by demonstrations comprising unsatisfied citizens against the Government which they feel has not discharged its duties correctly, especially at a time when we have almost 28,000 retrenched workers and a large portion of them are still unemployed. But our Government has not faced this situation because our leaders have set up wise measures to overcome this problem. One other reason is that our leaders are calm and not panicky. They have always emphasised on understanding, tolerance and harmonious living among us. As citizens, we should also play our part in upholding the spirit of harmony. We should always cooperate with one another and respect one another. Economic stability also depends on such a harmonious situation. We should be wary when we listen and read the speeches of leaders of our neighbours. We should not react on the explicit or implicit intention in their speeches, especially when our workers are facing retrenchment. The Budget Statement for the year 1999 by the Finance Minister, generally, is accepted by the community, because they are conscious that the Budget Statement is based on an uncertain economic background.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, that is precisely my point. If we have grown up in an environment and gone through an education system, we are what we are today. And no matter how we change the environment, we are not going to be very different. So the focus that we should be paying attention to is on young people.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, first of all, I am not a marker for Mr Chiam See Tong. In fact, we entered Parliament at the same time and we have also travelled together on Parliamentary missions. We are close friends but I am definitely not a marker for Mr Chiam See Tong. Secondly, if Mr Chiam is talking about promoting creativity and innovativeness of young people, we are on the same wave length. We completely agree with each other. My point is that he is saying that for an adult population to be more creative and to create more opportunities in high-tech enterprises, we need to have more and greater political freedom. Let us do a mental experiment. Let us take the key people that we are talking about and physically transport them to a more liberal society. Would these adults become more creative? I think most of us will agree that we cannot be that creative.”
“Indeed, we are very well-prepared for many lean years if it ever comes to pass. Singaporeans should be thankful that we have a Cabinet worthy of Joseph. On this note, Sir, I support the Budget.”
“The Government of the day could always make use of these two instruments - sales of land and investment income - to raise the necessary funds to meet this budget deficit without ever going back to the President to exercise the second key. Whatever the definition of reserves, it would seem that Singapore's economy is a wonder machine. Why do I say so? Because in the current term of government, we have only one good year in 1997, two lean years in 1998 and 1999. Prime Minister Goh said that we could handle two more lean years. So taken together, the reserves generated in one year could handle four lean years without ever going back to unlock the reserves accumulated by the past terms of government. This reminds me too of a passage in Genesis relating to how Joseph interpreted Pharaoh's troubled dreams of seven fat cows devoured by seven lean ones and seven stalks of healthy corns devoured by seven swivelled ones. Joseph interpreted it as seven years of abundance followed by seven years of famine and advised the Pharaoh to make the appropriate preparations, a task which the Pharaoh had entrusted to Joseph. Mr Sin Boon Ann has already alluded to this particular passage yesterday. In the case of Egypt, it took one good year to prepare for one lean year. In the case of Singapore, one good year would have saved enough for four lean years. I think this is very impressive indeed. Mr Speaker, Sir, one should not compare any mortal with the biblical Joseph. But one cannot deny the strength of the Singapore economy after 33 years of stewardship by the PAP Government. If we look over the past decade during which the present Cabinet was in charge, there were indeed seven good years where the budget surplus exceeded 3.5% of the GDP.”
“Similarly, maybe only part of the investment income from past reserves should be credited to good governance of the current Government and not the total sum of the investment. Before I get all tangled up in this theoretical discourse, perhaps the Minister could give the House a definite answer. Mr Speaker, Sir, the same rationale, I think, applies to land sales. Could the proceeds from land sales be considered part of the reserves for the current government or is it part of the previous government? If it is considered so, then I have also two issues. State land is an inheritance held by Government in-trust for all future generations of Singaporeans. Other than reclaimed land which is created, all lands are an inheritance associated with the sovereignty of the Government at the time of independence. Land has inherent value and its value at the beginning of the current term of government can be assessed. Land sale to me is a process to realise the value of land or its lease in cash. It would seem reasonable to assume that the proceeds of a sale should not be considered part of the reserve accumulated by the current term of government. In my mind, one should not credit the entire sum of land sale to the current Government as such. Again, if land fetches better prices because of good government, perhaps only the enhancement of its value as a result of the performance of the current government can be considered accruable to good government. Furthermore, if these two sources of income - investment income and land sales - were considered part of reserves accumulated by the current term of government, then one would question seriously the effectiveness of the provisions of the Presidential Elections Act to protect past reserves.”
“But at least we know if we were to achieve the same rate of recovery as in 1985/1986, the Government could have done more. Would we need to make provision for another year of budget deficit? Would we be short of reserves accumulated in the current term of government if we were needed to do so? When asked by the reporters on 5th March 1999 regarding the issue of past reserves, Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong mentioned that the Government has accumulated sufficient reserves since January 1997 to finance a deficit for another two years, if it is necessary to do so. Therefore, besides the budget deficit, the definition of reserves must have included other income sources for which the two major ones are investment income and land sales. Investment income was $3.8 billion in 1997, and $4.3 billion in 1998. Land sales were $14 billion in 1997 and $5.9 billion in 1998. If these figures are considered reserves accumulated in the current term of government, then it is absolutely true that there is a lot of money in the kitty. Even if these are considered part of reserves, it still begs other questions in my mind. Should not investment income derived from past reserves accumulated in the previous terms of government be considered part of the past reserves of the past government but not the reserve of the current government? Philosophically, I think part, if not all, of such income should be considered as reserves for the past government. My reasoning is as follows. A good fund manager could provide better yield but even a mediocre fund manager would yield a return not less than fixed deposit. Therefore, the measure of how good a fund manager is only the incremental improvement in yield rather than the total yield of the investment.”
“One reasonable question to ask is whether the Government could have been more aggressive in stimulating the economy if it has accumulated greater surplus. The budget deficit of $5.05 billion is the largest in memory but only in dollar terms. In terms of percentage of GDP, it is 3.5%. On the other hand, the last budget deficit of a similar magnitude occurred in FY86 when the budget deficit at that point was $2.5 billion. However, in terms of percentage of GDP, it was 6.3%. Moreover, it was also followed by another year of budget deficit in FY87 of $1.16 billion or 2.6% of GDP. So, in terms of percentage of GDP, the budget deficit in FY86 would have a greater impact on the economy than the deficit that we are seeing in FY99. As Mr Inderjit Singh has said earlier, we should take bold steps. The question I would like to ask is: are we being bold enough in this particular Budget? We all remember the recession of 1985 and 1986 and those were indeed difficult years. The Government's budgets were in deficit for two consecutive years. Yet, was the recession of 1985/1986 more severe than the current one? Probably not, as the Prime Minister and Deputy Prime Minister have mentioned on several occasions that the recession in 1998 and 1999 is the worst since Singapore became independent. If we think that this is the worst recession ever, why are we only having a deficit of 3.5%? So the relative impact of our current deficit on the economy, I think, is only 56% of what took place in FY86. Let us assume that the Government wants to inject the same level of stimulants in the economy as in FY86, 6.3% would work out to be about $9 billion. Whether the economy needs or could take such a stimulus, I do not know.”
“Everyone accepted that we should allow the cost cutting measures implemented from 1st January 1999 to work through the system before the Government evaluates again whether more stimulations are necessary. Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like now to move on to my own comments on the Budget Statement for FY99. As the last but one speaker, much of what I would want to raise has already been brought up by the 30-plus speakers ahead of me. So I find it quite difficult to bring up new ideas. Therefore, I would like to take a completely different tack and focus on the use of past reserves, this being the first budget deficit after the Presidential Elections Act was passed in this House. I am particularly interested in the interplay between the role of the President and the use of reserves as enacted in the Presidential Elections Act. Walter Fernandez of the Straits Times in his article "Spotlight on the $5 Billion Deficit" touched on a very pertinent topic, namely, the provisions of the Elected President and the use of reserves accumulated in the current term of Government. I was interviewed by Walter and basically gave him an outline of what I would be covering in this debate. Mr Speaker, Sir, since this Parliament was returned in January 1997, there are only three fiscal years so far, FY97, FY98 and FY99. Only in FY97, there was a surplus of $5.2 billion. Deficit in FY98 was $0.466 billion. FY99 is projected to have a deficit of $5.05 billion. So just looking at the total sum of budget surplus and deficit, the Government has already exhausted the surpluses accumulated in the current term of Government. Note that I use the word "surpluses" and not the word "reserves". Dr Lee Tsao Yuan, earlier in her speech, has also touched on this particular topic.”
“As a result of the recession, because of their loss of jobs or income, they were forced to sell their properties as they no longer could service their mortgage loans. As we all know, CPF has the first claim on the proceeds for such sales. For some individuals, the balance left behind was so small that the banks have no choice but to sue them for bankruptcy. So as a result, these are bankrupts. But they have a lot of money in their CPF account. So the new term is called high net worth bankrupts. The participant asked for relaxation of the return of CPF funds to prevent unnecessary bankruptcies. While I am personally sympathetic with these high net worth bankrupts, my own opinion is that any relaxation of the CPF rules at this point of time is unwise. Individuals should have known the rules ahead of time and be prudent in their use of CPF funds in their investments. On the topic of bankrupts, it was felt that the restriction on bankrupts from holding any directorship for five years seems to be too harsh and reflects our society being intolerant of failure, which I think Mr Inderjit Singh has also touched on. Government assistance for small and medium sized businesses drew quite a few comments, and much of these I would bring up in the debate in the Committee of Supply. A few have suggested that TDB promote more missions overseas to explore new markets. I am glad to note that the Minister has already disclosed in his Budget Statement that TDB would do so. This concludes my summary of the Feedback Session on the Budget for FY99. I must compliment the participants for being very reasonable and realistic in their proposals.”
“Most taxpayers are unable to claim tax relief for their insurance premiums as their CPF savings had exceeded the maximum. One participant pointed out the total sum of estate duties raised in the last fiscal year is relatively small. He called for its total abolition. The minimum income beyond which CPF contribution would be made was set some 30 years ago. To encourage more part-time workers to join the workforce, it was felt that these income ceilings should be revised upwards. Personally, I do not agree with this request because of our ageing population. If anything, my own sentiment is that all incomes should be subject to CPF regardless of its amount. Perhaps, the ceilings were set many years ago to reduce the hassle of implementation in the age when the use of IT and computers was not as widespread. Several participants pointed out that our current practice of paying taxes of last year's income in the current year is creating some difficulties. Especially in the current recession, some individuals have actually in the current year dramatically lower income, some have even lost their job. Therefore, many find it a burden to pay income tax. To avoid similar problems in the future, perhaps we should move towards a withholding tax system like many developed countries. And we can phase-in this particular structure over time to minimise the burden on the tax payable by people. One participant highlighted the problem of what they call high net worth bankrupts. At first glance, it sounds like a contradiction of terms. It turns out that these are individuals who have used their CPF savings to buy a high price property.”
“Now that they are running into cash-flow and credit crunch problems in the current crisis, one participant called for a tax moratorium for several years to facilitate the repatriation of these profits. Everyone present in the workshop lauded the emphasis on the training of workers. However, they pointed out that there is a lack of incentives for the training of executives and managers. The contributions of these people to the economy is no less important. The participants seem to support a form of payroll taxes for all employees rather than the current SDF which only takes care of the lower income workers. On the other hand, most of the participants would like to defer any action on this idea until the economy has recovered. Participants also welcomed the reduction of property taxes but commented that property tax assessment by the Department concerned is fast on the upswing but sticky on the downswing. So they would like the relevant authority to be faster and quicker in responding to the market. Several participants pointed out that to provide and promote promising enterprises, perhaps the Government could provide tax break for smaller companies to allow them to grow into bigger ones. Some of them mentioned that UK has such a law and we could follow that particular model. On taxes on individuals, the 2% gap between corporate and individual tax ceilings attracted quite a number of comments. The question is when would the Government remove this gap as we have learned in the past that individuals would tend to corporatise themselves to take advantage of lower corporate tax rate. The other ever green topic is that tax relief for non-working spouse should be raised. It was pointed out that the tax relief for insurance premiums was insufficient.”
“After giving vent to the concept of inter-group offsetting, it is inevitable that the matter of loss-making foreign subsidiaries was brought up in the discussion. Several participants mentioned that it was the Government who encouraged Singapore to spread a second wing by going regional in the first place. Now that these foreign subsidiaries are losing money, many are requesting that the losses in the foreign subsidiaries be offset against profits in the home company in Singapore. Many CEOs would like to see the Government as a partner in shouldering business risks, as I mentioned earlier. This concept is already in operation within one single company in the sense that losses in one year could be carried forward into the future against future profits. Inter-group offsetting is just taking this concept one step further. Several businessmen involved in the trading business pointed out the difficulties they are facing as a result of the regional crisis. Current tax structure on inventory receivables is based on estimates. This is problematic in these current years because of the late payment or non-payment of inventory already delivered to the customers, especially those in Indonesia and Malaysia. These companies are facing the cash-flow problems as a result of non-payment or late payment. Yet, they have to pay taxes on estimated profits. So they are asking the Minister to review the tax payable to reflect the actual payments received. Mr Speaker, Sir, many CEOs pointed out that because of our tax on profit remitted from overseas, many companies or individuals had parked their profits derived from previous years outside Singapore.”
“In this recession, many companies are finding themselves in a very difficult situation where one subsidiary will be making major losses while the other subsidiary will have some profits. Furthermore, for property development industry, companies are required by law to set up a clean sheet single asset company for each project if they were to bid for Government land. In this case, the entire group is engaged in the same business but only because of the Government requirements, they have to form subsidiary companies. This is especially glaring in this period when the losses of some of those companies could be substantial. As Mr Heng has mentioned, Mr Speaker, Sir, this request has merits. As it stands today, the way we operate our tax structures is that the companies bear all the risks while the Government does not share the burden of business risks. The basic principle of group taxation, or inter-group offsetting, is basically sound. Companies could have achieved tax savings by not setting up subsidiaries in the first place. However, they are set up for many reasons, often times for efficiency and focus on management attention. Therefore, the current taxation regime penalises this division necessitated by business. While the concept is basically sound, the devil is in the implementation. It is possible that some companies might take advantage of inter-group offsetting to avoid paying their due taxes. Nonetheless, I think it would be better to tackle the issue head-on than to avoid it just because of implementation difficulties. The basic fact of the matter is that single group offsetting is a reasonable idea whose time has come as this will really help companies caught by the regional crisis.”
“On the contrary, they welcomed their involvement as an indication of the importance Cabinet has attached to the issue. Furthermore, the Feedback Unit convenes similar workshops involving notable persons from businesses and CEOs annually with regard to the Budget Statement. And these workshop sessions are typically chaired by Members of Parliament on the Feedback Panel. I believe the participants in those workshops also welcomed the involvement of MPs. They do not see as "control" by the PAP Government but as an assurance that their views will get an airing in Parliament as I am doing right now. This year, the Feedback Unit brought forward this discussion session ahead of the Budget Statement so that this feedback can be considered by the Minister for Finance. Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to give a summary of the session chaired by me on 9th February this year. In that particular session, 41 participants from trade associations, Singapore Institute of Management corporate members, trade unions and feedback groups attended the session. Senior Government officials from the Ministries of Finance as well as Trade and Industry were also present. The mood was generally subdued as the Prime Minister had commented earlier that the Budget is unlikely to contain any more surprises or goodies. From the feedback, let me summarise. On corporate taxes, several participants requested the Government to consider permitting group taxation, or what we call inter-group offsetting, a subject that Mr Heng Chiang Meng has already touched on, by allowing the losses of one subsidiary to offset against profit in another subsidiary within the same group.”
“The greater freedom he has advocated is meant for the adult population whereas creativity and innovativeness must be developed and inculcated when the individuals are still very young, maybe starting as young as pre-school kindergarten. Actually, we are talking about two different segments of the population. It is indeed a rare individual who will transform himself or herself into a more creative or more innovative person as an adult just by having greater freedom, ie, freedom of any kind, political freedom, personal freedom. We can verify that by checking with friends and acquaintances who have lived and worked overseas, for instance, in the United States, presumably the model country Mr Chiam is referring to. I have also lived and worked in US for a long time. I do not think I have become more creative and innovative by being there. In fact, there is a saying that one cannot teach old dogs new tricks. So Mr Chiam would have been right if he advocates reviewing our school curriculum to promote creativity and innovativeness. But then it would not be as headline grabbing, would it? Mr Chiam further mentioned that he would like to see a committee of businessmen and chief executive officers of major corporations to deliberate the issues faced by the Singapore economy and coming up with suggestions without the involvement of a Minister. Perhaps, he has overlooked that the various subcommittees of the Committee on Singapore's Competitiveness are chaired by captains of industries from the private sector. Only the main committee was chaired by two Ministers. The Feedback Unit had in fact conducted several feedback sessions on the report of the CSC. No one had ever complained about the involvement of two Ministers.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the Member for Potong Pasir, Mr Chiam See Tong, mentioned yesterday that for our economy to make the next leap, our people must be more creative and more innovative. Further, he said that for our people to be more creative and more innovative, Singapore should have more political freedom. Mr Chiam was right on the first point but, sadly, he was completely awry on the second point. He was right in saying that for Singaporeans to justify a higher income than others, we must provide higher value-added. There is a limit on the premium other people will pay for our better infrastructure, clean and more efficient government, etc. Ultimately, the differentiating factor is our products and services that people are prepared to pay more for. But if that is his point, then he is not saying anything new. Mr Inderjit Singh earlier has also mentioned how to create a more innovative and creative society. The whole emphasis on the Committee on Singapore's Competitiveness towards a knowledge-based economy is to inculcate creativity and the inclination to innovate in our young people. That is the reason why in this Budget the Government is providing more money for education despite the recession. It is regrettable that Mr Chiam was barking up the wrong tree by saying that we can only do so by having more freedom. I hope he is not equating greater chaos in the countries he mentioned with greater democracy. Perhaps he is advocating freedom to demonstrate and freedom to speak from the street corners as being more democratic. This, he believes, will lead to a more creative and innovative population. Unfortunately, there is a fallacy in his argument.”
“This might not be the right occasion for the Minister to address these problems but I hope he will give his due consideration and bring up such issues in future amendments to the Act.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I too rise to support the Bill. As Mr Ong Kian Min said earlier, the primary purpose of any legislation is to serve as a deterrent to prevent the offences from being repeated. The Minister had said earlier that the passage of this Bill will send a clear and loud message to all those would be offenders of our roads. And I believe in many aspects, he is right, except in one particular area where I thought he would have taken this opportunity to enhance the penalty for such offences, and that is in the area of causing death through reckless and dangerous driving. He also highlighted the case where a motorist ploughed through a bus-stop, killing three persons and seriously injuring others and the penalty for that particular offence was two years' imprisonment and suspension of driving licence for life. I have given it some thought and I have also discussed it with my grassroots leaders and the consensus is that the penalty in this particular case is not severe enough. This case is over, and I think it is all right for me to bring it up in Parliament. In Singapore, where other minor offences attract heavier penalty, I believe that the current penalty in this particular category is insufficient. For instance, if the penalty for outraging of modesty or rape would attract long imprisonment and severe punishment through caning, I wonder why a case of causing death through dangerous driving attracts only two years' imprisonment and suspension of driving licence for life. I believe that we should enhance the penalty in these areas and probably I would even advocate the introduction of caning for such offences.”
“However, as interest rate eases and stock market prices recovered slowly to the current 1,300 points, I believe the sense of crisis amongst Singaporeans is slowly dissipating even though much work is yet to be done. Therefore, grasping the timing is very important. If we can get the present generation of young Singaporeans who are facing their first major crisis to take this pain together with the Government, this would definitely strengthen the bond between our emerging leaders and this generation of Singaporeans. And this bond will serve us well as we ride out this crisis and move confidently forward to claim our rightful place in the history in the 21st Century. On this note, Sir, I would like to congratulate the Minister for a very comprehensive policy package. I support the recommendations of the CSC.”
“In conclusion, Sir, I think the concerns of plunging domestic demand is actually a very serious matter. Many retail businesses, small and large, might be forced into difficulties as the disposable income of individuals is reduced. I understand that the CSC Report touches on the possibility of reducing company tax or personal income tax. Much as I am personally against unnecessary consumption, I think the current belt-tightening by Singaporeans have actually been overboard. So I would like to advocate a stimulative measure of personal income tax to counteract the reduced disposable income. Hopefully, the Minister can propose a reduction in personal income tax even before the March 1999 Budget debate. Mr Speaker, Sir, the $10 billion package, or US$6 billion package, is equivalent to a cash injection into the Singapore economy. It is very hard for individuals to visualise what is US$6 billion and how large is that number. But if we consider that in the recent report, the United States, Japan and the World Bank will come together and propose a US$5 billion package for the ailing Thai, Korean and Indonesian economies, perhaps we can put that in a proper perspective. Singapore is a small country with 3.5 million population, and yet we are going to inject close to $10 billion a year into the economy for the next, hopefully, two or more years. So in that respect, I am very confident that our economy will turn around quickly in a V-shaped recovery after these particular measures. The call of sacrifice by the Government to the people will be readily heeded if we can seize the opportunity while the sense of crisis is still very much heightened. The sense of crisis was at this highest point several months back when the Straits Times Index fell to about 800 points.”
“Many proposed a reduction of GST by 1% to 2% or even the complete suspension of GST to stimulate domestic demand. When we pointed out to them that 3% is a very small number and whether a $3 charge, based on a $100 purchase, would influence the decision to spend or not to spend, their response is that it is not a matter of money but a matter of confidence. So despite many clarifications on GST by the Minister for Finance in the past, most still asked for the major reasons why the Government is so reluctant to consider a reduction of GST. Perhaps, the Minister should address this issue again. Several participants commented that since manpower cost constitutes 75% of this package while Government fee reduction constitutes only 25% of the package, it would seem that wage-earners, including workers as well as high-income earners, are being asked to shoulder a high proportion of the `sacrifice'. Many would like to see that the Government shoulder a higher proportion of this `sacrifice'. In fact, a number commented that maybe there should be a 50%/50% contribution, ie, 50% from the wage-earners, 50% from the Government. The participants seem to be unaware that wage cost is close to 40% of the GDP while the various charges by the Government only amount to 10%. So in fact, they are unaware that the proposed 15% reduction, amounting to $25 billion, is actually more than the 15% recommended by the Government. It is actually coming up to 20%. So if we were to approach an equal proportion of 50/50, it would mean that Government fees and other levies would have to be reduced by a whopping 60% or more in order to achieve this goal. Surely, there is no way to do so. On the other hand, having said so, this particular message needs to be repeated by the Ministers.”
“In fact, they looked towards the long term and expressed concern that cost containment should not be a once off or ad hoc process but should be an on-going process, because Singapore is no longer competing with under-developed countries but with developed countries. They expressed the worry whether Singapore will revert to the past practice or behaviour of cost escalation once the current crisis is over. For those CEOs who are in Singapore for their OHQ operation, they expressed concern about other costs, other than wage cost. For instance, one key factor is the high telecommunications cost. If Singapore wants to evolve into a IT society or knowledge society, or develop into e-commerce, they felt that our telecommunications cost is pretty high. And those with major manufacturing operations also expressed concerns of high energy cost, especially electrical utilities costs. Being CEOs, they all concluded that the major driving force of escalating costs in Singapore, besides wages, is actually the land cost in Singapore. Therefore, these CEOs would like to understand what is the Government's plan as far as land cost containment is concerned. How do we contain land cost in Singapore such that the two factors I mentioned, telecommunications and electrical power utilities, will not escalate out of reach? In the second category that I mentioned earlier, those CEOs who deal with domestic demand are basically from the retail businesses. In fact, they are very concerned about the diminishing purchasing power of Singaporeans after the proposed 15% manpower cost reduction. In light of the reduced disposable income, they expressed concerns about how the lower income group would weather the wage reduction.”
“I am glad to say that Singaporeans are responding positively to these Government policies through the various feedback we have obtained. The Feedback Unit has conducted two sessions, one in English chaired by myself, the second in Mandarin, chaired by Mr Ang Mong Seng, the Member for Bukit Gombak. In the English Language session, around 50 CEOs of small and medium enterprises and multi-national companies attended. From the comments, I could easily classify those comments into two major categories, based on the perspective of the participants. The first group comprises those who are concerned with the external demand of Singapore's goods and services, and the second group involves businessmen serving the domestic economy. Not surprisingly, their perspectives and comments differ dramatically. For those faced with external demand and external competition, almost everyone lauded the effort by the Government in recommending this package as appropriate and timely. In fact, the foreign CEOs were especially impressed by the ability of the Government to put forward such a comprehensive package. In fact, they lamented that such packages and measures are unlikely to be successful or even contemplated in their own countries. These participants were convinced that those measures recommended in the Report would help their business overcome the current crisis over the next two years. They said that while Singapore does not suddenly become more attractive to foreign investors, at least the push factor of business migrating away from Singapore has been reduced or eliminated.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, this Report is a result of a lengthy deliberation involving the best and the brightest minds in Singapore. In terms of the depth of analysis and the rationale of its recommendations, there is actually not much one could add to it. If we remove the emotional cobwebs surrounding the issue, the basic fact is that the cost of doing business in Singapore has gone up dramatically versus our competitor nations. Yes, our infrastructure, our management expertise, our stable Government, the skills of our workforce, etc, will allow us to charge a premium, but only so much. Therefore, we must reduce the cost to render ourselves more attractive to foreign investors. There are only two ways of doing it. One way is through self-engineered currency devaluation. At first glance, this apparently is a painless approach. Dr Ow Chin Hock, in his speech, earlier has already touched on much of the pitfalls of doing this. So I would not go into it in detail. I just want to say that in so doing, the cost of living inflation resulting in a weaker Singapore dollar will have its greatest impact on retirees who are living on their savings - people who have contributed greatly to the prosperity of Singapore in the past. The second approach is through cost-cutting measures, as recommended by the CSC. It is heartening to say that the Singapore Government has decided to take the correct but politically more demanding route of reducing our wage cost and Government fees. This reflects the long-term perspective of the Government. Cutting wages of the wage-earners is always very painful. This requires political courage as well as a well-informed and responsible population who understands the needs of these drastic measures.”
“Sir, the question of gazetting is to insist that train passengers must stop at Woodlands Checkpoint for immigration clearance, and if they do not, they would therefore be violating our law.”
“I would like to ask the Minister whether it is necessary for the Government to gazette the Woodlands Train Checkpoint as mandatory for all train passengers to clear their immigration at that point.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, may I ask the Minister of State whether the dependency ratio he mentioned is always in favour of the Singaporean workers? In other words, if a company were to retrench one Singaporean worker and, by the dependency ratio, it may have to retrench three or four foreign workers.”
“So if you stay for a very short time, you get very little additional benefit from that. You basically get benefits which are equivalent to something like the full CPF system. Finally, Sir, Dr Ong asked whether the family of the officer will be given the benefits under the SAVER scheme if the officer dies in service. The answer is yes, the entire amount in his SAVER account will go to his estate. Question put, and agreed to. Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House. The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. - [RAdm Teo Chee Hean]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time. TELECOMMUNICATION AUTHORITY OF SINGAPORE (AMENDMENT) BILL Order for Second Reading read.”
“When the SAVER Plan is fully operational, MINDEF will further consider whether to allow withdrawal from the retirement account to help officers buy their homes. MINDEF thinks that it is a good idea to unlock some of the money in the SAVER accounts to help our servicemen buy their homes. It will provide security for officers when they retire and will encourage more people to join and remain in the SAF. Dr Ong also asked whether the SAVER scheme will be extended to regular Warrant Officers and specialists in future. We will consider this when we have gained sufficient experience after operating the scheme for officers. Dr Ong asked how the Government will ensure that the funds are well managed in terms of investments and that the officers will enjoy good rates of return for the SAVER Fund. The purpose of investing the funds independently is to try to obtain a reasonable rate of return for the funds and thereby making the scheme even more attractive to officers. While we cannot guarantee a minimum rate of return, we will invest prudently. To this end, we will work with the professional investment advisor who will help MINDEF to work out the investment strategy, advise on the selection of fund managers and help monitor the performance of fund managers. We have also invited several top-level executives from the banking sector and the Monetary Authority of Singapore to sit on the SAVER Board of Trustees. This is to inject professional expertise and experience in guiding investment and management of the money in the SAVER Fund. Dr Wang asked about the minimum period of engagement. The structure of the SAVER system is such that the longer you stay, the more is accumulated in the various accounts and the more you can withdraw. And the shorter you stay, the less you get.”
“Sir, I too support the Bill. I have a very simple question for the Minister. I would like to find out whether there is a minimum service the officer must fulfill before he can enjoy the benefits under the SAVER Plan. RAdm Teo Chee Hean: Sir, I thank the GPC Chairman, Dr Ong, for the support that he has given. Dr Ong has asked several questions. He asked whether the officers will continue to enjoy medical benefits upon their retirement. The existing medical benefits will not be changed. Existing officers will continue to enjoy the same medical benefits while they are in service and when they retire. New officers will also enjoy the same medical benefits that are open to them now. The second question is whether the savings and retirement accounts will be subject to tax. The sum in the savings account is a form of gratuity. Like the present contract gratuity given to officers when they complete their contract with the SAF, it can be withdrawn in full after 10 years of service. Therefore, like contract gratuities, it will be taxable when withdrawn. The retirement account is similar to the present commuted lump sum pension that is given out to retiring officers today. It will, therefore, be treated like the pension today and will not be taxed if officers withdraw this when they retire, ie, when they leave the SAF after age 40 with at least 10 years of continuous service. If withdrawn prematurely, the money is treated like a contract gratuity and will be taxed. Dr Ong also asked about withdrawals from the SAVER accounts for payment of housing instalments. Under the scheme, officers may withdraw their money in the savings account progressively after the sixth year. They can use the money as down-payment for properties they wish to purchase.”
“By then he was already in the secondary school years. So the son failed repeatedly, despite his best effort. So much so that he was asked to leave the Jurong Institute before he could complete his Pre-U education. On my appeal, I am happy to report that the MOE is very flexible. It is now allowing him to complete the Pre-U education but MOE is still insisting that he must take his French at the coming "0" level examination and must pass with at least a D7 in order to fulfil the second language requirement. I believe, Sir, it would not be easy for this young man. Having learned their lessons, the Davies are selecting Malay as the second language for their two younger daughters. I understand they are doing very well in that language. I would like the Minister to review whether the mother tongue language for children of foreign talents that we are trying to attract is necessary. To me, it seems unnecessary to be too strict in imposing the second language requirement on such families. Such families are not the target of our mother tongue policy and I believe we should be more flexible in those cases.”
“They probably do not have the family environment to support learning and using the languages. To this group of children, all those languages I have mentioned are actually all foreign languages. So it is just as difficult for them, if not more difficult, to learn these foreign languages versus our own children or my own children learning the mother tongue. This is especially so if the child is already at the secondary level when the parents come to Singapore. With your indulgence, Sir, and to inject some human interest in this debate, I would like to give a real life example. A British couple, Mr and Mrs Davies, came to my meet-the-people session about three weeks ago regarding the tremendous difficulties their son, who is enrolled in our school system, is encountering in learning French. The husband who was engaged as a English Language consultant came to Singapore with the family several years ago. At that time, their son was already a teenager. The wife, Sheila Ruth Davies, was born in Singapore when her father was serving in the British Army during the Second World War. Interestingly enough, this qualified her to claim Singapore citizenship which she subsequently did. As a result, the husband and the son are now both Singapore PRs. And they later have two daughters born in Singapore and are Singapore citizens. This is a case of foreign professionals coming to work in Singapore, fell in love with the country, and decided to stay. They put their son through our school system which by the way they praised highly, compared to their schools in UK. The son did very well in most subjects, except French, which is the second language required and which he only started learning for the first time when he joined our school system.”
“Sir, the mother tongue policy was implemented for a very specific social objective, and that is, to ensure that our children retain the language of our forefathers and we continue to transmit our traditional culture to the next generation. However, for those children from families whose working language is not the mother tongue, they have to work extra hard just to make the grade. I am envious of Mr Peh Chin Hua in the sense that his son is effectively bilingual at the "A" grade level. I have also three school-going children and I must report that they have to struggle very hard to make the grade. But, nonetheless, I think the mother tongue policy is appropriate, it is necessary in our social context and I support the policy. Instead, I would like to address the mother tongue policy and its consequential policy in the context of our effort to attract foreign talents. Not all foreign talents that we want to attract are single, or married, without children. Would the second language requirement which sprang from the mother tongue policy become a hindrance if it is enforced strictly on these children of foreign talents? Here I am referring to those foreign professionals whose mother tongue is basically English. And that could be of any ethnic origin and they could come from any part of the world, including UK and United States. In fact, it is not uncommon today to find Caucasians who have become PRs or even citizens of Singapore. So when the mother tongue policy is applied to them and their children, their children studying in our school system will be required to study another language which is not their mother tongue. In this respect, some take German or French and others take Malay.”
“The road tax system announced recently by the Minister embodied within it a progressivity formula. And I would like to see the same progressivity in the COE prices. One can argue that we cannot really control that in the current COE system. But my response would be that perhaps the number of quotas allocated to each category is not appropriate with respect to this desire to achieve progressivitiy. Furthermore, Sir, the current COE system has also an element of built-in bias of favouring big cars and luxury cars and, that is, we actually created a category called the Open COEs. And most Open COE quotas have been used to register big and luxury cars. Very few, I believe, have been used for other categories. Probably, none for small cars. So therefore, there is a built-in bias in the COE system with this Open category by allowing buyers of luxury cars and big cars to use the Open category to register their vehicles. Therefore, in essence, the luxury car and big car categories have a larger number of quotas than what we have allocated. In my view, it is also the reason why the COE prices level off at the high end of the car market. To overcome the shortcoming I mentioned, one proposal is what Mr Chng has said, to merge all the COE categories into one. In this way, the number of quotas allocated to the COE pool will be larger and it will be very unlikely that a similar freak result like the $50 COE would happen. I think it is time for us to review the COE system. I would like the Minister to consider this suggestion.”
“Sir, listening to Mr Chng Hee Kok, I am surprised that we think alike. Because I too want to point out the problems with the current systems. We all remember the $50 COE and my colleague, Mr Gerard Ee, already said it was a freak result and, to me, it was also a fluke of the system. Based on the prevailing COE quota premium, in that particular exercise, the loss of COE revenue was probably of the order of $15 million. So in a way, Sir, it is like distributing this amount of money to the 300-odd people who were successful in that particular bid. So it is like tikam tikam. It was a lucky draw for them. It does not truly serve the system well. All these years, the Government has been very careful when it comes to spending public money. Similarly, it is also true that we should be very careful in collecting public revenue. So if we were to have a system that allows freak results like this to happen, I think it is not a good system. It should be reviewed. Also, similar to Mr Chng, after seeing the quota system being in operation for several years, there are several peculiarities of the COE system that I am not satisfied with. I refer here to the successful bids of the various categories. One would expect to see that the bigger the car, the higher would be the COE. What happens is that the incremental increase, as you go up to the higher category is smaller. At certain times, a COE for a large car is in fact more expensive than a COE for a luxury car. I would also project that when the ARF is reduced from 150% to 140%, the reduction will be transferred to COE. But the amount transferred will be smaller in the large car category and larger in the small car category. In that sense, it would definitely benefit the large car users more.”
“But over-estimating would lead to wasteful Government spending and potential social problems as a result of unemployed graduates, etc. So, it seems to me intuitively that it will be very difficult to obtain accurate manpower forecast. On the other hand, the consequences of a poor one are also highly undesirable. Yet, with the establishment of the Ministry of Manpower, this is exactly what will be expected of it. Whatever forecast it produces, there will be even greater faith in using this information. After all, they are the full-time experts in this area. So I would like to ask the Minister to enlighten this House, how he would be addressing this issue and how he would ensure that MOM will be able to discharge its responsibilities when it comes to manpower planning for the 21st century.”
“Mr Yeo Cheow Tong, then Minister for Health in 1993, announced a set of policies restricting the medical student enrolment every year that Singaporeans should have. It does not just apply to NUS but also as a standard for overseas universities. We can understand that enrolment in NUS is funded by the Government, but in the enrolment overseas, those students are funded by the parents. On top of that, in fact, the restriction excludes some very famous and prominent medical schools. All this is done in the name of manpower planning. Many aspiring doctors were denied the opportunity to pursue, some of them, life-long dreams to become a doctor, to serve their fellow human beings. Several have approached me during my meet-the-people sessions in the past regarding their appeal to be given exemption, not just to get into NUS but to continue their enrolment with overseas universities, but to no avail. As a Government policy, I still support this restriction, which was logical and rational at that point of time. But only a few years later, the Ministry of Health started to hire overseas doctors to meet its own shortages. Only a few days ago, Mr Yeo Cheow Tong gave a reply to Parliament during the debate on his Ministry justifying the hiring of foreign doctors based on the shortages. It seems to me that the restriction imposed by MOH now does not make very good common sense. Worse, the suffering and emotional stress of all those who were denied a career in medicine have been all for nought. This sudden reversal of the forecast reflects poorly on the accuracy and points to the pitfalls of implementing Government policies based on poor forecasting. It seems to me that manpower forecasters always err on the safe side. In fact, there is very little or no penalty for under-estimating.”