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 12 of 21.
“Sir, the mission of the Ministry of Manpower was touched on in great detail by speakers preceding me, including Mrs Yu-Foo and Mr Zainul Abidin. Its primary goal must be to produce the manpower needed for Singapore in the 21st century. To achieve its goal, I believe it is necessary for the Ministry of Manpower to have a strong and effective manpower planning capability or, in deference to my colleague, Mr Chay Wai Chuen, human resource planning capability. So its goal must be to identify the manpower needs of the country in the 21st century. All of us would love to have accurate and reliable forecast to work with, for instance, how many engineers, how many doctors, how many workers and what discipline and so on. But it is also unrealistic to have perfect 20/20 vision when it comes to forecasting the future. Sir, manpower planning has always been a very sensitive topic. For instance, MOE uses its own manpower forecast to identify allocation of resources with the various institutes of higher learning, which in turn determines how many students will be enrolled each year, in what discipline, and in what classes. Since education is very important to our future, manpower planning then directly influences the future of all young Singaporeans. To make my point, let me use an illustration. We do not have to go too far back to come up with examples of forecasting which cause great emotional stress to students and parents. I am referring to the restriction imposed on the number of doctors trained each year in Singapore. The Government directly controls the number of doctors trained each year. This number is derived from a very logical doctor/patient model.”
“So that is not a reason for electricity increase because after they went through the process of corporatisation, they have been able to increase productivity. When I joined the Ministry early last year, they informed me that, in fact, they had already reached the target. So I would like to assure Members that this will not be a cause for increase of power charges. In fact, the cost of power is capped. The fixed component is capped at CPI-X (where X has been set initially at 1%). So it means they cannot just increase rates at will. They must pass on their productivity to the users.”
“Clarification, Sir. I accept the reply from the Minister regarding the electrical power supply charges. But Mr Yeo Cheow Tong in 1996 had laid out a programme on the increase of tariff which will be spread out over three to five years, and every year it will increase by 5%, on the average. My question to him is whether this built-in increase is still going to be implemented, come high or low water. Would he take into consideration that in 1998 Singapore will face economic contraction and maybe the danger of recession? Will this 5% increase, to enable Singapore Power to increase its rate of return on total assets, be continued to be implemented? Perhaps he will give us a clear answer. Mr Lee Yock Suan: Sir, I thank Mr Choo for his clarification. I take it that he accepts that JTC is generally quite cooperative, although some friends of his have told him that it is rather inflexible in some ways. But my own impression of JTC is, in fact, that it has been very accommodating to its tenants, and it is amongst the first to move to support our industries in the current crisis. On its own volition, without any pushing from me, it has gone ahead and made various adjustments. As for the cash flow problem that he mentioned, he may be aware that JTC has also allowed the payment of quarterly rentals to be done on a monthly basis, instead of quarterly. So I hope that would be of some help to the tenants. As regards Dr Wang Kai Yuen's point on the return on investment, yes, Mr Yeo Cheow Tong did mention a target in 1996. It slipped my mind just now. I am glad to inform the House that, in fact, the target has already been reached.”
“Sir, on 14th March 1996, the Minister stated in Parliament in the Committee of Supply about the principle behind charging electricity rates in Singapore, especially those tariffs implemented by Singapore Power. On that occasion, he said, firstly, Singapore Power's rate of return on total assets is low because our electricity tariff is low. Secondly, I will quote him, "there is a need to allow SP to increase electricity tariff by 12% to 14% over the next three to four years or an average increase of 3% to 5% a year to restore its financial health." But we are now in 1998, Sir. So from 1996 to 1998, it has already been two years. Presumably, we are still in this process of allowing Singapore Power to adjust its rate from 3% to 5% a year. Recently, in fact, SP has increased its rate by 5%. The Feedback Unit has received various negative feedback from the industry and the commercial bodies. A 5% increase in today's terms is in fact substantial. It has substantial impact on them. In fact, one organisation whose monthly electricity bill is $1 million said that a 5% increase is equivalent to $50,000 increase per month. So it is indeed a heavy burden to them. I would like to ask the Minister what is the basis of the recent rate increase. Is it based on the need to increase the return on total assets of SP or is it an increase based on the fuel price increase used by SP? And if it is based on this formula that Mr Yeo Cheow Tong formulated more than two years ago, perhaps I would like to urge the Minister to defer or hold back such increases until our economy has recovered to a more sounder foundation. 2.30 pm”
“Recently, Prime Minister Mahathir of Malaysia has stated that Malaysia will continue to supply water to Singapore beyond the expiration of the two water supply agreements. Perhaps, Sir, this is the first time in my memory that such a statement has been made by such a prominent Malaysian leader. To me, it seems to present a historical opportunity for us to seal the security of water supply for our future generations. And if we can do so, it will remove a form of contention that has bugged the relationship between our two countries and will allow us to ensure that the relationship and collaboration between us will be on a sounder foundation in the future. I realise this is a very sensitive subject and perhaps currently under negotiation between our two Governments. But, nonetheless, I would like to take this opportunity to urge the Minister to be bold to seize the opportunity and to remove water as an issue between us and perhaps take this opportunity to ask him whether he would be prepared to share his view with the House on this very important matter.”
“We need to have the National Science and Technology Board, which is the overseeing organisation, and ask more critical questions in assessing how much benefit would incur from the money we spend on such programmes. I would suggest to the Minister that maybe now is a good time to review the whole R&D funding programme to trim the fat and to critically review the programmes funded by the NSTB in this financial year. 2.15 pm”
“Sir, I am glad to see that, despite belt-tightening in the Government's budgeting process, the R&D funding for various Government organisations in the R&D community has remained very strong. It is a reflection of the far-sightedness of our Government and it is also indeed a preparation for the future. R&D is actually a long term process. If you look at the various R&D programmes, typically, it will take about three to five years before we see any tangible results. So, therefore, funding for R&D cannot be on a roller-coaster basis, but should be on a steady basis. When we can also take note of the effectiveness of such long-term programmes from the commercial sector. Sir, I know it is a generalisation, but many American companies will cut back their R&D funding whenever their profit margin is being squeezed. On the other hand, for Japanese corporations, they have a long term plan for R&D. Indeed, they capitalise their R&D programmes. So, in the recent years, Sir, if you look at the number of patents, R&D outcome for Japanese companies, they tend to be more productive than the American companies. I do support the funding provided by Government in this year's budget for R&D. But, nonetheless, when the Government budget is tight, we have to be more critical in supporting the various R&D programmes. At a time when my colleague, Nominated MP, Mdm Claire Chiang, had lamented the small amount of budget we allocated to MCD, it is all the more so for us to ask whether the R&D money allocated to the various Government-funded R&D institutes is actually value for money and value for money well spent.”
“So a well-trained army cannot be produced overnight. In the present context of science and technology, apart from a well-trained armed forces, we must also ensure that our armed forces are equipped with advanced military hardware. We can learn from the Gulf war the importance of the supremacy of advanced military hardware. So even in peace, we must also make sure that we have a well-trained, well-armed and well-equipped armed forces, and be prepared at all times. When we are enjoying peace and security, we tend to forget the hardship of nation building, especially the young people who have not gone through the experience of disorders in the 50s and 60s. We have to remind them time and again of events that are happening all over the world. Take the lesson from the Gulf war. Kuwait was invaded overnight by Iraq. For a small country like Singapore, I think we can learn a good lesson from that. Our defence is to maintain our stability and security, especially in this time of uncertainties. We cannot afford to be complacent. We should restore the confidence of investors and make every effort to promote peace and security in this region. This regional financial crisis teaches us a lesson and makes us realise that the future is very unpredictable. It is only when we live in peace and do not forget to anticipate the dangers ahead, be prepared at all times that we will be able to tackle the problems as they come along, in order to continue to enjoy peace and prosperity.”
“Sir, the 1998 Budget is a prudent one. However, despite the shadow of the regional financial crisis, our defence spending is not reduced but increased. It accounts for 4.6% of our GDP, up 0.2% from last year. In other words, defence spending has increased from last year's figure of $6.445 billion to this year's $7.228 billion, an increase of $830 million, or 12.8%. This is a substantial increase. The question is: why are we increasing this spending? The NCMP has been asking the same question again and again. There is peace around the region, why should we spend more money on defence? We know that the NCMP is English educated. He is not quite familiar with the Chinese history. Let me enlighten him with a story from Chinese history. During the warring periods, in order to show appreciation to the state of Jin for helping it to negotiate for peace with the other states, thereby avoiding a conflict, the state of Zheng gave a lot of chariots, musical instruments, musicians and songstresses to the king of Jin. The king offered to share these gifts with his meritorious minister, Wei Jiang. Wei Jiang declined the offer, and instead turned to advise the king that he should think of the dangers ahead and be prepared, even when he was enjoying peace and prosperity. So I hope the NCMP can appreciate that national defence is the basic foundation and most important role for an independent and sovereign Singapore to guard against external aggression, to protect the lives and properties of the people, and to ensure security, stability and prosperity of our country. At the same time, it will boost confidence of our foreign investors in us. Just now my colleague mentioned that it takes a thousand days to raise an army to be used one day.”
“At a time when other Finance Ministers in the region have to scramble to keep their nation's finances afloat, our Minister can still boast a budget surplus. He must be the envy of Finance Ministers everywhere else. If any Singaporean still has doubts of the effectiveness and the farsightedness of our political leadership and of the PAP Government, I believe that this budget should dispel all such doubts.”
“As an additional comment on the timing of the feedback, the Singapore International Chamber of Commerce and Industry feels that it would be more meaningful to have a session with the Ministry before, rather than after the Budget sessions. The practice by the Hong Kong and Malaysian authorities was cited as examples of other governments' practices. It would be a disservice to the participants if they came across as being too parochial in their views. Therefore, I would also like to reflect their attitude when other aspects of the budget are being touched on. When it was pointed out to them that the Government indeed increased allocation for infrastructure expenditures such as Jurong Island, Changi East as well as provision in the Ministry of Education for new schools, they agreed that these are important stimulus measures albeit confined to the construction sector of the economy. It is also useful to note that they have no issue with the defence expenditure, despite its substantial increase from 4.4% to 4.6% of GDP. Indeed, they were very supportive of the need to maintain defence capability, especially at this time of uncertainty. They generally feel that their concerns would pale against the consequences of potential social upheavals in Indonesia if riots over cost of basic necessities become widespread and uncontrollable. Put in this context, all participants agreed that the Minister for Finance has achieved a judicious balance between being conservative and proactive in managing our nation's finances at this juncture when the future is so uncertain. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I would like to compliment the Minister for an excellent budget, giving something for everyone although the amount given out is a little bit less than last year.”
“And with the collapse of the Indonesian rupiah, the credits extended to their Indonesian clients have turned into bad debts. This problem has already dragged down the profits of the big four banks. The small traders are suffering in silence. They are hoping that the credit guarantee scheme proposed by the Prime Minister could be put in place quickly to enable them to continue their business. Many companies have ventured overseas in response to the call by the Government to sprout a second wing, and many have suffered losses in their overseas subsidiaries. The participants would like to appeal to the Minister to allow these companies to make use of such losses in their subsidiaries to offset taxable profit in the Singapore parent company. They are aware that the Minister has not been sympathetic to this appeal in the past. But they would like the Minister to review the situation, as much of the losses recently is not due to bad business judgment but circumstances beyond anyone's anticipation and control. Sir, that summarizes the feedback of the business community in the Feedback Unit's discussion. I believe the views expressed are fairly representative. Everyone present was very grateful for the undertaking given by the Minister to make use of off-Budget measures to assist the businesses if the economy takes an unexpected turn for the worse, although they would like to know what those measures are likely to be. What is interesting to me is that everyone has an unshakable confidence in the Government's ability to turn the tide if the need arises. Maybe that is a compliment to the Minister for Finance.”
“Therefore, this year's one-off 5% rebate is equivalent to an increase of personal income tax and the $130 million of disposable income has been withdrawn from the economy. If the Minister has retained the traditional 10% rebate, it would only reduce the $2.7 billion surplus by a minuscule 5%. This percentage is not very significant to the surplus but very important to the domestic retail sector at this very difficult time. Hence, most of the participants could not understand what moved the Minister to take this step at this point in time. At the feedback session, the Singapore Chinese Chamber of Commerce and Industry reiterated its request for a central committee to coordinate all Government fee increases so that their impact could be moderated over time. In this respect, the Singapore Power's recent rate increase of 5% is being held up as an example, and most people felt that the increase is untimely. Electricity being essential and unavoidable to all businesses, the electricity rate increase adds to the burden of enterprises and manufacturing precisely at a time when cost reduction is what all of us should be concerned with. Many wondered whether the corporatisation of Singapore Power with its goal of increasing its return of assets is the real reason for the rate increase, rather than the higher fuel cost. The Singapore Chinese Chamber of Commerce and Industry also reiterated its call for the Minister to make use of some of the $2.7 billion to assist businessmen at this time. And my colleague, Mr Tay Beng Chuan, has gone into it in detail, and I would not do so. Sir, the regional economic crisis also brought difficulties for small traders whose businesses have always been done on credit. Their businesses have been squeezed by the regional economic crisis.”
“They pointed out that it is not accurate to assume that all companies can adjust their wage cost by adjusting the variable component of the flexi-wage system. Perhaps these companies have themselves to blame for getting into this current state of affairs. But that is the reality of the labour market and they continue to urge the Government to look into the reduction of the employer's portion of the CPF contribution as an option to help them to reduce business cost. Coming to the challenge of workers' training and retraining, most participants, including those from the SMEs, believed that the current lull period is the best opportunity to train our workers in preparation for the upturn in the business cycle which will inevitably return. With lower business activities, employers could release workers for training without missing their deliverables. And workers' loyalty could therefore be enhanced and cemented. Participants urged the Government to support the call by the unions to fund additional workers' training and retraining. They also urged the relevant fund administrators to speed up the reimbursement of training grants so that their cash flow problems could be reduced, as interest cost has become quite volatile and has increased in recent months. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, it is obvious that the retail sector will be facing another year of worsening business. Participants expressed surprise that the Government would reduce consumers' disposable income at this juncture, when in fact the reverse should be the case to help the retail sector. Their rationale is as follows: for several years now, the Minister has granted one-off personal income tax rebate of 10%. It has almost become part of the income tax structure.”
“However, the relaxation of this scheme should not be viewed as tantamount to extending greater help to SMEs. Relaxation in qualifications for LEFS only increases the number of firms that will qualify for this scheme, in particular, those with higher turnover and those who are probably already stronger than others. But it did not increase the benefits for those who are already qualified but need greater assistance. Most participants have looked forward to the Government helping to reduce the cost of doing business in Singapore. They felt that the rental freeze by HDB and JTC and the 15% property tax rebate, while welcome, do not truly address this problem. The reason being that rentals have been on the downward trend for more than half a year. So the rental freeze for another 12 months is a non-event. For those renting private commercial properties, they would typically enjoy little or no spin-off as a result of the 15% property tax rebate. On the issue of property tax, several participants took the opportunity to point out that the Government's action is an irony, in the sense that IRAS has sent out recent tax increase notices for residential properties. Yes, they understand that such notices are sent out after tracking the market for several months, but the action is still contradictory to current trends and also adds to the financial burden of the taxpayers. The Minister has encouraged companies to deal with excessive labour cost by trimming the variable component of the flexi-wage system. Several SME representatives pointed out that in the boom years, small companies have been forced to pay high wages to keep their workers, and they did not develop a flexi-wage system, as the Government encouraged them to do and as the larger companies have already implemented.”
“I chaired the session for the business community and would like to take this opportunity to provide a summary of the reactions of the business community. In this particular session, representatives were drawn from the various Chambers of Commerce, small and medium enterprises as well as selected corporations. The general consensus of the budget is that the Minister for Finance has adopted a reactive rather than a proactive posture in this uncertain time. Given this mental framework, the resultant budget is actually reasonable despite its lack of financial stimuli. However, participants have questioned whether the Minister has taken into consideration that the economy has contracted rapidly in the last two months, and is indeed much worse off than the time the budget was prepared, given that the budget was probably prepared in December and then reviewed in January. The Singapore International Chamber of Commerce's representative highlighted that there are instances to indicate that MNCs are repatriating their expatriates from Singapore and taken this as an indicator that the trend has been going downwards rapidly and is still accelerating. Generally, all the participants felt that the budget is biased towards helping the financial sector and not enough attention has been paid to the manufacturing sector. In fact, several participants even mentioned in jest that perhaps the financial sector has the ears of the Government. So I think it is important for the Minister to dispel this misperception. On the subject of helping small and medium enterprises, participants felt that increasing the risk sharing of loans in the Local Enterprise Financing Scheme (LEFS) by the Government is laudable.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, allow me to add my support to the motion standing in the name of the Minister. At this time of economic contraction and regional political uncertainties, I believe it is wise for the Minister to be prudent and conservative. While no recession is in sight, the situation could be changed unexpectedly if economic upheavals rock those Asian countries hitherto unaffected by the Asian flu. There are lingering uncertainties as to whether China could avoid devaluing its currency in order to remain competitive. The IMF has withheld the release of additional funds for Indonesia as the conditions for market discipline are not being met. As we read from the papers, President Suharto has declared that the mandated IMF measures are against the Indonesian constitution, perhaps indicating to the market that more shocks are in store for the regional economy. In my view, Sir, our treasury therefore must have sufficient surpluses to instil confidence in our financial system and to react to unseen circumstances. Many Singaporeans are experiencing pains when the growth slows down in the current time, and are urging the Government to provide stimulus to the economy. In my view, given that Singapore has experienced more than 10 years of double-digit growth, it is not necessarily bad to pause for a breather and to wring out the excesses in our economy that had happened in the last two years. Indeed, I applaud the Minister for resisting calls for measures to stimulate the economy the very moment we have encountered a small correction. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, let me now turn to the findings of the Feedback Unit. Last week, the Feedback Unit conducted a series of five sessions with the business community and the general public.”
“The Parliamentary Secretary did not answer my question on whether the land sales programme affects HDB prices.”
“Sir, I would like to ask the Parliamentary Secretary whether his Ministry is considering any measure to help people sell their flats at higher prices and whether the Government's planned land sales have any impact on these HDB flats.”
“Sir, can I ask the Parliamentary Secretary whether such a drop in prices in such a short time had been anticipated by the Ministry when implementing the new policies? Because such a drop in prices has affected a large number of Singaporeans selling their flats at that particular point of time and a lot of them were actually caught. The Parliamentary Secretary may not be aware but there are many persons selling their flats during this period of time and conducting open houses who did not get any call at all.”
“Can I ask the Parliamentary Secretary whether he would still consider it as consolidation if the prices of HDB resale flats drop to valuation or below valuation?”
“Sir, can I ask the Parliamentary Secretary whether he is aware that the market prices of HDB resale flats since the announcement of the revised policies have dropped significantly and, in some cases, up to 20%? Would he consider this drop as a consolidation of prices?”
“Sir, by any measure of economic progress, Singapore can be considered a developed country. In terms of per capita GDP, ours is also a rich country, one of the top 10 in the world. Fortunately for us, as a small island on the equator, we are also blessed with good weather and are not plagued by natural disasters like earthquakes and so on. However, from time to time, communities and nations, rich or poor, distant or close by, are struck by natural calamities like typhoons, floods, earthquakes and volcanic eruptions. And some of these disasters are so massive that they could overwhelm their own national relief programmes. As part of the global community, I believe that we in Singapore should extend our helping hand. We should not let the developed countries in the western world be the torch-bearers in such missions. And helping others in their time of need is not only good for the soul, doing so will also build up our goodwill with these countries. Furthermore, from my interaction with younger Singaporeans, they also like to see Singapore perceived as a more concerned global citizen. Of course, having goodwill is good but, hopefully, we will never need to call upon on such goodwill. However, if perchance misfortune strikes us in whatever form in the future, we would also hope that others would extend a helping hand to us in our time of need. Occasionally, we do read in the newspaper about our national disaster relief to other countries, but I believe we could do more. Perhaps the Minister could enlighten the House whether he envisages a more structured approach to disaster relief as part of our foreign policy.”
“I would like to ask the Minister to review the existing system and to make the necessary changes to prevent future occurrence of this nature. The Minister has been very kind to support my earlier proposal. So I hope he will also be equally supportive of this request.”
“But since the Ministry of the Environment does not work 24 hours a day, its officers will only set up the monitor station the following day. By then, it would be typically too late to punish the culprit and to alleviate the suffering of the residents concerned. So what if the contractor was fined? A fine of $2,000 is insignificant compared to the delay of a few days in a multi-million construction project. In fact, many contractors would willingly pay the fine rather than to stop work. The current system is unsatisfactory as it gives the impression that the rule of law is uneven. That it is not even handed in this respect. Let me give Members an example. When your neighbour creates disturbance beyond 11.00 pm and you complain to the police, the police will show up and your neighbour would promptly quiet down. They would obey the law. On the other hand, when a construction site next to your house is creating all kinds of havoc, waking up all the neighbours around the site with fleets of ready mixed cement trucks rumbling down the normal quiet street, with heavy machinery labouring throughout the night, the police is powerless to act. Sir, this is no good for the image of the police and also for the morale of the officers concerned. It seems that the existing noise pollution control is effective against the individuals but ineffective against the big construction companies. Of the many constituents who have complained to me, many of them harbour the impression that the Government has favoured the big boys in the property development business and allowed them to make use of these loopholes. I know of course that this is not true but this perception is not good for the image of the Government.”
“Sir, several years back, the control of noise pollution during the construction of buildings was transferred from the Building Control Division to the Ministry of the Environment. Prior to the transfer, the construction activities were restricted to normal working hours and on occasions where there is a possibility that neighbours are disturbed, the activities were actually prohibited. So there was quiet and peace in the construction site located in the residential areas after dark. After the transfer, construction of buildings is no longer restricted to certain working hours but could actually go on round the clock. The only protection for Singaporeans from such noise pollution activities at night is the noise level stipulated by the Ministry of the Environment. When a complaint is lodged, the Ministry of the Environment will set up a monitoring station and if the monitor indicates that the level has exceeded the stipulated level and a violation has occurred, a citation will be issued to the party concerned and the fine is not exceeding $2,000 per occurrence. In theory, Sir, this seems to be very logical and provides sufficient safeguards to Singaporeans. I am sorry to say that, at least in the Bukit Timah constituency, the actual situation is quite different. Many property developers, especially those of the high-price condominiums, have embarked on a 24-hour work construction schedule without regard to the need of residents for peace in the night. When residents lodge a complaint to the police after, say, 11.00 pm, the police officers will promptly show up but they are powerless to do anything if the contractor does not cooperate. ENV will be duly informed.”
“Sir, during the Budget debate last year, I advocated that the Ministry should move away completely from the fixed fee system of sewage processing and adopt a fee structure based on the volume of waste water generated. I am happy to note that when the Government revised the water rate on 1st July this year, the Ministry took the opportunity to adjust, actually to increase, the volume-based fee. But, however, I note that the Minister did not go all the way. I am aware of the Ministry's plan to build a massive, deep tunnel system to handle the sewage generated by Singaporeans in the future. There is an existing programme to enclose all sewage treatment plants in Singapore so that Singaporeans can enjoy an odourless living environment. All these infrastructures, Sir, are expensive, and the more waste water we generate, the greater the need for such sewage treatment facilities. I think it is only logical that we should scrap completely the fixed fee system based on the number of sanitary appliances per household and move completely towards the volume-based system. The change introduced this July reflected that the Minister basically agrees with this principle. Perhaps he would take this opportunity to enlighten the House his views on this matter.”
“What happens in the interim period before the contractors were given permission to start on the renovations? In other words, when the home owners have got their flats but before anyone has access to the flat, mosquitoes are breeding inside the flats and the neighbours who have already moved in are suffering from mosquito infestation.”
“Sir, I would like to ask the Minister what are the enforcement programmes against households that are not occupied, especially newly allocated households in HDB flats. The reason why I ask this is that, in my constituency, there are a lot of new HDB households and mosquitoes are breeding in the toilet bowls. But these flats are locked up and so nobody can carry out any action against them.”
“Resolved, That the following Address in reply to the Speech of the President be agreed to:- "We, the Parliament of the Republic of Singapore, express our thanks to the President for the Speech which he delivered on behalf of the Government at the Opening of the First Session of this Parliament." COMMITTEE OF SELECTION (Appointment of Members)”
“They have done so in a quiet and resolute way and have expressed unequivocally the true feelings of Singaporeans. The issue now is how do we proceed from here, and I believe that the ball is now in the Malaysian side of the court. Topic number six is on the National Education programme. The National Education programme was proposed last year when it was recognised that young Singaporeans lack a good understanding of our history. In view of the recent events, the importance of the National Education programme has become obvious, and it is a hot topic in this debate. All the Members who spoke agreed that this programme is important to ensure that young Singaporeans will remain a united people as they grow up in future. Mr Speaker, Sir, I am sure Members who have spoken have expended much time and effort into preparing their speeches. I would like to thank Members for their contributions. You, Sir, too deserve our thanks for showing forbearance in sitting through these four days of speech making. Being an eloquent speech maker yourself, I am sure you must have been tempted from time to time to join in the debate. From the speeches, Sir, we can see that the atmosphere of this House is an upbeat one. It is one of hope, it is one of optimism. We do have challenges ahead of us, but none that we cannot overcome. This reflects the confidence of Singaporeans as we face the challenges of the new century. Ours is a country that is secure, united, progressive and prosperous as we enter into the 21st century. And under the banner of Singapore 21, we Singaporeans will achieve our goal of making Singapore Our Best Home. On this note, I would like to ask Members to join me in thanking the President for his Address to this House. [Applause]. Question put, and agreed to.”
“On the other hand, Members also recognise that there will always be someone in our midst who will fall behind. Topic number three is education and life-long learning. Many Members highlighted the fact that the future depends on the education of our young to meet competition. They note that our young must be taught creativity. Our young must acquire the desire for life-long learning. Members also stressed the importance of continuing education and upgrading for the adult working population. Topic number four is on Singapore's value system. The value system of Singapore is another much discussed topic. Members are concerned that the Singapore society today might be turning too materialistic, and there might be concern that Singaporeans are exhibiting increasing signs of evolving into a self-centred society. Other Members were also concerned that our current success might breed complacency. Topic number five is on Singapore/Malaysia relationship. This is certainly the most emotive issue during the current debate. Many Members deplore the current state of affairs between our two countries. All in their speeches reflect the quiet resolve of Singaporeans to stand up for Singapore. In this respect, Members also reflected Singaporeans' impatience over the perennial threat to cut our water supply. As Mr Chiam said, water is our life blood. He also mentioned that cutting water supply is a very serious matter. It is tantamount to a cause for war. The Prime Minister and the Minister for Foreign Affairs have also comprehensively discussed about the Points of Agreement between Singapore and Malaysia over the KTM lands. Singapore MPs have been quiet over the past two months over this issue, and this debate allows Members to air their views.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, it is now my humble duty to wrap up the debate. However, after the Prime Minister's speech, I find it not an easy task to do, and therefore I intend to be very brief. In the course of the past four days, over 50 speakers have taken the floor, and all except two have supported the motion. I would like to thank the Members for supporting the motion standing in my name. All 23 new Members have delivered their maiden speeches. Even though they are new in this House, several of the deliveries were robust and invigorating. All have prepared themselves well. Their speeches give us an idea of the calibre of the Members and what concerns them most. And those retired Members who had made way for the new Members shall be happy to know that their replacements are worthy ones. Sir, most of the speeches made reference to the President's Address and the topics covered can be classified into several areas. Topic number one is international competitiveness of Singapore. This topic received many comments reflecting the concern of Singaporeans. The issue is how to continue to develop our economy in the face of increasing international competitions, and the increasing cost of doing business in Singapore. Many Members recognise that the key lies in the preparation of our young for future competition, and the need to move up the technology curve in order to remain competitive is also well recognised. Topic number two is the play of free market forces versus social cohesion. All Members who spoke on this topic stressed the importance of free market economy in Singapore's continued success. They believe in meritocracy to promote social mobility and to reward hard work.”
“Tomorrow, Sir. ADJOURNMENT Resolved, "That Parliament do now adjourn." - [Mr Wong Kan Seng]. Adjourned accordingly at Twenty Nine minutes past Four o'clock pm.”
“As this Government implements programmes to fulfill our vision of Singapore 21, we will build a prosperous and at the same time a more caring society. We shall overcome any hurdles as we march towards the future provided we remain a united people. Question proposed. 12.58 pm”
“In this respect, the Government has taken the right step when our Deputy Prime Minister, BG Lee Hsien Loong, launched the National Education Programame for younger Singaporeans on 17th May 1997. The National Education Programme aims to foster in our young a sense of identity and pride of being a Singaporean. They must understand Singapore's unique constraints and vulnerabilities. When the post-war baby boomers' generation starts to retire, Singaporeans will enter into a period of rapid aging. As we cannot build enough old folks' homes to cater for our old, the only feasible way to take care of them would be to continue to accommodate them within the community they live in. For those without families, we need to build a stronger community support system. We must also look into opportunities for the successful among us to extend a helping hand to the needy. The Government has already identified the Community Development Council (CDC) as the vehicle to achieve these goals. Two full-time Mayors, Dr Ow Chin Hock and Mr Eugene Yap, have been appointed. By the end of this year, CDCs will be established in every constituency. With the CDCs, we will be progressing forward to fulfill the other two pillars of Singapore 21, namely, to care for the old and to build ties. Singapore is a unique place. We have built a robust society based on the principle of meritocracy. We have strong leadership, a society without corruption. Today, we have the financial resources accumulated over the past 32 years to build a highly creative and dynamic society in future. This Parliament will be the one which ushers Singapore into the new millennium. We will face new challenges and unexpected crises as we enter into the 21st century.”
“Until then, Malaysian political leaders would have to consider this factor when it comes to choosing their words as it does not pay to use Singapore as a bogeyman. Since our independence in 1965, we have evolved along different paths as the Malaysians. While the Malaysians still conduct their politics along racial lines, the PAP Government has built a multi-racial society based on meritocracy and equality. We, Singaporeans, are very proud of our way of life. No Singapore leader would be able to command the respect of Singaporeans and remain our leader if he were to adopt an appeasement policy towards Malaysia, even for something as crucial as water. Our Malaysian friends should realise this and abandon their expectation of a dominant relationship over Singapore. The sooner they come to this realisation, the sooner could we build a stable and balanced relationship between our two countries. Better relationship is something that we all are hoping for given our geographic proximity and historical ties. Mr Speaker, Sir, when sudden squalls hit, only those with the courage and experience could weather the storm. Our post-independence generation has no experience of the trials and tribulations leading to our separation from Malaysia. As such, they lack the ballast to stay the course. As recent events demonstrate, relationship between two countries could plunge off a steep cliff without warning. How do we mentally fortify our people against such eventuality? Our young should be taught the forces shaping the birth of our nation that predates 1965, including the tumultuous years between 1963 and 1965, the racial riots, and our righteous call for a just and equal society. We should transmit to our younger generation the experience of those who have lived through these events.”
“Those Malaysian politicians calling to cut our water supply, regardless of the status of the person, were given extensive coverage in their media. I wonder whether the people of Malaysia understand the impact of such talk on the psyche of our people. Yes, Singapore is short of water while Malaysia is blessed with abundance. If not tapped, much of the water we import from Malaysia would have flown into the ocean anyway. Water is an accident of geography that we Singaporeans are handicapped with. We are not ungrateful to our neighbour for supplying the water. But it is a gratitude that would be better expressed on a foundation of friendship and trust. Singaporeans are sick and tired of this threat. Most of my constituents will support the proposed water rate increase to conserve water. As we all know, for Singaporeans to support price increase will show the resolve of our people in this very matter. We see water pipes on the causeway carrying water to Singapore. What we do not see is a virtual pipeline conveying large sums of money Singapore tourists and investors spend in Malaysia. The Malaysian Tourist Promotion Board's figures showed that in 1995, Singaporeans spent a total of $4.3 billion ringgit in Malaysia, about 50% of the total tourist spending. Malaysian leaders should realise that after their public display of anger towards Singapore, Singaporeans will instinctively avoid Malaysia. It is partly due to concerns for their personal safety but, mostly, I am glad to note that it is a closing of ranks among Singaporeans. Malaysia will probably one day become affluent enough not to be bothered whether Singaporeans spend money in Malaysia or not.”
“I understand that the Minister for Education is reviewing this very question. Presumably, as a result of the high stress, some Singaporeans are weighing immigration as an option to a slower paced society. This is reflected by the Master Card survey conducted in June 1996. The survey shows that one in five middle-income Singaporeans wish to migrate to another country. Of those who express so, 38% choose Australia. While this could be just a wish, it also goes to show that the anchor of a fair number of Singaporeans to the soil could be loosened in a crisis. The President has advised us to expect rough weather. Where would the squalls come from? We do not have to look far afield. The recent furore raised by Malaysian political leaders over one single statement in the affidavit filed in the Tang Liang Hong's case showed that the bilateral relationship between our two countries is a minefield. Most Singaporeans find that the intensity of the emotions expressed by the Malaysians far outweighs the gravity of the statement on the crime rate in Johor Baru. Most Singaporeans of the post-independence generation are puzzled. On the other hand, for older Singaporeans, we know that this is a manifestation of the historical baggage resulting from the separation of Singapore and Malaysia in 1965. Mr Speaker, Sir, we are usually accused of being insensitive to their feelings every time Malaysian politicians find fault with us. Apparently, they place a high premium on being sensitive to the feelings of others. I would like our Malaysian friends to realise that we Singaporeans too have feelings and emotions. I am particularly unhappy over the perennial threat to cut off our water supply.”
“Other asset enhancement schemes such as the various HDB Estate Renewal Programmes like Interim Upgrading Programme, Main Upgrading Programme and Selective En-bloc Redevelopment Scheme are also well received by the people. This home-ownership programme has brought about a stakeholder society in Singapore. The percentage of home-ownership in Singapore is the highest in the world, something no other society has been able to emulate. In a way, the home-ownership programme has been overly successful. MND released a survey that showed that 35% of those who changed flats downgrade to roll-over and realise their substantial capital gain in the form of cash. Some used the money for retirement and for their children's education. I think no one will quarrel with that. However, others used their capital gain for consumption like buying a car and going for vacation. Besides being unwise, this behaviour is against the intent of the HDB housing progamme. Thus, the new measures to cut HDB waiting time, namely, longer time bar and new resale levies, are timely. However, almost every Singaporean is affected by these new rules. I hope the Minister for National Development would be compassionate in dealing with those HDB applicants who are caught in a financial bind as a result of these new measures. Mr Speaker, Sir, the President has said that our education programme is already very good but we can do better. How? By increasing the information content or teach our young to be more creative. Already, parents are telling me that the pressure in primary school is getting greater and greater. They told me that they must employ tutors for their children. If they were to leave their children to depend entirely on the instructions in the classroom alone, they would not make the grade.”
“Though technology is important, we should not ignore the opportunities in other sectors of our economy such as financial services, legal services, life sciences and medical services. Here, I found the views expressed by Ms Ho Ching, CEO of Singapore Technologies at the 31st AGM of the Institute of Engineers on 17th May 1996 quite enlightening, especially her views on the supply of doctors and lawyers. She proposed that if we consider the region as a catchment area for our medical services, then the previous assumptions in arriving at the demand and supply balance of doctors in Singapore could be thrown out of the window and the number of doctors could be increased. Coincidentally, Sir, the Minister for Health has announced on 25th May 1997 that NUS will increase the annual intake of medical students from 150 to 180 next year and to 200 the year following, citing existing shortage till the year 2000. Mr Speaker, Sir, if we look at the American economy that sustains a high income level, we will discover that its cultural exports such as clothing, footwear, food, music and movies are very strong. Singapore should explore similar opportunities too. In this respect, I am glad to note that the Government has set up a Committee on Singapore's Competitiveness involving two Ministers and one Minister of State as well as many titans from the industry. The long term strategies charted by this Committee will be our roadmap for growth. The cornerstone policy of our Government to share success is each citizen's right to purchase heavily subsidised HDB flats twice in a lifetime.”
“The recent shut-down of Apple Design Centre is a good example. As cost increases, we no longer can depend entirely on MNCs to develop our R&D capabilities. We need more home-grown companies, such as Creative and Aztech. We need more young men and women to take up science and engineering to produce the next generation of techno-entrepreneurs. Here, Sir, we face an uphill task. Young people are naturally attracted by the financially more rewarding careers. In all modern economies, the closer one's job is to the management of large sums of money the better is the pay package. Old favourites like lawyers and doctors are still very popular, with fund managers and remisiers increasing in favour. Young people are also choosing accountancy, business studies and shying away from the technological areas like computer science, engineering, manufacturing and other technical disciplines. Yet they need to be convinced that science and engineering are also rewarding career choices. In terms of pay, this choice should be as good as being a lawyer, doctor, remiser or a financial analyst. Yet, the Government has limited the number of new lawyers and doctors through various administrative measures implemented since 1993, thus ensuring that these professions will continue to enjoy high income levels. On the other hand, the Government has been generous in granting Employment Passes to foreign engineers and software professionals to satisfy surging domestic demands. While this enlarges the pool of talents, it will also increase the competition in these careers and moderate the wages. Are we sending mixed signals to our young?”
“Already we have achieved the target of delivering the first bag on the belt when the first passenger reaches there. There is little strategic value to do this any further. The Government's strategy here is to move our economy up the technological curve. The National Science and Technology Board is provided with ample funds. Good progress has been made, and more remains to be done. Let us look at the number of Research Scientists and Engineers (RSEs) per thousand in the workforce, a statistic commonly used to gauge a nation's strength in R&D. In the five-year period from 1990 to 1995, the number of RSEs increased from 27.7 per thousand to 47.7 per thousand, an increase of 72% or an annual growth rate of 12%. Still, we are 13% behind the UK, 18% behind Germany, 36% behind the US and 41% behind Japan. Even amongst the NIEs in the Asia Pacific region, we are 17% behind Korea and 22% behind Taiwan. We are also investing in our IT infrastructure, including Singapore One, a $80 million project involving 31 companies. The spread of the Internet is probably the most important event in the post-industrial revolution. With more and more information accessible on-line, the future belongs to those proficient in surfing the Net. Only those tapping the resources on the Net will discover new business opportunities. Thus, it is most heartening that the Government has announced a $2 billion IT plan for schools. Our citizens' proficiency in the use of computers will ensure that Singapore will remain in the forefront and ahead of the competition. Even in R&D, high cost is a deterrent. Several US R&D operations in Singapore have closed down over the last several years and relocated their R&D operation back to the US, citing high cost.”
“Still, Singaporeans should realise that competition will become even stiffer in future. Now that Singapore is amongst the richest economies in the world, the question is how do we continue to enlarge the economic pie and raise the income of our people. We may be rich in terms of per capita GDP but Singapore cannot be considered a developed country as we lack depth in R&D and other capabilities that will ensure continued demand for our goods and services. Being rich also means that the cost of doing business in Singapore is now comparable to those in the developed countries. In a recent dialogue session of the Feedback Unit, chaired by Dr John Chen, on the President's Address, the high cost of doing business in Singapore was a main concern of the participants. They reflected that high office rental is one of the main components. Secondly, the use of the pricing mechanism by the Government to achieve policy objectives, for example, COEs, is another factor that causes the cost to rise in Singapore. Their concerns are also reinforced by the recent slow-down in our economy. The economic growth for the first quarter of 1997 was a slow 3.8%, with manufacturing registering a minus 6.7%, the third quarterly decline in a row. By economic definition, in fact, manufacturing should be in recession. While this is partly due to weak global demand, increasing business cost is definitely a contributing factor. Mr Speaker, Sir, the message is quite clear. While we must continue to become more efficient, that is no longer enough. In many areas, we are already rated No. 1 in the world and have reached the point of diminishing returns. Consider, for example, the much acclaimed baggage delivery system in Changi Airport.”
“The Institute of Management Development, a Swiss business school, has ranked Singapore equal with Japan in terms of purchasing power parity. With such a strong record, it was no surprise that the voters supported the PAP. Mr Speaker, Sir, the results reflect the trust and confidence the people of Singapore have in the Prime Minister and his Cabinet. As we are poised at the threshold of the new millennium, our people have given the PAP a renewed mandate to lead them into the 21st century. They have endorsed the vision of the PAP Government for this term of Parliament, namely, Singapore 21, with its five pillars: create wealth, share success, invest in the young, care for the old, and build ties. Mr Speaker, Sir, Singapore's competitive advantage lies in our ability to figure out how to organise ourselves more efficiently and effectively than others. The process is simple. We identify where we are. We determine where we want to be. Then we implement a gap-closure plan to get there. Nothing fancy, just a step-by-step systematic approach. While the recipe is simple, to implement it nation wide requires strong leadership, clear minds, focused and consistent execution. Being simple, it is also a recipe that others could copy. A good example is our Operational Headquarters strategy which has been quite successful in attracting multi-national companies to establish their OHQs here. Malaysia adopted the same strategy and has succeeded in attracting several major MNCs, including the software giant Microsoft, in direct competition with Singapore. We welcome other countries to emulate us. We support their effort to improve the standard of living of their people. The world will be a better and safer place if our neighbours are also prosperous.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, it is an honour to be given this privilege to move the motion. I beg to move, That the following Address in reply to the Speech of the President be agreed to:- "We, the Parliament of the Republic of Singapore, express our thanks to the President for the Speech which he delivered on behalf of the Government at the Opening of the First Session of this Parliament.". Mr Speaker, Sir, 65% of the voters voted for the PAP in the last general election, reversing a trend of the previous three general elections, a trend which the opposition had been counting on to carry them into Parliament in greater numbers. Instead, the election saw opposition parties humbled and decimated, so much so that the SDP, the main opposition party in the last Parliament, is no longer represented in this House. The PAP's success is based on its record of good Government. Singaporeans have found their standard of living improved for the past five years. In his 1992, 1993 and 1995 National Day Rally speeches, the Prime Minister had reiterated that Singaporeans' assets would be enhanced during his tenure. A series of asset enhancement programmes such as HDB upgrading and share ownership were introduced, benefiting a large majority of Singaporeans. Our booming economy has raised our per capita GDP to US$28,500, placing us amongst the top 10 countries in the world. Real wages have increased by 4-5% per annum over the past five years. Propelled by the increasing income, the appreciation of our homes over the last five years was unprecedented in Singapore's history. As inflation has been low and our currency remains strong, our purchasing power has increased dramatically.”
“The proposal by the Minister is a good measure administratively. However, I have one concern. Basically it is a merger of two organisations with very different cultures. If you look at the National Parks Board's organisation, I think its mandate and mission is to leave nature as it is, ie, as little interference as possible, and perhaps do not do anything and let nature take its own course within a park, whereas the Parks and Recreation Department is a completely different organisation. It is concerned with horticulture, and basically as much human interference as possible, like landscaping, planting trees, and so on. I am a bit concerned about the type of approach the merged organisation will adopt, and I hope the Minister can address my concern.”
“Last year, at the re-union dinner attended by Nantah graduates from all over the world, the Prime Minister announced that he had agreed to the suggestion. That is the reason why we have this Bill before the House for the Second and Third Readings. From Nantah to NUS and back to Nantah again, I think we can use two idioms in Chinese to describe this process. They are the idioms mentioned by Mr Sinnakaruppan and Mr Low Thia Khiang. The first idiom: yin shui si yuan [ ] when you drink water, think of the source). That describes the feelings of Nantah graduates and how they cherish the memory of the former Nantah. The proposed transfer of register can be said to be luo ye gui gen [ ] (return of the fallen leaves to the roots). So, from yin shui si yuan to luo ye gui gen, this is indeed a story with a happy ending! I do not know why Mr Low Thia Khiang is still so querulous. I believe that the majority of Nantah graduates will support the transfer of Register, and I believe that, in future, Nantah graduates will make greater contributions to the future development of the present Nantah.”
“I think this is 15 years overdue. It is out of time and not relevant now. Mr Goh mentioned that Nantah was closed down. I think they are both wrong. At that time, Nantah was not closed down. Nantah was then merged with the University of Singapore to become the National University of Singapore (NUS). Mr Low Thia Khiang mentioned just now that it was the training in Nantah that enabled him to become a successful MP in this House. I think that was the success of Nantah. The merger between Nantah and the University of Singapore was a decision taken after a long time of deliberation. With the merger, the National University of Singapore (NUS) was formed. Consequently, the registers of Nantah graduates and University of Singapore Alumni were transferred to the NUS. It is a natural course of event. As Dr Ker mentioned just now, all these years, the graduates of Nantah are still very attached to the old campus and the old university, and this sense of attachment has not faded away with the passage of time. On the contrary, with the establishment of the Nanyang Technological Institute, and its subsequent upgrading to Nanyang Technological University, these sentiments have become stronger and stronger. Last year, the Association of Nanyang University Graduates suggested to the Prime Minister to consider transferring the names of the Guild of Graduates of the former Nanyang University from the Register of Graduates of the NUS to the Register of Graduates of the NTU. One of the reasons was, as mentioned by Mr Goh Choon Kang just now, that graduates of Nantah still have their sentiments attached to the former Nantah campus in Jurong, and could not identify themselves with NUS.”
“It is also in conformity with the wishes of the majority of the graduates of the former Nanyang University (Nantah). Although Nantah was closed down in 1980, I believe that more than 10,000 Nantah graduates still have their hearts and feelings attached to the Yunnan Garden Campus. With the closing down of the former Nantah, the Alumni Register was transferred to NUS. But I believe that most Nantah graduates find that they have difficulty identifying themselves with NUS. Although their name is with the Register of NUS, it actually exists in name only. The feeling is not there at all. Now, with the transfer of the Alumni Register back to Nantah, I think it would, at least, be useful in reviving the sense of belonging of these Nantah graduates. Personally, I hope that we would be able to start all over again to cultivate and restore the Nantah spirit. This is the biggest challenge ahead of us. If we can have the support of these 10,000-odd former graduates of Nantah, I think the chances of success in reviving the Nantah spirit are very great. If we can have the support of all these Nantah graduates, the chances of the present Nantah being developed into something comparable to the MIT or Harvard University of the USA will be better. For this reason, I support this transfer of the Register. Dr Koh Lip Lin (Nee Soon South)( In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, originally I did not intend to speak today, but having heard the speeches of Mr Low Thia Khiang and Mr Goh Choon Kang, I feel that I have to say a few words. Mr Low, I believe, was among the last batch of Nantah graduates. Mr Goh was in one of the intermediate batches, and I was from the first batch of Nantah graduates. Just now, Mr Low read, in Parliament, an elegiac address on the demise of Nantah.”