Yeo Cheow Tong
Singapore
“Mdm Ho Geok Choo asked the Minister for Health in light of the recent report on fungal corneal infections (a) whether those who contracted the contact lens related fungal corneal infections will suffer permanent damage to their eyes; and (b) how long will his Ministry take to conclude its investigations into the causes of these contact le…”
“My Ministry performs a regulatory role and what we do is that we try to ensure that we have a conducive regulatory environment for the growth of this industry in Singapore. Let me tell him what we are doing in some areas.”
“Sir, on her two questions, whether we are satisfied that the school buses are collecting fares during the school holidays, as I mentioned just now, the school bus service is a contractual service between the parents and the service provider. It is therefore up to them to work out the terms and to abide by the terms.”
“Sir, on the first question, whether there is any abuse by owners of buses while using the 50% rebate, the answer is no, because LTA monitors very closely.”
“Sir, I have to repeat my answer. We are not responsible for regulating school buses and therefore will not be involved. SCHOOL BUSES (Installation of seat belts) 5. Assoc. Prof.”
“Ong Soh Khim asked the Minister for Community Development, Youth and Sports (a) if his Ministry will increase the cap of $10,000 per disabled person over their lifetime for the Assistive Technology Fund scheme; and (b) if not, whether there will be a flexibility to adjust the funding cap for this scheme based on the applicant's need, as j…”
The complete record
Every one of 1,964 lines we hold for Yeo Cheow Tong, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 21 of 40.
“At the present moment, we have a total industrial land stock of 7,250 ha. This will grow by 42% to about 10,300 ha by the year 2010, when major land reclamation projects in Tuas and the amalgamation of Jurong islands are completed. If need be, we can acquire additional land through reclamation after that. Sir, we therefore have enough land to meet demands well into the next century. During the last five years we released an average of 170 ha per year of industrial land through JTC allocation and URA land sales. So long as we continue to release adequate land steadily in tandem with demand, we should be able to contain excessive fluctuations in industrial land prices. For the next five years, we will be able to release at least 200 ha of land per year, if there is a demand for it. Mr Lew has asked about the prices of our land in Singapore versus the region. Sir, because of our shortage of land, understandably land prices in Singapore are much higher than those in the neighbouring countries. I do not have the exact figures here. But if my memory is correct, the price of land in Singapore is about two to three times the price of land in Malaysia. But compared with Taiwan and Japan, our land price is either about the same or slightly lower. Japan is a huge country and the land which is near to the city, within the inner suburbs, of course is very expensive. But because it is a big country, the further out you go, the cheaper the land price is. And speaking to the Japanese businessmen who were here, they told me that if you are prepared to go far into the country-side, land is definitely cheaper than Singapore. But of course there is an operational cost for being located far into the country-side.”
“The reduction usage was evenly spread but, of course, in total, our total consumption went up because of the increase in the number of households. Part of the reason is likely to be the higher awareness about our water situation and also last year we had very wet weather, and I think this also contributed to a reduction in the usage. Dr Ow asked about our future measures on the demand and supply side. On the demand side, we will continue with our Save Water Campaign. We will continue to publicise the need to save water and we will also encourage PUB to find more ways where we can assist households to reduce the use of water, because the domestic users make up about 50% of our total usage. In terms of the supply side, we are still actively exploring new and alternative water sources, for example, with Malaysia, as announced by PM. And in terms of desalination, MTI last year sent a mission to visit desalination plants in Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Malta. The visit confirmed that desalination of sea water is both technically feasible and viable. Following the study, PUB has called a tender to engage consultants to carry out feasibility and engineering studies for the development of desalination plants in Singapore. The study will examine the suitability of various sites for desalination plants and recommend the process to be adopted, as well as the functional requirements, the design, the costs, and so on. The study is scheduled to be completed in 1997. Based on current water consumption rates, the first desalination plant is likely to be required in the early part of next century, ie, less than 10 years' time. Sir, Mr Lew Syn Pau asked about the stock of industrial land, how long it lasts, and whether it is adequate.”
“And for the major consumers of electricity such as the petrochemical and electronic companies, their electricity costs generally do not exceed 3% of their total operating costs. I therefore do not expect the proposed increase of 3% to 5% a year to pose a major problem to the companies. Mr Leong has asked whether we should split up Singapore Power to provide competition. Sir, we have already split up SP. SP comprises five companies, two of which I have just mentioned - PowerGen (Seraya) and PowerGen (Senoko); a transmission company, PowerGrid; a supply company, Power Supply; and PowerGas. So within there are already the five subsidiaries, each with its own board. And we expect in due course that each of these subsidiaries will be able to operate flexibly on its own, autonomously as well, and to compete with each other to achieve higher productivity improvements and to innovate even greater. Sir, let me now move on to Dr Ow's comments on water. He has asked how the measures implemented last year have affected water consumption. I am pleased to announce that as a result of the publicity on the rapid increase in water consumption, and the PUB's Save Water Campaign, Singaporeans and our business sector responded quite positively. In 1995, the growth in our water consumption dropped to 2.2% from the 6.5% growth in 1994. In particular, domestic water consumption registered only 0.9% growth compared with 5.2% growth in 1994. Non-domestic water consumption grew by 3.6% last year compared with 8.2% the year before. All households, whether those in HDB flats or private housing, used less water compared to 1994. The average reduction was about 3.1%.”
“Mr Goh Choon Kang also expressed concern about the tariff increases having a ripple effect on the rest of the economy. For businesses, utility bills make up a very small percentage of their total operating costs. For retailers, utilities make up only 0.1% of total operating costs. In the case of hawkers, which was the concern expressed by Mr Goh, their average electricity bill is about $50 a month. A 5% increase in electricity tariff will only add about $2.20 a month to their total bill. This works out to less than eight cents a day. So there is no justification for any hawker to increase his prices because of electricity tariff increases. In any case, our message to consumers has been that whenever any hawker or any shopkeeper profiteers by using all kinds of irrelevant reasons, the best way to treat them is by not giving them our business, ie, just boycott them. Then they will find that there is a heavy price to pay for profiteering. 1.30 pm Dr Ow has asked about externalities. I take it that Dr Ow was asking whether there were grounds for either a lower or higher rate of return through deliberate pricing decisions in the case of electricity. I see no reason to either under-price or over-price. We import all our fuels and we should not inadvertently encourage consumption by under-pricing our electricity, because this will lead to over-dependence on imported fuels, not to mention the adverse effects on the environment. And also there is no reason for us to over-price electricity because this will affect our competitiveness. He has also asked about the impact on the industry, particularly the high-energy users. On average, electricity costs account for less than 1% of the total operating costs of manufacturing firms.”
“But this CPI-X approach can be adopted only if the tariff rates on which it is to be applied are realistic, and correctly established. It cannot be done immediately, because SP's tariffs are out of line. Otherwise, there is no incentive for the companies to invest in future capacity. This is why we must allow SP a 12-14% tariff adjustment over three to four years. After that, we can apply the CPI-X formula, which will benefit both consumers and suppliers. Sir, the privatisation of SP is a move to prepare Singapore for the future. Electricity is an important input to our economy. Its price and the security of electricity supply are important to the competitiveness of Singapore. We have an excellent record of technical and professional excellence in the electricity industry which is acknowledged internationally. What we need now is to put in place a competitive structure which will ensure that we continue to be efficient even as the electricity industry grows. I would like to assure the House that the Government will continue to safeguard the interests of consumers in the process of privatisation and monitor closely the impact of any price adjustments. We want SP to do well; but this must never be at the expense of Singaporeans and our economy. SP must do well by providing good services and value to all consumers, and not by exploiting its monopoly position. We therefore expect SP to continue improving its efficiency, productivity and service quality. Ultimately, Singaporeans and our economy will benefit from the privatisation of the power industry, and the introduction of competition. Sir, let me move on to the specific questions that the other Members have brought up.”
“Some Members have expressed their unhappiness over what they interpret as the Government guaranteeing an attractive rate of return to SP. I agree that the Government should never guarantee SP a minimum return. This would remove all incentives for SP to improve. The problem is how to regulate a monopoly in a way which balances the interests of consumers who want low tariffs and high quality of supply and services, and the interests of the project investor, who needs an adequate return to justify the present and future investments. All countries with monopolies face this problem. Ideally, tariffs should be set by market competition, which will give suppliers an interest in keeping their rates low. This will enable us to regulate the industry with a lighter touch. This is our aim over the longer term. Indeed, introducing competition is a major reason for privatising SP, as I have explained earlier. It is therefore important for us to press on with the restructuring of the power industry. But until market competition is effectively available, we will need to safeguard the interests of consumers with regard to pricing, performance standards, security and the reliability of supply. This crucial role of licensing and regulating the electricity industry will be played by the restructured PUB. Furthermore, PUB will not control SP's tariffs by setting the rate of return which SP can earn. It intends to control tariffs through a price cap which depends on the rate of inflation and productivity improvements, ie, the CPI-X approach. In other words, SP will not be allowed to increase its tariffs by more than the inflation rate, with a correction for the productivity improvement which we expect it to make and pass through to consumers.”
“4-roomers can expect an increase in the bill size of about $1.80 a month. The $100 rebate will last them almost five years. Sir, Mr Low and Mr Goh Choon Kang argued that since the investments in power plants and infrastructure have already been made, there is no need to treat these investments in a commercial manner, ie, there is no need to raise tariffs. Let me remind the House that non-domestic consumers use 82% of all electricity generated. Among domestic consumers, the better off the family, the more electricity they consume. Let me quote some figures. A household in a 1-room HDB flat uses about $15.50 of electricity a month. A 3-roomer, double that, at about $32 a month. A HUDC household, more than double that of a 3-roomer, at about $74 a month. And private home owners, again almost double that, at about $124 a month. So if we subsidise electricity, as Mr Low and Mr Goh have suggested, we would in fact be subsidising a key factor of production, encouraging over-consumption of energy, and creating serious misallocation of resources. Furthermore, higher income households would benefit much more from an electricity subsidy than lower income households. So for every $1 we spend subsidising electricity, only 4.2 cents will go to benefitting HDB 1-, 2- and 3-room households. Is this what we all want? Far better that we price electricity correctly, and then help low income households directly, through utility bill rebates, through Edusave Merit Bursaries, through SOTUS schemes, as the Government has done. Then for every dollar the Government spends, low income households can benefit by the full one dollar. Sir, the third issue is the protection of consumer interests.”
“I would like to refer Members to Appendix II (Cols. 1291 - 1292), which shows the tariffs in the region. We need to allow SP to increase electricity tariffs by 12-14% over the next three to four years, or an average of between 3-5% a year, to restore its financial health. Appendix II - COMPARISON OF TARIFFS WITH REGIONAL POWER COMPANIES (Cols. 1291 - 1292) Members should note that while we are talking about 12-14% over three to four years, or an average increase of 3-5% a year, Malaysia's electricity tariffs had just increased by 8.3%, and Hong Kong's by 6.7%. The other utilities in the region have not yet announced their new tariffs this year. So even with the proposed tariff adjustments for SP over the next three to four years, it is likely that our electricity tariffs will remain among the lowest in the region. Sir, many people believe that SP is increasing tariffs because the Government wants to list SP. This is not correct. Once the Government ascertained that our electricity is underpriced, the problem had to be corrected. It has nothing to do with SP's privatisation. But we are mindful of the need to minimise the impact on consumers, both domestic and non-domestic. That is why we are correcting the problem over several years, by spacing out the tariff adjustments. As I have explained in this House a fortnight ago, the impact on households will be very minimal. A 5% tariff increase for 1-room HDB households results in an increase in the electricity bill of about 70 cents a month. The rebate on utility bills of $150 for 1-roomers will pay for 17 years of the tariff increase. The increase in bill size for 3-room HDB households will be about $1.40 per month. Their $120 rebate would pay the equivalent of seven years of increase.”
“It is inherent in the nature of corporate restructuring that we do not know the exact state of the company's accounts until after the restructuring, when the assets to be transferred have been determined and valued, the taxes payable properly ascertained, and so on and so forth. SP's ROTA could not be reliably calculated until after these issues had been settled. In fact, for a full picture, we have to wait for the closing of the first full year's accounts. After taking all these factors into account, SP's total assets in FY96 will amount to $10.7 billion. This is almost double PUB's fixed assets as defined under the World Bank criterion of $5.6 billion in FY94. As a result, SP's return on total assets for 1996 is projected at only 5.4%, barely exceeding SP's cost of borrowing. This poor return on total assets is the basic reason why SP's return on equity is low. It is not a problem of inadequate gearing or over-capitalisation. Because the ROTA barely exceeds the cost of borrowing, gearing SP's capital structure higher, ie, by borrowing more and having less equity, does not help much to raise its ROE. To be viable, SP would need to make a ROTA of at least 7-8%, which with gearing translates into an ROE of 10-11%. The next question is: what causes SP's low ROTA? Are the returns low because PUB and the successor SP have been inefficient? Sir, the answer is a definitive No. As I showed this House two weeks ago, all the operational indicators show that we have a very efficient power generation system. This has also been confirmed by both Deloitte and Touche, MTI's consultant in the restructuring of our power system, and by the World Economic Forum. SP's ROTA is low because its electricity tariffs are low. Our tariffs have consistently been among the lowest in the region.”
“Members have asked: what is the difference between the World Bank and international accounting criteria? Sir, I would like to refer Members to Appendix I (Cols. 1289 - 1290) which I have handed out earlier. The World Bank's criterion for loans requires a return measured by dividing after-tax profit before interest expenses by the average net fixed assets in operation. This does not include current assets and capital investments which are not yet productive, for example, new power stations under construction. Under this World Bank criterion, PUB's rates of return were indeed adequate, ranging from 11.1% to 12.4% during the past five years. Appendix I - DEFINITION OF FINANCIAL RATIOS (Cols. 1289 - 1290) But the World Bank criterion is only a minimal test of the viability of projects wanting to borrow from the World Bank. Most of these projects are in underdeveloped countries, which must build infrastructure, even at low rates of return, in order to get the country to start developing. Singapore is not an underdeveloped country. We must evaluate our electricity projects by commercial standards. This is what developed countries and even ASEAN and East Asian countries do. Commercially and economically, we cannot ignore current assets and capital investments. These represent valuable assets employed by the PUB in generating electricity. There is an opportunity cost to deploying them in the PUB. Members have asked: why did the Government only discover this problem when SP was corporatised and not earlier?”
“So have New Zealand and the state of Victoria in Australia, with a generating capacity of about 7 GW each. Hong Kong, with a generating capacity of 10 GW, has had two power companies for many years. By restructuring PUB now, we are preparing the ground to gradually remove PUB's monopoly and introduce competition into the generation and supply business. We have split PUB's power stations into two subsidiaries of SP - PowerGen (Senoko) and PowerGen (Seraya). We are building a large new power station in Tuas which will be run as a different company from SP. This will enable some competition to develop in power generation. Eventually, consumers will have a choice of which supplier to buy their electricity from. The electricity will still be delivered to them through the national grid, but the grid will merely be transporting the electricity for suppliers to consumers. This is a strong reason to restructure PUB and eventually privatise SP. Sir, low tariffs. The second issue relates to the need for the proposed tariff increase, and why the Government had not realised prior to the corporatisation of PUB that it had been under-pricing electricity. PUB's accounting systems and practices were similar to most commercial companies. But when the PUB borrowed from the World Bank in the 60s, it adopted the World Bank criteria for calculating its rate of return, instead of internationally accepted commercial accounting ratios of profitability, such as return on equity or return on total assets (ROTA). By the World Bank's criteria, PUB was earning adequate returns. But when preparing to corporatise PUB, the Government had not realised that in PUB's case, this differed significantly from the commercial measures of return on total assets or return on equity.”
“Firstly, to enable them to operate as flexibly and efficiently as their private sector counterparts. Secondly, to give Singaporeans a direct stake in the economy, by acquiring shares in companies which are closely tied to the prosperity of our economy, through the Government's asset enhancement scheme. Sir, asset enhancement cannot be the main motivation for privatisation. The Government has many other avenues for enhancing the assets of Singaporeans, besides selling them shares in privatised companies at a discount. Unless privatising and restructuring the industry makes long-term economic sense and will benefit consumers and the economy as a whole, it should not proceed. In the case of electricity, restructuring enables us gradually to introduce competition into the industry, and generate incentives for the electricity companies to improve their service. The benefits will not show up in the short term, because the PUB was already operating efficiently. But for the longer term, the status quo will not suffice. Our generating capacity is 4.6 GW today. Demand is growing by 8% a year. In 10 years, it will be 10 GW. This will no longer be a small system. PUB has operated a 4.6 GW system efficiently as a monopoly. But there is no guarantee that a monopoly can efficiently operate a system twice this size. Competition between several electricity generating companies will be much more effective than regulation of one monopoly operator. Competition will drive the companies to cut costs, introduce new technology and offer more reliable services and lower tariffs. Northern Ireland, with a capacity of only 2.2 GW, less than half of our present capacity, has already restructured its power system to introduce competition.”
“Ultimately, while the Government can put together schemes and programmes and publicise them, SMEs themselves need to respond and come forward, ie, please read all the many brochures that are being mailed out. The new Productivity and Standards Board (PSB) will set up a "first-stop" centre for SMEs, as I mentioned just now, which will make it even more convenient for small firms to seek assistance. Sir, I think with the establishment of this new centre in the PSB, help is literally just one phone call away. Sir, let me move on to the issue of Singapore Power (SP). The Government's announcement of the need for SP to increase its electricity tariffs by 12 to 14% over the next three to four years, and the deferment of the listing of Singapore Power, has drawn many comments, both inside and outside of the House. The key points raised were: First, why do we need to privatise PUB, especially as I have shown this House just two weeks ago, that PUB was efficient and appears to be doing well? Second, why does SP need to increase electricity tariffs? Some suspected that this is in preparation for the listing of SP. They would rather that the Government not privatise the PUB, thinking that this will remove the need for SP to increase electricity tariffs. Third, what is there to prevent SP from irresponsibly increasing its tariffs in the future, since it is, in effect, still a monopoly? I will address these concerns first before responding to the other questions on SP. First, privatisation. Sir, in some countries, privatisation is a way to reform poorly-run national enterprises or to top up depleted government coffers. Fortunately, Singapore is not in such a predicament. We are privatising statutory boards to achieve other objectives.”
“To ease the cash flow, especially of the smaller firms, the SDF's Training Voucher Scheme and LETAS allow SMEs to pay only the unsupported portion of the fees, instead of the previous practice where they paid the full fees and then waited for the reimbursements later. The SDF has also identified a list of approved courses to help small companies select the appropriate courses to train their staff. Sir, some specific questions: should Government assist small firms, eg, retailers and shops in HDB estates? The answer is yes, we do and we should continue doing so. NPB has been assisting small retail and service businesses, in particular, those located in HDB estates to adapt to economic restructuring by encouraging them to join economic groupings such as franchises. Sir, NPB's survey shows that eight out of 10 HDB franchisees would be able to double their 1992 productivity levels within five years. So far, NPB has helped to create 39 economic groupings in 23 trades which all the existing businesses are free to join. The NPB will continue to identify more selected trades in HDB estates to assist them. Sir, let me conclude by saying that we are not short of assistance schemes to help SMEs. Existing schemes and programmes already address practically every aspect of SME operations. The various agencies have also made their programmes readily accessible, but we will continue to improve on this. If there are still more effective ways to help the SMEs, we will not hesitate to introduce them. And in this regard, we will continue to take in the suggestions of Members here as well as take in the inputs and suggestions from the various trade associations and Chambers of Commerce.”
“In terms of reaching out, Members have asked for a review of how the various Government agencies can reach out more effectively to the SMEs. Sir, if you refer to Table 3 (Cols. 1287 - 1288), our agencies have made extensive efforts to reach to the SMEs. Dr Ow asked if information on the various schemes could be compiled into a booklet in various languages to be distributed through the Chambers of Commerce and the various trade associations. Sir, this has already been done. As I mentioned just now, this whole set of brochures and pamphlets are bilingual and are available in the Chambers of Commerce and the various trade associations. Table 3 - Promotional Activities Carried Out Over Last 3 Years (Cols. 1287 - 1288) He has also asked whether the information could be sent by the Registry of Companies and Businesses to new companies. Sir, this is indeed the practice. Upon registration, each of the 10,000 or so new companies registered each year receives a bilingual booklet describing the range of Government schemes available. Additionally, the SDF has been mailing out trading vouchers and brochures to practically every small business. And to keep companies up to date, a multi-agency newsletter for local enterprises is circulated to more than 7,000 companies each month. This newsletter highlights new schemes and programmes for SMEs and inform them about SME events. Sir, to make this scheme user-friendly to small enterprises, the SDF application procedures have indeed been simplified. This is a concern expressed by Dr Ow. The application form has been simplified to just one page. It is a one-page application form. For the convenience of SMEs, these applications can be submitted through fax, post or electronically through SkillsNet.”
“1287 - 1288) of the handout on SMEs, which shows that the main Government grants and loans extended to our local enterprises have been quite significant. As at 31st December 1995, a total of $128 million in grants have been extended to help more than 3,000 SMEs pay for consultancy services to upgrade their operations; to seek new markets; to map out strategic business plans; and to develop new products and processes. The SMEs which have applied under these schemes have received an average of $39,000 in grants. Table 1 - Grants and Loans Extended to Local Enterprises (Cols. 1287 - 1288) In terms of loans, a total of $4 billion in loans have been approved to help more than 5,000 SMEs buy new equipment or acquire factory buildings, or provide for domestic and export factoring. This works out to an average of $750,000 in loans per SME. On training of workers in SMEs, the Minister of State, Mr Goh Chee Wee, will elaborate further. The data show that all the SMEs with more than 50 employees have made use of the SDF to train their workers. Ninety-nine per cent of SMEs, with between 10 and 49 workers have taken advantage of SDF. Essentially, for all companies with more than 10 workers, we can say that they have all, at one time or another, made use of the SDF. Sir, in total, as at 31st December 1995, 32,000 firms have benefited from the SDF. Dr Wan suggested that preferential treatment be given to SMEs. Sir, some preferential treatment is already being given. This is because, while all schemes that large companies have access to are also open to SMEs, not every scheme open to SMEs is available to the large companies. Many schemes, eg, LEFS and the Local Enterprise Technical Assistance Scheme, are specifically designed to benefit SMEs.”
“They also face greater difficulty getting access to technology, market information, or even expertise in developing their own human resources. Sir, since the mid-70s, our economic agencies have built up a wide array of over 60 schemes and programmes which directly benefit SMEs. We can group them into four major categories. First, financing assistance. These are schemes to help SMEs gain access to funds. One example is the Local Enterprise Financing Scheme (LEFS) whereby low-cost, fixed-rate loans are provided to help SMEs upgrade their operations. Second, Product Development and Operational Upgrading. These schemes help SMEs to improve their products and operations. An example is the Local Industry Upgrading Programme (LIUP), whereby MNCs and large local companies help SMEs to upgrade and expand. We have a few examples of SMEs graduating from the LIUP scheme into successful regional enterprises. Overall, this LIUP scheme has proven to be very useful and successful. 1.00 pm Consultancies help SMEs to gain access to expertise in various aspects of their businesses. For example, the NPB, through its economic grouping effort, has assisted retailers in 22 different retail trades to become more efficient in their management practices. Lastly, regionalisation. I have already mentioned about all these schemes. Basically, these schemes help our SMEs to venture abroad. The Business Development Scheme, which provides grants to help the companies offset the cost of overseas missions in search of investment opportunities, is one such scheme. I would commend more companies to make use of this. Sir, what about the results of all these schemes? The data show that many SMEs have actually taken advantage of these schemes and programmes. I would like to refer Members to Table 1 (Cols.”
“Second, it is not absolutely cost levels per se that we should be concerned with, but whether our cost matches our capabilities. In view of our resource constraints, it is not realistic to hope for costs to fall when the economy is doing so well. The only viable long-term solution is to improve productivity and quality so that our capability rises in tandem with our cost levels. Measures to improve productivity and quality include the Innovation Development Scheme announced in December last year, new incentives to promote development and expansion in the budget and the various schemes by the Singapore Productivity and Standards Board to upgrade the skills level of our workers. Sir, let me move on to the issue of SMEs. As Members have noted, SMEs form an important sector of our economy. In the five major sectors of the economy, namely, manufacturing, commerce, transport and communications, financial and business services, and community, social and personal services which account for 91% of our GDP, SMEs make up 91% of the establishments, employ 42% of the workforce, and produce 23% of the value added. The sector has grown over the years. In manufacturing, the total value added of local enterprises doubled from $2.7 billion in 1987 to $5.4 billion in 1993. Correspondingly, the value-added per worker rose from $27,000 to $44,000 over the same period. Although the growth has been encouraging, the absolute level is still about half of the economy's average. So it shows that SMEs still have quite a fair bit of room for improvement. Sir, the MPs who have spoken have asked that we help SMEs. By definition, SMEs are characterised by their small size and being small, they do face some disadvantages. For example, they find it more difficult getting financing for expansion.”
“Sir, our relative Unit Labour Cost index for the manufacturing sector against the other NIEs rose by 7.1% per annum during 1990 to 1995, and this is lower than the 8.4% per annum in the period 1980 to 1985. I agree with Mr Leong that we should also monitor competitiveness against emerging economies and MTI is already doing so. Dr Ow asked if Singapore remains attractive to foreign investors. Sir, the answer is a definite yes. In 1995, we have attracted a record of $4.85 billion of foreign investment commitments in the manufacturing sector and a record of $930 million of foreign investment commitments in the services sector. Dr Ow and Dr Wan asked about Government measures to moderate cost increases. Sir, some of the measures are (1) the relaxation of the dependency ceiling for foreign workers in late 1994; (2) MTI's review of the formula for pricing industrial land sold to JTC and an increased supply for industrial land which would help to keep down the cost pressures on land; (3) a one-off 25% rebate on property tax in the 1993 budget, followed by three consecutive budgets in which the property tax rate on industrial and commercial properties was reduced by 1 percentage point in 1994, 2 percentage points in 1995 and 1 percentage point in 1996; and (4) three rounds of corporate tax reduction in the 1992, 1993 and 1996 budgets. Sir, let me turn to more general points. First, we must recognise some macro-economic facts. Our estimated supply side growth potential is about 7% per year. Actual growth in the past three years averaged 9.8% per annum. Naturally, the gap of nearly 3 percentage points of growth per year for three years has to show up somewhere in the form of rising costs, appreciating Singapore dollar and a significant increase in the number of foreign workers.”
“Dr Ow asked for reasons, other than labour cost, for the 3.4% increase in the Unit Business Cost (UBC) index for the manufacturing sector in 1995. The main contributors were interest and financial service charges, distribution costs, utilities due to higher fuel costs and rental charges which were due to the expiry of the property tax rebates. It is not true that the public sector has been responsible for most of the cost increases in the last five years. Public sector cost increases accounted for only 0.4 percentage points of the 1.9% per annum average increase in UBC for this period. The public sector cost increases were in turn due to increases in underlying costs, like labour costs or specific social policies, like the need to control the inflow of foreign workers. With regard to this, Mr Stephen Lee proposed that the foreign workers levy be halved in view of the inelastic demand for workers, while Dr Wan asked for control on foreign workers to be relaxed, especially for SMEs. While I appreciate Mr Lee's feedback that demand for foreign workers cannot be completely elastic in the short term, we still need to balance business, economic and social considerations in our foreign worker policy. This explains why the Government uses a combination of pricing and dependency ceilings to control foreign workers. As for SMEs, existing rules already allow services establishments with two to 10 local workers to exceed the 25% dependency ceiling subject to a maximum of 33%. But if Members feel that there are strong justifications to depart from current policy and practices, I am sure the Ministry of Labour will consider them. Sir, Mr Leong asked how our Unit Labour Cost (ULC) compares against our competitors.”
“With regard to the factories, two factories have begun operations and another 20 to 30 factories should start operating by the end of this year. To-date, the CSSD has invested almost US$200 million in the park and excluding the PRC share, our private sector has invested $128 million in the development. Sir, response from investors has been good. 59 investors have committed to invest US$1.8 billion in the industrial park. Among them are 25 MNCs, such as Eli Lilly Pharmaceutical Company, Advanced Micro Devices, Becton Dickinson, Samsung and Harris Semiconductor. We expect more MNCs to become tenants in the park in due course. Mr Low has also asked about the expected returns from the park. Sir, in terms of physical development, this is strictly a commercial venture involving listed as well as non-listed companies. The Government does not have access to their financial and cash flow positions, especially for the listed companies. It would be more appropriate for the figures to come directly from them rather than from the Government. Mr Low also asked whether there are problems. Sir, the developers face typical problems associated with a large and complex development of this nature. On the Chinese side, there were regulatory issues to resolve. However, because this is a project supported by both the Singapore and Chinese governments, the Chinese side was able to resolve these difficult issues very quickly. This is why so much progress has been achieved in a short time since February 1994 when SM Lee and Vice-Premier Li Lanqing signed the agreement on the joint development of SP. Sir, on cost pressures on business, various Members have raised concerns about rising business costs and deteriorating competitiveness and asked what the Government can do to help.”
“As to the Member for Potong Pasir's question on whether the Government would consider making our society more open in order to nurture entrepreneurship, I find this question strange as the Government has never stopped any Singaporean from going into business, either locally or abroad. Indeed, the fact that our private sector has invested $37 billion abroad shows that we are not as short of entrepreneurs as some would like us to believe. Sir, on the prospects for the future with regard to regionalisation, our external economy will continue to grow in line with our regionalisation efforts. Singapore's GNP expanded by 12.5% in 1995 at current market prices. If regional politics remain stable, and I think that is the key, Asia is likely to remain the fastest growth region in the world. The World Bank has forecast that Asia, excluding Japan, will grow by an average of 7% to 8% a year in the next 10 years, almost three times the rate of 2.7% per annum for the OECD countries. Against this backdrop, I am bullish about our regionalisation prospects. Our task is to identify the key growth countries in the region and within each country, the key growth areas and to make this information readily available to our businessmen. Sir, Mr Leong and Mr Low Thia Khiang have asked about Suzhou Industrial Park. The project is proceeding on schedule in both the hardware and software aspects. In terms of the physical development, the joint venture company, China-Singapore-Suzhou Industrial Park Development Company (CSSD), had already acquired 8 sq km of land in the industrial park. Preparation of the land and infrastructure in the start-up area of 3 sq km had been completed. Another 1.7 sq km of land are currently being prepared for marketing.”
“In terms of the Government's assistance to SMEs to regionalise, EDB has eight assistance schemes to help SMEs to regionalise as well as other assistance programmes. All this information is readily available from EDB and they have also been very widely publicised. To-date, over $65 million in loans and grants have been disbursed to local companies. In addition, for those who require venture funds in Singapore, there are $5.4 billion worth of venture funds available, as mentioned a few days ago by the Minister for Finance. We do review the various assistance schemes regularly to ensure that they remain relevant to the needs of our local investors. But we must also avoid having schemes which lead investors to go beyond what normal commercial prudence would dictate. 12.45 pm On whether the Government would consider setting up a central unit to collate information on doing business in the region, TDB's Information Centre already serves this purpose. Efforts are on-going within TDB to build up the information base further. As for a small enterprise board to help SMEs regionalise, when NPB is merged with SISIR, it would be setting up a division specifically to cater for SMEs. And I think this focal point would be able to work even more closely with the SMEs and serve them better. Sir, in promoting regionalisation, the Government is not asking all our SMEs to go abroad. Only those with the capabilities and resources should do so. I have said this many times and I would like to emphasise this again. Our local businesses must be prepared to risk their own resources. Investing overseas can be very profitable but because the profits are high, the risks are also much higher.”
“At the business networking level, the Singapore-France Business Council and the Singapore-Australia Business Alliance Forum were launched. As to the problems and information on pitfalls that are encountered, our businessmen face the problem of lack of transparency in the rules and regulations of the host countries, shortage of qualified managers who are prepared to relocate overseas, difficulties in getting reliable partners overseas and lack of support facilities for families of Singaporeans working abroad. I would like to assure Members that the Government will help the business sector to overcome these problems where possible. For instance, the Export Institute of Singapore already runs courses to prepare Singapore executives and their families for overseas attachments and EDB's INTECH-run scheme has been extended to companies to help defray the cost of training and developing manpower for regional projects. The TDB is also documenting the experiences of our companies into case studies. These studies which will point out the general pitfalls and obstacles of investing in various countries could help our investors shorten their learning curve. The Government will continue to organise regular seminars, conferences and workshops which highlight important issues to consider when venturing abroad. For example, the recent TDB International Day was very well attended. TDB brought back their Centre Directors from all over the world and arranged booths where our local businessmen could make appointments with these directors and on a one-to-one to basis gain first-hand information about the opportunities and the pitfalls. It was very successful and TDB will continue this programme in the years to come.”
“Outside of ASEAN, Hong Kong and China were the most attractive locations with Hong Kong attracting 17.4% of total investments and China 4.5%. It is safe to assume that a substantial portion of the Hong Kong investments were actually made in China. The data show that our investments are quite well spread out and most are in our traditional partners in the ASEAN region. And contrary to popular perception, it is actually in Malaysia where our businessmen have invested most. I must stress that while we have encouraged the private sector to actively explore business opportunities in the region, we should not dictate the flow of private investments. Investments will flow to where the returns are the highest. The financial and manufacturing sectors accounted for $27.3 billion or 73% of our total stock of overseas investments, followed by commerce, 11%; real estate, 7%; transport, 4%; and business services sector, 3%. These figures show that Singapore ventures overseas are, again contrary to popular perception, not primarily in the property sector. With regard to factor income, factor income from abroad in 1995 was S$15.4 billion or 13% of GDP, up from $13.2 billion in 1994 and $12.9 billion in 1993. Our flagship projects in Indonesia and China continued to make good progress. Two new industrial parks, the Bangalore Information Technology Park in India and the Vietnam-Singapore Industrial Park were launched last year. These flagship projects have not only anchored Singapore's presence in the host countries but have also played a significant role in assisting our local companies to regionalise. We have also strengthened the institutional framework for regionalisation by establishing new working mechanisms with Myanmar and with Sichuan and Hubei provinces in China.”
“Sir, let me first thank the speakers who have spoken. On the first topic on regionalisation, I would like to take the questions posed by Dr Ow Chin Hock, Mr Leong Horn Kee, Dr Wong Kwei Cheong, Mr Choo Wee Khiang, Dr Wan Soon Bee, Mr Chiam See Tong and Mr Low Thia Khiang together. Sir, the Government's approach to regionalisation is to let the private sector take the lead and make its own investment decisions based on hard-headed commercial considerations. The Government's role is purely to facilitate the efforts of our companies. This is done through building up strong relations with other governments, organising trade and investment missions to help our companies explore opportunities overseas and creating networking opportunities with third country businessmen. In addition, the Government also provides financial assistance schemes to encourage our companies to invest in the region. Sir, Singapore's regionalisation thrust continued to gather momentum in 1995. The available data support this observation. Within our traditional markets in ASEAN, Singapore was the second largest investor in Thailand, third largest in Malaysia, fifth largest in Indonesia, and the sixth largest in Vietnam. Outside of ASEAN, Singapore was the second largest investor in Myanmar, the fifth largest in China and the tenth largest in India. Singapore's stock of overseas investments as at the end of 1994 stood at $37.3 billion, an increase of 29% from 1993. The ASEAN region remained the most popular location for Singapore investors, accounting for almost 30% of Singapore's total overseas investments. The bulk went into Malaysia which had 21.6% of our total investment, Indonesia, 3.6% and Thailand, 2.9%.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I beg to report that the Committee of Supply has made progress on the Estimates of Expenditure for the financial year 1996/1997, and ask leave to sit again tomorrow.”
“Sir, this tax on utility bills goes to the Government. If Mr Chiam were to refer back to the time when the tax was first implemented, the tax is meant to encourage conservation, since utilities are the biggest users of fuel oil. SINGAPORE MASS RAPID TRANSIT PTE LTD (Publication of financial statement and annual report) 3. Mr Low Thia Khiang asked the Minister for Communications whether the Singapore Mass Rapid Transit Pte Ltd has published its financial statement and annual report.”
“Yes. Whatever tax there is now on utility bills will remain unchanged when SP is privatised.”
“Whatever the present figure is, it will still remain. Mr Chiam See Tong: That means there will still be a tax on electricity.”
“Sir, there is a chart which is not available here, and that is, the return on equity of the regional companies. It shows that the rate of return for the Indonesian utility companies is extremely low.”
“Sir, as I mentioned just now, SP would need to raise its tariffs by 12% to 14% over the next three to four years. I think what Members may also be interested in is to have a picture of what such increases translate into at the individual level. A 5% increase in tariff - we are saying 12% to 14% over three to four years - would mean that the tariff will increase by about 3% to 5% per year. What will the 5% increase in tariff translate into at the household level? For a 3-room flat, a 5% increase in electricity tariff will translate into a bill size increase of $1.40 per month. For a 5-room flat, the 5% tariff increase will translate into $2.20 increase in the SP bill size per month. And for private housing, since they use more electricity, the private households would incur an increase in bill size of $5.30 per month. Mr Cheo Chai Chen (Nee Soon Central)( In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to ask the Minister whether SP has plans to build new power plants. If so, how many new plants will be built and where will they be built? Mr Yeo Cheow Tong: Sir, the Government has under construction at this present moment a new power plant in Tuas. This new power plant would have a generating capacity of 1.2 gigawatts or 1,200 megawatts of electricity and the investment would be in the region of about $1.8 billion for the plant. The plant would be ready and operational in the year 1999.”
“Sir, two reasons. Firstly, wages and land cost are lower. Secondly, their energy costs are also lower, because these are all energy producers as well.”
“The answer to her first question is no, PUB does not owe any more money to the World Bank and therefore we could have moved away from the World Bank's accounting system earlier. Secondly, if SP were not privatised, what would be a reasonable rate of return? A 10%-11% rate of return would be reasonable. In fact, that is close to what PUB was obtaining when it was using the World Bank's system of accounting.”
“Sir, it is not that the tariffs were not set properly. The tariffs in the past were set based on the accounting system that PUB had. And based on that accounting system, PUB appeared to be making very reasonable returns. What was the old accounting system? In earlier years PUB had to borrow from the World Bank. As a World Bank borrower, the World Bank imposes on the borrower the requirement that the borrower must use the World Bank's system of accounting. This is so that all the borrowers have the same system. The World Bank's system, like most public sector systems, was a simpler system of accounting and which did not take into account the working capital and operating capital needs of a company. So when SP was corporatised, and SP used the normal commercial accounting system and standards, all these other operating costs were then captured. And these are real operating costs because the working capital of the company can be very significant. We have to price that capital into it. When SP was corporatised, all these figures came to light, and that was when we realised that the old set of tariffs was based on a different accounting requirement and therefore we should use what is the normal accounting system now, which is being applied to all the statutory boards and all private sector companies.”
“Sir, the proposed increase of 12% to 14% over the next three to four years will result in SP having a return on equity of 10% to 11%. Who owns SP? At the present moment, the SP shares are owned by the Government and this represents assets of the people. Why should we ensure that electricity tariffs are set properly? The main reason is that electricity is consumption. It is better that we price electricity properly and let the people and companies decide on how much to use. For example, if a company wishes to have its building lit up like a Christmas tree the whole day, and is prepared to pay the price, so be it, because it is paying the economic price. If companies feel that they want to save on power, then they can decide to light up for a shorter number of hours. And similarly at home, whether to leave the lights on the whole night or to switch them off when they go out for dinner. This is a decision which is within the capability of each of us to make. So once it is priced properly, we leave the decision to you, because at the end of the day we have not just to import all the fuel but the cost of building new stations is also very, very high. A new power station now costs billions of dollars. So it is better that we price properly and encourage Singaporeans to use electricity efficiently so that we do not have to incur any more expenses than we need to.”
“Sir, the gratuity which has been agreed upon will remain. On the question of retrenchments, I have not heard of any plans to retrench. What SP intends to do is to consolidate the operations and to make sure that the existing staff are deployed meaningfully.”
“With the interest-free loan of $1.7 billion, the return on equity for SP is 7.6%, based on the figures that we currently have. If SP had to borrow, at prime rate, this sum of $1.7 billion, its return on equity will go down to 6.4%. SP will still be profitable. It is just that the return would be lower.”
“Sir, now that we have corporatised SP and the full data are available, I think it is incumbent upon the Government to ensure that the tariffs are correctly priced in order to obtain a reasonable return on this very crucial infrastructure. So whether or not we privatise SP, SP would need to raise its tariffs to obtain a reasonable rate of return. In terms of the privatisation programme, that is a separate matter. As I mentioned just now, the tariffs will have to be correctly set regardless of this privatisation programme. But the main reason for privatisation is to enable Singaporeans to have a direct stake in the economy. This is part of the asset enhancement programme of the Government. We will decide on the privatisation of SP in the coming years.”
“Sir, this is an interim measure. The Government will extend the interest-free loan to SP for a few years. SP is still in the process of finalising their accounts and their accounts will be ready in a few months' time and we will know the actual picture. Over the next few years, as SP's operations are consolidated, and as the figures become more readily available, we will review whether we need to continue giving the interest-free loan. Mr John De Payva (Nominated Member): Is the Minister aware that the vast majority of Singaporeans would prefer to keep the old structure of PUB where they pay lower tariffs as opposed to paying higher tariffs to Singapore Power so that Singapore Power can be attractively profitable and it could then go on to pay good dividends to shareholders, some of whom may not even be Singaporeans? If this is so, what justification is there to list Singapore Power and what are the advantages to the Singaporean?”
“Sir, as the charts show, the former PUB had actually run a very tight ship in terms of capacity per employee, sales per employee, thermal efficiency, etc. So it has already been performing well. But I think there is still room for improvement. As SP regionalises and as they gain access to different modes of operation, I think they should be able to transfer those lessons to their operations in Singapore. We hope to see SP continue to improve on the foundations that PUB handed to them. Secondly, in terms of the gearing, Mr Lee has asked about the impact of the borrowings on the bottom line. Sir, when we corporatised SP and SP geared up to 30%, the Government actually provided SP with an interest-free loan of $1.7 billion, rather than requiring SP to go out into the commercial market to borrow. So in actual fact, the interest-free loan of $1.7 billion represents a subsidy of over $100 million a year to SP.”
“This revaluation was necessary, for SP's accounts to reflect accurately the true costs of producing and distributing electricity to Singaporeans. The land occupied by power stations and SP's office buildings represent scarce and valuable resources, especially in Singapore. There is a high opportunity cost to using them. This cost is as much part of the cost of producing and distributing electricity, as the fuel oil and natural gas which the power stations consume. SP's profitability is low primarily because of the low electricity tariffs. Our tariffs are lower than many countries in the region, even though our land and labour costs are higher than most countries. SP will continue to improve its efficiency and productivity, and to control costs internally to improve profitability. However, this is unfortunately not sufficient. It is therefore also necessary to raise electricity tariffs by 12-14% over 3-4 years, to correctly reflect the full economic costs of producing and distributing electricity in Singapore.”
“Their Report gave the following reasons to support their conclusion: (a) PUB's electricity tariff has fallen in real and nominal terms over the past 10 years; (b) PUB has been able to finance additional capacity required without increasing its long term debt even though tariffs have fallen; (c) PUB has efficiently run, well-maintained power generation stations and a sophisticated dispatch system; (d) power losses are very low - the standard of system security is high; (e) unit costs of customer services activities are low; and (f) manning levels have declined although the electricity undertaking has grown by all normal measures of output and activity levels, including maximum demand, energy supplied and customers connected. Some Singaporeans have commented that SP's profitability may be low because SP is over-capitalised or its assets have been over-valued. This is not the case. SP is not over-capitalised. We restructured SP's balance sheet upon corporatisation to give it a gearing ratio of one-third. This is a prudent balance between debt and equity. It gives SP enough shareholder funds to invest and grow without over-capitalising the company. Normally, increasing the gearing of a company will improve its return on equity (ROE) because the cost of borrowing is lower than what the company can earn on its shareholder funds. But in SP's case, this increased gearing only improved its ROE very slightly, because SP's return on equity had been low - only slightly higher than its borrowing costs. On the question of asset valuation, SP's land and buildings were revalued to market value upon corporatisation. The valuations were done by an independent property consultant, Jones Lang Wootton, with inputs from the Chief Valuer.”
“Thank you, Sir. As I was saying just now, I am satisfied that the former PUB Electricity and Gas Departments, and now SP, have been operating efficiently. The Clerk of Parliament has distributed the comparative charts (Cols. 749 - 762) and Members may wish to refer to them. charts - (A) Comparison of Productivity Indicators with Regional Power Companies, (B) SP's Electricity Supply Reliability Indicators (Cols. 749 - 762) Firstly, in comparison with other utility companies, SP ranks among the best in terms of many performance measures: electricity produced and sold per employee; installed capacity per employee; thermal efficiency, unit cost, and losses in transmission and distribution. Secondly, the reliability of SP's supply is also high and has been improving steadily year by year. This is so whether measured in terms of system interruption time, supply interruptions per day, interruptions per 1,000 customers, or interruption duration. Thirdly, The World Competitiveness Report has ranked Singapore best in the world for having a power supply infrastructure which meets business requirements. Fourthly, in December 1994, MTI commissioned an independent review of PUB's Electricity Department, in preparation for its corporatisation as Singapore Power. The review was done by Deloitte & Touche, who had been consultants to the British Government when it privatised the electricity industry in Britain, and were therefore experts in this area. Deloitte & Touche concluded that the PUB Electricity Department had been managed and operated efficiently.”
“Sir, I am satisfied that the former PUB Electricity and Gas Departments, and now SP, have been operating efficiently. I am requesting the Clerk to hand out the comparative charts for Members' reference. Mr Speaker, while waiting for the charts, could we proceed to the next Question first and I will take up this Question in a few minutes' time?”
“Vasoo asked the Acting Minister for Community Development whether there are plans to increase the number of child care centres and review the grants for such centres. The Acting Minister for Community Development (Mr Abdullah Tarmugi): Mr Speaker, Sir, the Ministry will set up more child care centres to meet the needs of parents who require the service. As at the end of October 1995, there were 376 child care centres with 29,343 places. By the end of FY 95, the target is to provide 402 centres with a total capacity of 30,562 places. The target set for FY 96 is 434 centres to provide for 32,642 places. The Ministry continually monitors the demand for child care services and sets up centres in tandem with demand. As for grants, Sir, child care centres set up by voluntary welfare organisations, non-profit organisations and workplaces receive capital grants for equipment and furnishings and for conversion costs. Grants are adequate and MCD will review them periodically as the need arises. Then there is a child care subsidy for working mothers which was increased from $130 to $150 for full day care and from $65 to $75 for half day care with effect from April this year. This amounts to a $6.24 million increase in the budget for child care subsidy bringing the total to $40.82 million. Child care subsidies are reviewed on a regular basis in order to keep child care fees affordable and to make them attractive for working mothers to use child care centres.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the electronics industry grew by 23% in 1993, 22% in 1994 and 16% in January-September 1995. This is due to strong global demand for electronic products like personal computers, disk drives and semiconductors. However, not all segments did well. The consumer electronics segment declined by 4.6% in the first nine months of this year after expanding by 26% in 1994. It is difficult to forecast growth accurately as the electronics industry is fast-moving and volatile. However, based on available information, the outlook appears good. Most analysts expect strong growth to continue up to the first half of 1996 because of the boom in personal computers and the present global shortage of components such as semiconductors. The latest survey of business expectations also shows that a net balance of 39% of electronics firms expect business to improve in the last quarter of 1995 and the first quarter of 1996, compared with 27% in the same period last year. We can expect double-digit growth for 1995 and 1996, though not as high as in 1994. Over the longer-term, the prospects for the global electronics industry are good. Dataquest predicts that the global electronics demand will hit US$1.3 trillion by the year 2000. This represents an average annual growth rate of 8.7% over the period 1995-2000, compared to 7.4% over the period 1989-94. In addition, the Asia-Pacific's share of the global electronics demand will also grow from 19% in 1994 to 27% in the year 2000. By continuing to upgrade their core capabilities and moving into high value-added products, our electronics companies will be in a good position to benefit from this world-wide boom. CHILD CARE CENTRES (Review of grants) 2. Dr S.”
“Spending of Singaporeans on gambling is recorded under private consumption expenditure as expenditure on recreational activities. NURSES (Salary) 11. Mr Cheo Chai Chen asked the Minister for Health whether there is any plan to increase the salary of nurses. BG George Yong-Boon Yeo: The salaries of Ministry of Health nurses were last revised in January 1994. The salaries of Assistant Nurses and Senior Assistant Nurses were again revised in September 1994. The starting salaries of nurses with polytechnic diplomas are comparatively better than for other grades of appointment in the Civil Service at diploma level entry points, such as Teachers, Executive Officers, Technical Officers and Senior Immigration Officers. The Ministry monitors the salaries of nurses and will review these when necessary to ensure that the nursing service remains attractive and rewarding. SEMBAWANG SHIPYARD EXPLOSION 12. Mr Cheo Chai Chen asked the Minister for Labour whether the investigation into the explosion at the Sembawang Shipyard on 9th August 1994 is completed and, if so, what are the findings.”
“Since the launch of the Stall Ownership Scheme in April 1994, the Ministry of the Environment has been monitoring the prices of market produce and hawker food in the four HDB hawker centres under the first phase of the Scheme. Its price watch showed that the prices of hawker food in purchased stalls were comparable to those in rented stalls in other hawker centres. The prices of market produce have remained unchanged except for seasonal fluctuations. The public has also benefited from better services and a wider variety of produce being sold. The Ministry of the Environment will continue to monitor the trend of food prices. In addition, my Ministry through the Department of Statistics tracks the prices of market produce and hawker food regularly. This is part of the effort in monitoring inflation. These price data are released monthly for public information. Such on-going monitoring of prices serves to safeguard the interests of Singaporeans from undue escalation in food prices. PRIVATE CONSUMPTION EXPENDITURE (Gambling) 10. Mr Low Thia Khiang asked the Minister for Trade and Industry whether the spending of Singaporeans on gambling (for example, buying of 4-D) was captured under Private Consumption Expenditure.”
“This was especially so among locals, whose visitorship dropped from 218,000 when the exhibition first opened in 1989 to less than 40,000 a year during the last 4 years. This reflects the need for continued arts promotion among Singaporeans by the Government and interested cultural groups. FOREIGN WORKER RATIO IN ELECTRONICS INDUSTRY 8. Mr Cheo Chai Chen asked the Minister for Labour what is the employment ratio of foreigners to locals in the electronics industry.”