Zainul Abidin Rasheed
Singapore
“I think much has been done as far as recovery is concerned, and the Japanese government itself is now paying due attention to reconstruction. Just at the Jakarta meeting, in fact, there was a lot of sharing of what has been done, and while they are grateful, they also look forward to us working together in terms of the reconstruction.”
“Kelp that he had met Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew when Mr Lee visited Moscow in 1970. Even though then Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew at that time showed an interest to learn from the Soviet socialist system, he changed his mind after visiting the Soviet Union and made changes to the political system and the system of governance in Singapore…”
“In my opinion, the measures and programmes to achieve progress are quite visible and numerous. The Community Leaders’ Forum network continues to develop. What else should be given attention to, especially in relation to dysfunctional families and divorce cases?”
“I found the Malay workers in the Middle East very encouraging. This is one of the best opportunities for us in this new area. Finally, the three-prong Government measure is to ensure that every citizen will continue to contribute towards the development of Singapore to ensure that every Singaporean will be given the best opportunity to en…”
“Sir, I believe ASEAN's credibility does not just hinge on Myanmar. ASEAN's credibility has been built over the years and we have shown a lot of credibility in many areas in terms of international relations.”
“As the President has said, when we take advantage of the existing opportunities through globalisation, we must also pay attention to the fact that these new opportunities should not result in a wide income gap.”
The complete record
Every one of 455 lines we hold for Zainul Abidin Rasheed, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 9 of 10.
“Thank you, Mr Speaker, Sir, for allowing me to join in this discussion. While Mr Jeyaretnam found it interesting, I find it reassuring. I notice that Mr Jeyaretnam has taken the opportunity to cocok a bit. I think Mr Jeyaretnam understands the meaning of cocok, which is to try and take advantage of the situation.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, there are two points I mentioned in that statement. One is for CDCs to monitor the situation at the grassroots level, in terms of the effects of the economic turmoil in the region and once it is felt by the people who are retrenched and they are feeling the hardship, the CDC will be close enough to the ground to monitor and see what kind of problems the economic situation has created. The other point is in terms of coordinating the programmes and the Government could help either through NTUC or the Ministry of Manpower and the CDC, again being close to the ground, could also help to coordinate these programmes.”
“These projects initiated by NTUC and supported by EDB, PSB, ITE and Polytechnics show promise and should therefore be given further financial boost. And I am not talking of a token allocation. This should be a big billion dollar item for the medium and longer term. The Government should team up with the labour movement and employers to instil a greater sense of urgency for worker training and upgrading. This calls for a significant commitment from the Government in terms of funding. More could and must be done for worker training and skills upgrading, through SRP particularly. Now that the cool, calm and collected Dr Richard Hu is back in the House, I hope he will be creative in dishing out a sum that will help reflect and send a "collective will" message that we are serious about skills upgrading. After all this, we want our workers and economy to come out leaner and fitter and, in fact, more resilient.”
“We know that there is this promise of off-Budget measures if and when the situation worsens but Singaporeans are anxious to see the kind of immediate signals the Government would be willing to show or give in terms of budgetary/fiscal measures to help alleviate the position of those affected, especially those from the lower-middle and lower income groups. One area of immediate concern is the fate of workers who may be retrenched, which we are told, whose numbers will increase. There is room for more assurances and concrete programmes to help them. The Government should also consider funding CDCs to monitor the situation at the grassroots level and to coordinate the assistance programme necessary. This of course could be done in conjunction with the new Ministry of Manpower and NTUC. Of course, we would like to see help being given especially to those who want to be helped. Generally, I gather Singaporeans have three to six months of savings, and when the situation worsens, especially for those retrenched, what kind of safety net can we help them with, without of course succumbing to welfarism. In this context, many workers and union leaders are also wondering what signals the Government is sending for worker training and skills redevelopment. It is hardly visible in the 1998 Budget. In fact, a most marked omission. More can and should be done for skills upgrading. The Skills Redevelopment Programme (SRP) deserves more attention and financial back-up. SRP is currently helping to speed up development of a national skills certification and recognition system in Singapore and promote industry-wide collaboration in skills upgrading and certification.”
“However, since these are high growth sectors, the ripple effect will be felt by many, not only in `Shenton Way' but also by workers at large. True to Singapore's economic development philosophy, we find spending money on productive forces more effective than on the consumptive nature. Put simply, it follows more of teaching them to fish rather than providing the fish itself on a silver platter. That, I agree, is a good line for a better catch. Nevertheless, my concern is, do enough Singaporeans appreciate and understand the seriousness of the ongoing regional and economic turmoil since last July. As Dr Hu suggested in his first two sentences of the Budget Statement, Singapore's 7.8% growth in the economy in 1997 did not reflect the seriousness of the situation. The question now is: does the proposed 1998 Budget help to do so? Yes, there is less surplus. Yes, there is more on development spending. Yes, there is tax relief for selected sectors. Yes, Dr Hu has promised more help in case of any "sudden downturn", but could not more be done now to help drive home the point about the seriousness of the situation and to better prepare the population to take advantage of the opportunities later? We can also ask: is the Budget not too prudent? When we are expecting a possible growth rate as low as 2.5%, should not more pump-priming be done? Do we need all the over $2 billion surplus in difficult times? Surely, we do not want to be caught again like in the mid-80s. For example, why was the individual tax rebate for Year of Assessment 1998 be reduced by half to 5% only? Many people are asking: is that the way the Government wishes to help when times were to get difficult because of the currency and economic turmoil in the region?”
“" But, like Dr Lee Tsao Yuan, Mr Inderjit Singh and many others, I would rather like to see more of those off-Budget measures soon. I agree with the comment that we do not need a `crisis' budget, but neither should we be near `complacent' about the possible effects of the economic uncertainties of the region. In the words of the cool, calm and collected Dr Richard Hu, this economic outlook is "volatile and unpredictable." We need to continue to monitor the situation closely and respond accordingly. After all, being nimble has always been Singapore's forte. But allow me to reiterate, the signs are telling us that we would be better off with the off-Budget measures sooner than later. Mr Speaker, Sir, it was only eight months ago that quite a few Members in the House questioned the need for the Government to keep such a large current surplus for Fiscal Year 1997, suggesting more could be done with the money to help the business and the people to be more productive. Dr Hu stood his ground, reminding us of the need for prudence. Lo and behold, soon after the debate, regional events began to unfold exposing the fragile nature of the region's financial foundation. The currency and economic turmoil that followed was unprecedented. The ramifications are serious and the full effects are yet to unfold. Now, the budget surplus proposed for Fiscal Year 1998 was reduced by about 50% compared to Fiscal Year 1997, ie, from $5.09 billion to $2.73 billion. This looks credible. This, I believe, is for good reasons. It has allowed a budget that will result in a 25% increase in development spending and selected tax reliefs, especially in property and banking.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, after hearing Mr David Lim, I would like to venture to answer his question, whether we need to be a nation of road-sweepers. I think we would not need to be a nation of road-sweepers. I do not think we need to. Neither do I want to appear sweeping the issue under the carpet, for I agree with him that the issue is not just about scholarships and bond-breaking, but it is about our greater values, our social and national bonding. And I trust there will be another occasion, perhaps with all those who have spoken on this matter present, and we will thrash it out once and for all, for it is a very important issue, and I think we should not take it lightly. Sir, I rise in support of the Budget presented by our respected Finance Minister, Dr Richard Hu. Sir, all kinds of labels have been given to Dr Hu and his budget over the years that the latter must by now surpass many of the clever images and adjectives chosen for branded goods normally given by the media and the commercial jargon. As Mr Lim Boon Heng, Minister without Portfolio and Secretary-General of the NTUC, said in the latest NTUC News, why call it prudent, as though Dr Hu's Budget had been imprudent previously. True, the Finance Minister has always been prim and proper, and precise to the needs of the day. We also know that Dr Hu is no prima donna. Dr Hu has always been patient and open to suggestions and we therefore appeal to his good sense to prevail. And also since Dr Hu has promised that the Budget is not the-all, and that the Government will respond with off-Budget measures, we stand reassured. After all, Dr Hu said, "we have more than adequate resources to cope with any eventuality.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, may I seek a clarification from the Minister for Communications regarding revenue neutrality for this exercise. I read from the Minister for Finance's Statement that overall the Government expects to achieve revenue neutrality for this exercise in about eight years. Is this the target set and whether in fact the new charges levied will be reviewed and increased or decreased depending on the target set in terms of eight years? Also on the question of revenue neutrality, whether in fact that should be a target by itself or whether it cannot be based on a formula of net gain for road users if traffic usage on the road is under better control.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, may I ask the Deputy Prime Minister to elaborate, in the light of the uncertainty about the economic crisis in Indonesia and the uncertainty related to the mechanism that will be applied, including the question of the currency board and IMF package, whether there is continuing dialogue and consultation between the Indonesian authorities and Singapore and, if not, whether there is a need for a machinery to ensure that there is proper understanding between our offer and conditions. BG Lee Hsien Loong: We are in close contact with the Indonesian government. He can be sure that our Ambassador in Jakarta is a very busy man right now. But the Indonesian government has many preoccupations and the trade guarantee is only one of them.”
“Sir, I am personally reassured by the measures taken by the Government on the haze. I would like to ask whether, in fact, it is sufficient to have just one measure for the whole of Singapore. Because there were occasions when we saw that the PSI was below 70 PSI but it looked as though it was above 100.”
“(3) People's expectations. Yes, PAP MPs have done well in bringing up issues and speaking up on pertinent and very critical issues. Nevertheless, they are still seen as Government and PAP MPs and the people would like to see other viewpoints expressed by people whom Singaporeans consider as neutral. Thus, I think the NMPs can play that role. So I think we must allow them to help us make this Parliament more efficient and more representative and the NMPs have a role to play to contribute towards the efficacy of Parliament.”
“Sir, thank you for giving me this opportunity to speak up on this Bill. I stand in support of the Bill. But first let me say that I have a lot of respect for Dr Tan Cheng Bock. He is a man of vast experience, very measured, very balanced. Thus, I seek his indulgence to disagree with him. I know he is the leader of my Southeast Asia Parliamentary Group. So I hope he would not send me to Siberia for disagreeing here! I am one who has been through racial riots. I was almost killed in one, and I know what it means in terms of racial harmony. On the point about making a mockery of MPs who have worked hard to get elected, I think Dr Tan will agree that Cheng San MPs are those who actually went through a hard battle and we won the battle convincingly. But for one of those who belongs to the Cheng San GRC, I say I am in support of this Bill. I see no harm in that because we have seen the track record of NMPs. I remember sometime back when some of my friends were considering me as an NMP and I was sternly warned by some of my close friends, they challenged me. They said: Never go by the back-door if you want to go to Parliament. Such were the strong emotions of my friends. But having seen the performance of our NMPs, I stand here in support of that and I give three reasons. (1) As I said earlier, the track record of the NMPs. Perhaps not all, but I dare say many, if not most of the NMPs in the previous terms, have proven their worth and they have played a very important role in making the concept work. (2) The track record of former Opposition MPs. I think we will agree that one of the reasons why, in fact, two of the former Opposition MPs lost the last election was because of their dismal performance in Parliament. So the people have spoken and I think it is a good indicator.”
“Sir, a point of clarification. Before that, I would like to thank the Senior Minister of State for Education for his comprehensive answer. I am sorry if Encik Hawazi and myself, being two ex-journalists, had scooped the Senior Minister of State by showing the two magazines just now. We could not resist highlighting such a good piece of work. The Senior Minister of State just now mentioned about the number of ITE graduates who had joined the polytechnics. He mentioned about 400, which is about 10% of the total intake per year. My question is: does he see that 400 as a steady state or does he see that number growing in the longer term? This is the number of ITE graduates who would qualify to go for polytechnic education. The second point of clarification is whether ITE would consider mature students to do ITE courses in the light of the plight of daily-rated workers raised by Mr Sinnakaruppan the other day. Can these workers attend courses so that they can improve their chances of earning higher income?”
“So in terms of application, Chinese can be used internationally in the same way as English in order to ensure that we can keep abreast of the economic trend and to ensure that our young citizens can go regionalized to China and Hong Kong and other parts of the region. 1.15 pm”
“The young and talented executives from the enterprises, the industrial and commercial fields, as well as the public sector have gone to China to develop their business or to serve in various capacities. These people had put in at least 10 years studying the Chinese language during their school days. Yet, when they come to business dealings, they discover that the amount of Chinese they had acquired was very inadequate for business or official purposes. I understand that many people who have gone overseas or worked overseas had experienced the problem of not being able to handle the Chinese language used in contracts and other legal or business documents. This shows the importance of Chinese. It is not something that can be picked up easily from daily conversations or watching TV and movies. I therefore urge the Ministry of Education to place more emphasis on mother tongue education and encourage the students to learn, read and write more Chinese so that they will be able to use it when necessary. We should introduce into our curriculum Business Chinese as a subject at either `O' level or `A' level, for the benefit of those who are interested. We should also emphasise the importance of the Chinese language as a means of communication in business dealings. We cannot leave the Chinese Language as just an examination subject. Communications technology has progressed a lot. Unlike the past, with fascimile, international long-distance calls, Internet, etc., the Chinese language can easily be transmitted electronically to all parts of the world at the touch of the fingers.”
“ITE, too, Sir, has distributed these two books, as shown by Mr Hawazi. "ITE courses for GCE "N" holders" is very attractive. In fact, the opportunities shown inside are very inviting. This other booklet, "I did it my way" is not only very well done, but it reflects some of the success stories. Whether it is Eric Chua, Lilian Chee or Nadarajan or Mohammed Abu Bakar, they all constitute some form of heroes for the ITE students. I hope they will inspire ITE students to even achieve more. Nevertheless, what is the Ministry doing to ensure that we continue to maximize the potential in the ITE students? What more can MOE do to make them more marketable and relevant? MOE indeed should provide them more opportunities to upgrade their education and skills either through the polytechnic or through other diploma levels of education. Mr Peh Chin Hua (Jalan Besar)( In Mandarin): Sir, in Singapore, we are all aware of the importance of bilingualism. Our students put in much effort in learning English and their respective mother tongues. Today, in view of the strong economic growth in the Asia Pacific region, I feel that we should revitalize our bilingual policy. Greater emphasis should be placed on the use of the mother tongue. Following the reform and open door policies of China and the reunification of Hong Kong with China, China has grown rapidly in her economic development. In the past, we thought of learning our mother tongue to preserve our cultural values. Today, the Chinese language has also a strong economic value. The Chinese language will have greater practical value in the Asia Pacific region and will continue to further enhance its importance in the next 10 to 15 years. Many Singaporeans who have worked overseas have realized the importance of the Chinese language.”
“Before I speak on my topic, I hope you would allow me to congratulate Mr Ravindran for being the first to speak in Tamil in this new term of ours. I think it shows that multi-racialism and multi-lingualism is still very much alive in this House. Rumbe nandri, Mr Ravidran. The last two words in Tamil mean terima kasih or xie xie ni. Sir, we have just heard from our DPM, Dr Tony Tan, about the challenges of our tertiary education. Now, allow me to speak on the other end of the spectrum, ie, ITE education, an area of growing importance too. I remember when Dr Ahmad Mattar was appointed Minister in charge of vocational education a long time ago, some Malay community leaders were upset, thinking that it would set the children's mind low on ambition. Naturally, all parents want their children to aim high, as Mr Loh Meng See just told us too, to go to the university, if possible. Unfortunately, not everyone can, naturally. But nurture we must, to ensure from each his best. The important thing is that we have an education system that optimises every student's full potential, no matter at what level. Thus, Minister RAdm Teo Chee Hean's vision and mission statement about the education policy yesterday is indeed reassuring. Thus, I was happy to note that the ITE will be spending $9,167 per student. This is more than double the money spent on a secondary education student, which is at $4,805, and three times that of a primary student, which is $3,302. In fact, it is even higher than the subsidy for each polytechnic student at $8,659. I do hope that the ITE students (and their parents) realise how much the MOE is spending time and money on them. The media has done its part to highlight the ITE success stories and I hope they will continue to motivate them to greater heights.”
“With voluntary organisations. I suppose self-help groups would come under voluntary organisations too. Sir, if time is pressing, I will just pass.”
“I wanted a clarification from the Minister on his comments about the collaboration between his Ministry and the voluntary organisations. Would you allow that, Sir?”
“I thought he may want to reply together.”
“I wish to have a clarification on your comments just now regarding the cooperation between the Ministry and the voluntary organisations.”
“Sir, before the Minister answers, can I just quickly ask a point of clarification? This is on the Ministry's cooperation with self-help groups, particularly the ethnic self-help groups like Mendaki, AMP, CDAC and SINDA. In view of their potential, will the Ministry weigh the level of cooperation between the Ministry and those self-help groups?”
“Sir, talking about markets remind me about eggs again. Earlier on, I was asking that we should not put all our eggs in one basket. But with my simple taste, I hope Prof. Low Seow Chay would not mind that I do not really need branded eggs. It has been some years now since the Government reviewed its policy to stop building wet markets. What is the progress to-date? In my walkabouts, since last December, one recurring request by many housewives is the need to have more markets and cooked food centres convenient to their residence. Is there any plan for a wet market in the Cheng San GRC and/or other areas? I would like to urge MND to consider building one in the Punggol East area. Will a multi-storey car park near Punggol Primary School be a suitable site to have a wet market and a cooked food centre, like the one proposed for Serangoon North area of Jalan Kayu division? Will the Government also encourage supermarket operators to include wet markets in their premises like "The Pasar" concept in some of the NTUC Fairprice outlets?”
“Sir, conservation of old buildings is progressing at a very impressive pace indeed. We can be proud of the levels of achievement in those conservation works. It is proof that they can be an economic asset and not a liability. The building conservation programme first started "modestly" with 38 shophouses in Tanjong Pagar, and has since moved on to Chinatown, Little India and Kampong Glam. The Bussorah Street Mall restoration is idyllic. Indeed, the first Heritage Signboard unveiled more than two years ago speaks of the surrounding area and its history with much pride. However, with more and more of the surrounding area getting restored, the historic Sultan Palace will stand out like a sore thumb. Are plans in store to bring the Istana Kampong Glam back to its original grace? Can the Government help expedite the process? This national heritage should not be allowed to lag behind others in its restoration, not only for Singapore but for the region and the world to enjoy. With your indulgence, Sir, I was reminded by the earlier discussion about the Nanyang Arch and Lieutenant Adnan's Memorial, and the thought flashed my mind then how I wished to see a day when, in fact, our heritage, whether Chinese or Malay, the interests of those heritage are represented, not necessarily from the same community, same ethnic background, but in fact from the other ethnic backgrounds. Like in the case of the Nanyang Arch, for example, although I am a non-Chinese, I could feel the passion and importance of the Arch being restored and preserved. Similarly, for the Lieutenant Adnan's Memorial. In that context, Sir, I am raising the question of the Kampong Glam Istana as a Singaporean, and I hope it will be seen in that context.”
“Sir, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.”
“Sir, the Malayan Railway land has been at the centre of a controversy lately. I do not want to go into the intricacies and the question marks that have arisen regarding the use or abuse of the land by squatters, but just to ask whether MND is in any way involved in the settling of the problem. I see a budget for FY97 allowing for "clearance of squatters on Malayan Railway". I am sure many Singaporeans would like to see the matter resolved as early as possible, and I wonder whether there has been any movement on this subject. Mr Koo Tsai Kee: Sir, I thank the Member again for giving me the opportunity to clarify the issue which has appeared in the newspapers recently. Since 1990, URA and PWD have been working with KTM very closely to clear the squatters along the KTM Railway Line. The exercise was completed in April 1993, four years ago. In April this year, KTM and its lawyers issued eviction notices to the squatters who have resurfaced on its land. There have since been no squatter activities on the land, although some debris and small temporary structures still remain. Some users, however, have attempted to get back into the land to make use of the facilities left behind. KTM has taken action to warn against illegal use of the sites and will remove the structures.”
“Sir, I thank the Parliamentary Secretary for the answer.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head U of the Main Estimates be reduced by $10 in respect of Code UG 2100. Sir, land reclamation is one of the success stories of our tiny Singapore, where land is indeed scarce. The range of uses for reclaimed land has also grown, from housing to roads to airport. The latest, as in the FY97 budget, is for the North East Coast Scheme from Pasir Ris to Seletar. I remember being told once that Singapore has about reached its maximum in terms of land reclamation. My question is: is this true? Has new technology and new needs made it imperative for MND to review its position? MND should study further other potentials for land reclamation, especially around the shores of the Southern Islands and also the Northern shores, in view of the possible replacement of the Causeway with a bridge, opening new visions for greater use of the area for housing and recreational facilities.”
“MND should also consciously encourage imports of food and related imports to spread their net wider to avoid being over-dependent on a few sources, especially for the import of basic essentials. MND should also consider providing incentives for food importers to widen their sources as this will give us sufficient ballast not to be over-dependent on any few countries. Sir, on the fish wholesale market, before Raffles opened Singapore as a trading port, the islanders' main occupation was fishing. Today that vocation is done by a tiny fraction of the population. In the light of the need to diversify our sources of food supply, they play an important role. Today, local fish production accounts for only 10% of the total fish supply of Singapore. Although this could easily be replaced by imports, I am glad to see that the Government has decided to maintain a home base to serve the local fishing fleet. This is evident from the relocation of the Punggol Fish Market to Senoko. What is the progress of the relocation work, if I may ask, and what assistance has the Government given to those affected by the relocation? Since the Government has decided to retain this vanishing trade, MND should consider providing incentives for the fishermen to upgrade, possibly with new vessels and new technology. With the opening of the new Senoko base, would MND support the provision of immigration and customs facilities there to facilitate foreign fishing vessels to trade and thus enhancing the role and value of Senoko as a new fishing base?”
“Sir, my contribution is not on cruelty to animals but food for thought and food for the tummy. It is about diversifying sources of food supply. Sir, may I first declare my interest in the sense that I am working for NTUC Fairprice, although I think many of you will realise that Fairprice is an NTUC Cooperative committed to playing a social role to keep the price of basic essentials low. Land and water have often enough been cited as scarce and therefore of strategic interest to Singapore. I think the production and import of food deserve more attention as a matter of strategic interest too. The imports of food exceed $5 billion a year. Singapore is heavily dependent on overseas suppliers of meat, fish, vegetables, fruits and eggs. The question is, are we putting all our eggs in one basket or too few baskets? I believe less than 10% of what we eat here is actually produced locally. While this is understandable because of the shortage of land, had we really exhausted all possibilities of encouraging and facilitating production of food locally? What is the progress of our efforts at exploiting agrotechnology to maximise local food production? The Sunday Times story yesterday, which I have here, on deep sea fish farming is indeed reassuring, as it will eventually supply 40% of Singapore's fish supply. I would like to urge MND to introduce programmes, including tax incentives, if possible, to encourage more Singaporeans to engage in food production locally. More should also be done to encourage the local food producers to start farms overseas in order to diversify our sources of food supply.”
“Sir, may I, by clarification, ask the Minister on the ethnic integration policy? I am reassured that the Minister is very sensitive to the consequences of that policy as far as the minorities are concerned, and in the process of reviewing the policy, would the Minister look at it from two perspectives? One is, as the Minister said just now, to look at the mechanism where they can help minority groups who are affected by that policy. The other is that while we all recognise the social cost behind that policy in achieving a better spread of our population, in terms of ethnic distribution and integration, will the Minister also consider looking at alleviating that economic price that has resulted from the social policy? I know that sometimes we have to make sacrifices to achieve a greater goal. Could the Minister also consider in helping with the financial assistance to alleviate that economic price?”
“Sir, the mission statement of National Development reads, "to facilitate the physical development of Singapore through rational, far-sighted planning." I think, Sir, even the Minister for National Development will agree with me that it is a gross under-statement. Because if you just look at housing, HDB has tremendous effect on the life of Singaporeans even with the social and political ramifications. As the biggest landlord, it also can determine who your neighbours are, who your friends are and perhaps even who you marry. May I, however, focus on the policy of ethnic capping on purchases of flats, Sir? I personally see the rationale for that policy as it has very important ramifications in terms of distribution of population, multi-racialism and better understanding of Singaporeans and even your MPs. May I, however, ask the Minister to enlighten us as to the effect of that policy? What is its progress? Has it brought about the objective intended and whether, in fact, there will come a time to review such a policy and, if it is so, when?”
“Sir, I withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.”
“Sir, I am reassured by the mechanism in place. But may I ask the Ministry whether in fact they have started to anticipate the kind of problems that may come with the impending changes and whether they will work closely with the unions to pre-empt those problems?”
“For example, tripartite participation is reflected in the composition of many tripartite committees formed to study important industrial relations issues that are of concern to the Government, employers and the workers. The Minister has just reported on the recommendations of the Tripartite Committee on the Extension of the Retirement Age. Sir, through tripartite participation, workers and employers' feedback, concerns and proposals are carefully considered in the formulation of our labour policies. Tripartite participation and consensus have ensured that solutions formulated could be smoothly implemented. Sir, my Ministry will continue to work in partnership with employers, workers and trade unions to strengthen labour-management cooperation to ensure that Singapore continues to enjoy industrial peace, achieve economic growth and enhance the well-being of all Singaporeans.”
“For example, it is not uncommon for a company which has a large number of workers to be retrenched, to approach my Ministry for assistance in anticipation that the retrenchment exercise may give rise to problems with the workers affected or their union. Sir, depending on the circumstances, my Ministry will discuss with the company and explore how the matter could be handled to avoid a dispute. If the workers involved are unionised, my Ministry would invite the union and management concerned for discussions with a view to working out a satisfactory solution. Sir, my Ministry has also instituted a visitation programme to maintain regular contacts with unions and companies with the objective of establishing close rapport with union leaders and personnel managers or directors. Sir, such visits have enabled our officers to discuss industrial relations issues and problems encountered and to assess the state of industrial relations at the company level. Our officers use the opportunity to share good industrial relations and personnel management practices to help promote close labour-management cooperation. Sir, my Ministry therefore offers a proactive approach to enhance labour-management relations and teamwork in our companies. Sir, our industrial harmony is founded on the basis of tripartite cooperation among the Government, employers and trade unions. To strengthen tripartism, it has always been my Ministry's strategy to involve the active participation of trade unions and employers in the formulation and implementation of major policies which affect the interest of workers and employers. Sir, in line with this philosophy, tripartite participation features prominently in various areas of the Ministry's work.”
“Earlier, I had wanted to ask the setting up of a special tripartite committee to monitor the impending changes like the revised retirement age, base-up wage system and medical co-payment, but now that the Minister has announced its formation, I fully support the Committee. But let the Committee be reminded that there are serious concerns on the ground among the workers. At the recent NTUC dialogue with the workers, it is very apparent indeed. Sir, I hope the Committee will seriously gather feedback from the ground and act on them in order to be effective. The Minister of State for Labour (Encik Othman bin Haron Eusofe): Sir, the Member for Cheng San GRC has observed that while our industrial relations climate is harmonious or "smooth sailing", as he puts it, we cannot take it for granted. I fully agree with him. Let me brief the House on how my Ministry monitors the state of labour-management relations and the steps we take to promote industrial harmony. Sir, my Ministry has in place several measures to closely monitor the state of industrial relations in Singapore. We keep a close tab on the number and nature of industrial disputes which are referred to the Ministry for conciliation. Sir, we have in place a dispute settlement mechanism to ensure that these disputes can be resolved amicably. My Ministry also provides preventive mediation services to help prevent potential conflicts from developing into labour management confrontation. Companies or trade unions which detect a brewing industrial relations problem are encouraged to seek the Ministry's advice and assistance early to deal with the problem before it escalates into a dispute.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head S of the Main Estimates be reduced by $10 in respect of Code SD 1500. Sir, I agree with the Minister for Labour that the importance of harmonious industrial relations cannot be over-emphasised. It is one of the hallmarks of our economic miracle. But, of course, that does not mean that there are no grievances or disputes. With your indulgence, Sir, my six months with the Singapore Port Workers' Union have shown me what a constructive management-union relation is all about. Industrial relations between PSA and SPWU are excellent. At SPWU, we not only take workers' rights and welfare seriously, but also workers' responsibility. As PSA corporatises, there will be changes, thus anxiety. But the management and the union are working closely to minimise problems, if any. Similarly, as Singapore gears for the challenges of the next century, as also spelt out in NTUC 21, we have to be prepared for stiff competition. We have to remain nimble and resilient. We have to identify the shadows lurking and tackle them head on. I know handling cobwebs of the mind and mindsets is not going to be easy, but we have to soldier on. This is where I feel the role of the Ministry of Labour is critical, especially in making tripartism dynamic and relevant. While industrial relation is relatively smooth sailing now, we cannot take it for granted. We need to monitor and steer it well to avoid the rocks and the storms in the open competitive sea. May I ask what is the Ministry doing to enhance tripartism and promote meaningful industrial relations here?”
“Sir, can I seek a quick clarification from the Minister of State about teen gangs and racial undertones? Has he a breakdown for the different racial groups and different teen gangs? Assoc. Prof. Ho Peng Kee: I do not have the details with me right now. If you want the details, you can put in a Question for Oral Answer.”
“I just want to add, Mr Speaker, Sir, that in fact, when it comes to airing of people's views, it is not the monopoly of only the opposition Member.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I would also like to remind the Member for Hougang that when it comes to ---”
“Clarification from the Member for Hougang. I wonder whether he understands when he is talking about the sheep and tiger. Just now, he was saying that he is leaving it to the people to decide whether the Government is the tiger that sucks blood. I would just like to remind the Member for Hougang that the people had indeed decided. At the last election, the ruling Government has been returned with a more convincing victory.”
“For me, in the spirit of Racial Harmony Day today, I wonder whether the Government could not do more for `social therapy' to help foster a more cohesive Singapore. I know a substantial budget has been set aside for the new and old CDCs, the PA and programmes such as Sports for the People, but certainly more could be done for the self-help groups in their efforts at community upliftment, especially those who have proven to be a boon to society. Allow me to end here, Sir, on a harmonious note by thanking you and other Members of the House for their patience, tolerance and understanding.”
“It is worth reminding ourselves that although this proposed Budget comes with the lowest surplus since 1992, it has not stopped the Government from giving out the goodies to the people. After all, there is the Government's promise to share and plough back part of the surpluses to the people. My question is: what is the Government's policy, philosophy if you like, behind the question of what constitutes a fair surplus? When does the surplus get `overdone' and become counterproductive? What are the possible minefields? On the other hand, what is the Government's guiding principle, in terms of sharing the `manna' with the people? For this Budget proposal, is it right to say that nearly $1 billion or about a quarter of the surplus will be given out in various forms, mostly in terms of income tax rebates for all and assistance for the needy and the lower-middle income earners? While it is generous to many Singaporeans, it is inadequate to others, including those from the private sector who were hoping for more incentives to boost certain lagging sectors or to make them more competitive. Perhaps, the Hon. Minister would like to explain why he could not do more for the business sector and whether his hands were temporarily tied while awaiting the outcome of the Economic Committee on Competitiveness' recommendations. Admittedly, much has been done for the financial sector but what about the industrial sector where the SMEs were reported to be grasping for breath while waiting for some goodies. Many will agree with Dr Hu that "the aim is not to seek palliatives for current problems" nor are they in a terminal stage, seeking advance monetary directives. But was there not room for some booster injections in the interim?”
“They were dirty and dilapidated. A thought flashed my mind. How lucky we Singaporeans are. Not only is our policy on maintenance of buildings in place but we are fortunate to have the kind of reserves and budget surpluses to allow the Government to implement our IUP and MUP Programmes. The point I would like to make here, Sir, is that, thanks to the Government's budget policy, Singapore has had a healthy budget surplus for some time now. According to the World Competitiveness Yearbook of 1997, Singapore runs the world's highest budget surplus in 1995, both in terms of percentage of GDP and in dollar terms. It registered 15.5% of the GDP in 1995 at US$9.1 billion. In fact, it has had a surplus for many years. And this trend is likely to continue in the years ahead. I agree with the Hon. Minister for Finance, Dr Richard Hu, that, and I quote: "we have a robust fiscal position and a sound economic framework . and that the Government has managed the economy prudently, accumulating those surpluses". While some people may have wondered if too much money was being set aside for a rainy day, I feel that there is no harm, when the rain could turn into a monsoon, even though it seems unlikely in the near future. There are others who will say that the growing surpluses are because of too much taxes. That is surely worthy of review and worthwhile checking upon for we certainly would not want our Singaporeans to feel that they are over-taxed. Perhaps, the Hon. Minister for Finance could best answer that, for I am sure he would be the first to remedy that situation if he thought the consequences would be detrimental to Singapore's economic growth.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of the motion in the name of the Minister for Finance. Before that, I must say that it is quite a task having to speak after Mr Jeyaretnam. It can be quite disorienting, in terms of the mind, and sometimes it makes me wonder whether we are sitting in the same Parliament, or in the same Singapore, for that matter. Here, we have nine other speakers responding to the Minister for Finance's Budget Statement, asking questions, suggesting improvements, refinements and yet we are told that the Budget Statement is nothing but long on generalities and short on what the Government is expected to do. Previously, when it came to the President's Address, the same tack was taken that the Address was nothing in preparing the people for the 21st century and was thrown out. But yet we are now back facing the same kind of tenor, same kind of questioning on things which had been asked before, which should have been answered before, but yet we have to listen to the same tune all over again. Mr Speaker, Sir, before I move on to my comments proper, I would just like to comment on one aspect of Mr Jeyaretnam's comment and that was on PSA. Since I am also on the PSA Board and representing the Singapore Port Workers' Union, I would like to reassure Mr Jeyaretnam and Members of the House that, in fact, PSA is very prepared for the challenges and competition that are coming our way and that is the reason why PSA is corporatising. It is precisely to meet that kind of challenge and I am confident that we will meet the challenge squarely. Mr Speaker, Sir, when I was last in Hong Kong in May, during the drive from the airport to the hotel, I could not help but notice the sorry state of affairs of many of the apartment buildings that line the route.”
“As Gladstone put it: `We must hang together, or most assuredly, we shall hang separately.' Finally, Sir, briefly, on Singapore-Malaysia relations. Without doubt, relations between Singapore and Malaysia carry a lot of historical baggage. There was much bad blood too. The recent row, although it may have opened up old wounds, surely cannot be as bad as the ones experienced by our founding fathers of modern Singapore. They literally went through blood, sweat and tears to merge with Malaysia, and after having achieved that, only to find the two odd years nightmarish, what with race politics, communalism and communism as the harsh realities of the day. To some, it was even a matter of life and death. Perhaps influenced by the spirit of amity in Asean then, the two neighbours were able to rise above the acrimony and the din, to benefit from cooperation. Singapore could not have invested so much in Malaysia if not for good faith and optimism in bilateral relations. Not that there was no competition. As the President said in his Address, we will have to compete while we cooperate. It is not a zero-sum game. It should be a win-win situation. We all know the interdependence of both countries in many areas. And it is in appreciating that complementation that we had brought about mutual benefits. We all know, even blood ties flow both ways. What is it compared with the flow of water. Let us face it, we are two civilised, independent and sovereign states. Let us show the world we understand what that means and let us move on.”
“Neither should we underestimate the role of self-help groups, even the religious organisations. And collectively, they can help us make that difference. It is also an opportune time because in the white heat of global economic competition, Singapore needs every of its citizen to pull together in the same direction in order to stay ahead. This is not rhetoric. In the economic race between nations, no one country can afford to have less than total effort and total commitment from its people to do what it takes to produce goods and services which can sell in the global market place. Mr Speaker, Sir, I am confident that we Singaporeans can rise to the challenge. Yes, present times are unlike those early years when the very survival of Singapore was a question mark and people were ready to throw their support behind the Government unquestioningly. Yes, it would be much harder now to galvanise the nation. Today's generations have to be won over differently. That is our task, in fact, our test. We have to think of creative ways to win them over. In that thinking mode, Sir, allow me to say that I am in full support of the MOE's effort at inculcating creative thinking in our students, towards achieving what Prime Minister Goh called a thinking school and a learning nation. Let us also encourage creative thinking, and equally important is the need for us to teach our students and our young constructive thinking. In my mind, critical thinking is incomplete without constructive thinking. I consider it a worthwhile challenge to do my bit to help win hearts and minds for the larger Singapore cause. I am here to serve and I shall. And it is my conviction, my firm conviction, Sir, that in the trying times ahead, we cannot afford to be divided.”
“They have been heckling loudly and trying to prevent my colleagues and I from addressing our supporters in Cheng San and, through the medium of live television, fellow Singaporeans who had stayed up all night for the result. What I said to the opposition supporters in that tense moment, I said spontaneously. It was one of the first thoughts to have come to my mind. I have since been told that my plaintive cry - that in victory or in defeat, we ought to remember we are still one people - had not only calmed down those vociferous opposition supporters but also struck a sympathetic chord in many fellow citizens. Mr Speaker, Sir, I am glad. Yes, we are one people. And I say that in the full knowledge that there are substantial numbers of Cheng San residents, indeed many Singaporeans in other wards, who did not, and still do not, agree with much of what PAP says and does. This ability to accept that there can be differences between fellow citizens over political and other beliefs, differences honestly held - this tolerance, if you will - is critical to our staying united as one people. The call from our national leaders for Singaporeans to forge closer bonds with one another, to feel as one nation, would ring hollow if significant numbers are made to feel ignored, sidelined or alienated. Thus, I shall dedicate myself to doing whatever I can to help foster this sense of solidarity. Thus, I shall serve, to the best of my ability, even those who did not vote for our team. Mr Speaker, Sir, I believe today, as we prepare for the 21st century, is an opportune time to reaffirm our belief in wanting to stay as one people, whatever our political and other differences. The role of the CDCs in community bonding cannot be over-emphasised.”
“All the more when it involved different racial groups which may have different perspectives to it. Facts are clear but not necessarily their interpretations. In other words, there are minefields. We need to go about it with care, which I am sure the Minister for Education and his capable team are aware of. We wish them well, for this is a formidable task. By all means, focus on modern history, but do not also forget the early history where our roots are also planted. If I may add, since the purpose of us learning history is to draw lessons for the future, the Minister for Education may want to consider incorporating elements of our vision for the future in the NE programme. Understanding the pillars of Singapore 21, NTUC 21 and/or other agendas for action, will also be useful. Externally, Sir, the competition for trade and investments, for talent and technology has become ruthless. We can hope to continue the Singapore success story only if the people are united, pulling in one common direction for the common goal. For this great cause, I hope even the hon. Members of the opposition would join in. When it comes to the crunch, we should put aside personal interests and conflicts and stand up for Singapore. This does not mean that we do not entertain different views and opinions, as long as they stay objective and constructive. After all, we are all Singaporeans and we all have a stake in this country. With your indulgence, Mr Speaker, Sir, this reminds me of the early hours of 3rd January this year when soon after the result of the election at Cheng San GRC were announced, I found myself reminding supporters of the defeated opposition candidates that we were all Singaporeans.”