MAIN AND DEVELOPMENT ESTIMATES OF SINGAPORE FOR THE - FINANCIAL YEAR 1ST APRIL, 1986 TO 31ST MARCH, 1987
As I mentioned, the CAD became operational in March 1985 with its staff strength and scope of work determined prior to the start of operations. It was agreed, having regard to existing investigative resources, that CAD should investigate only serious and complex commercial fraud cases. The less serious or less complex cases were to be dealt with by the Police and other Government agencies through an established working arrangement with the CAD. It is not the Department's policy to leave minor cases to be dealt with under civil law. If an offence has been committed, it will be investigated by CAD if it comes within its purview; if not, it will be channelled to the appropriate investigative agency. As the CAD is a new department, it was decided that CAD's scope and workload should be periodically reviewed. Staff numbers are not as critical as the quality of its staff and productivity. Emphasis has been on quality and productivity. Should it be necessary, staff strength would be increased. Coming to the question raised by the Member for Anson, I think he has made some statements which are technically incorrect, and I will have to correct these. He said that the Minister said that in the case of Pan-El the insider trading was only known in 1985. That is not true. The insider trading, I think I recall saying that we knew about it in 1984 but it was investigated by the Stock Exchange and nothing came off it. I think the Member for Anson, as a lawyer, should know that insider trading cases are extremely difficult to prove, much less convict under our present laws. I believe there is not a single case of conviction brought in the courts of Singapore. Neither have there been successful prosecutions of insider trading, I believe, even in the UK under the existing laws. Few cases have been brought to court and successfully prosecuted in the United States even though the laws there are much more strict in this matter. The laws we are proposing in the Securities Industry Act 1986 would be similar to those in the United States. Secondly, he said that the MAS was aware of the forward contracts involvement of Pan-El in early 1985. This is totally untrue. The forward contracts it knew about were in connection with Alfa-Pacific Securities. Alfa-Securities was under investigation by the CAD Department on other matters. It was only as a peripheral item of investigation that the matter came to the attention of the CAD. The CAD then referred the issue to the SES for a ruling on the legality of these contracts and, as far as the SES Committee was concerned, it was not illegal under their rules. Now, whether or not it is a proper way of running a business is quite a separate issue. Here, I want to divert slightly on this issue of forward contracts and their legality, as it has some bearing on the inferences laid by the Member for Anson. I have taken advice from the AG's Office and in their procedures for forward contracts as such are not illegal. They are merely contractual devices made to extend credit in the normal course of business by Stock Exchange members. Now, whether the amounts which were extended and the terms under which they were granted were prudent is an entirely separate issue. The advice is that there are some forward contracts which could be illegal, particularly those in which two parties to the contract are common or there might be cases where parties enter into collusion to manipulate forward contracts in order to influence prices in the market. These would clearly be illegal, and I believe certain cases are pending in the courts. Therefore, I think it is best to leave it to the courts to decide because each case is different. On the other point raised by the Member for Anson concerning the powers of the MAS under the Securities Industry Act of 1973, indeed I am aware that Section 3 does give the Minister the power to call for an investigation, but only on substantive evidence. That is the difficulty in which the MAS found itself when it took over the management and administration of the Securities Industry Act in the latter part of 1984. MAS reviewed the provisions and found that there were severe deficiencies in the Act which provided, practically speaking, no surveillance powers what- soever. There were no returns required from members of the Stock Exchange in which their performance could be monitored. Neither has the MAS any powers of entry to inspect the books of stockbroking companies without specific court orders, which can only be obtained for specific causes. It is against this background that the MAS quickly realized that the existing laws were totally inadequate. Therefore, MAS immediately began to draft new laws to provide it with the necessary powers to take action; not on rumours or allegations because clearly it is not practical for the CAD or the MAS to mount a major investigation or for the Minister to call for a committee to be set up to investigate the affairs of publicly listed companies on the merest allegation, because you can imagine the chaos that would take place if we did so. The practical solution was to change the laws so that powers of surveillance are available, powers of entry and seizure of books and inspection will allow the MAS to keep tabs on companies, as we do with the banks, because that is the only way you can anticipate problems, not react after the event. Section 3 of the Securities Industry Act, 1973, is like an owner of a house hiring a pest exterminator to get rid of flies in his house and he gives him a cannon and says, "Kill all the flies using this cannon." Well, you would not have a house left either. So the problem MAS faced was not that it was unwilling to act because it has never hesitated to do so when clear hard evidence is available. In the Alfa-Pacific Securities case investigations were started in early 1985 and led to the prosecution and conviction of certain directors of the firm. I therefore believe that there are no grounds for the allegations made against the MAS by the Member for Anson. I am satisfied that the quality of staff is exceptional. Following the reorganization of the MAS in 1981, a programme was immediatelly launched to review all legislation under their control. So far, with the exception of the Securities Industry Act, they have introduced and amended legislation covering the Banking Act, the MAS Act, Finance Companies Act, the Insurance Act, proper gold trading through Simex, Merchant Banking Ordinances, guidelines for the Futures Trading Act, and amendments to the Companies Act. So with the passage, I hope, of the new Securities Industry Act, we will be in a better position to ensure that another Pan-El will not take place. The reasons for the failure of Pan-El, I will mention briefly here. There were three main reasons. Firstly, mismanagement by the directors. Pan-El was facing major downturns in its business operations, like everybody else, but the management simultaneously borrowed considerably in excess of the company's capital base. Secondly, there was widespread misuse of company funds by directors and by third parties, in collaboration, for stock market speculation which resulted in substantial losses. Finally, there was failure by the external auditors to report deficiencies in the company's accounts which is still inexplicable. It is in this connection that we are proposing to introduce amendments to the Companies Act in order to ensure that adequate reporting of a company's accounts is made in future to allow not only the Government but also investors to assess more closely the performance of the company. So the basic cause for the problems arising from the Pan-El case was deficiency in the statutes which govern the operation of the company, which are essentially the Companies Act and its reporting requirements and the Securities Industry Act 1973 which did not provide adequate surveillance and monitoring powers. I will now move on to the second question of concern to Members of this House, which is, the issue of consumption tax. I have dealt with this in some detail in the Budget debate but I think it bears repeating because it is an issue of major importance which I hope the public will understand. As I have mentioned in the Budget Statement, Singapore is a price-taker. Its productive sectors must be competitive in order to survive. We may therefore have to lower our corporate taxes to meet foreign competition. When that happens, we are likely to be faced with a permanent budget deficit unless we take steps to find alternative compensatory sources of revenue. The alternatives are very few. Taxing statutory boards is one although, as I have mentioned, the amount that can be collected is likely to be small on a continuing basis. Raising statutory charges and fees is another, but this will increase business costs and reduce our competitiveness. The need for consumption taxes is therefore a compelling consideration. Of course, we must ensure that the adverse effects are mitigated. I should point out that consumption taxes already exist in the form of taxes on liquor, tobacco and petrol and as a cess on hotels, although these were and will continue to be imposed for social and other reasons and not for revenue reasons alone. It is a little premature at this stage to consider the manpower resources needed to administer the consumption tax. This is because it will depend on the type of consumption tax to be imposed, the type of goods and services to be included and the level at which the tax should apply, whether at the manufacturing, wholesale or retail level. These questions will have to be carefully studied prior to making a decision. The next main issue which concerns Members is Government's proposed manpower cuts. Again, I have discussed this at some length in the Budget statement but I think the subject is important enough to bear repeating. Manpower reductions will be effected only after detailed reviews of the activities of each Ministry and statutory board by in-house scrutiny teams. The object of each scrutiny would be to determine whether the activity is necessary and, if so, whether it could be conducted at lower cost and with less manpower. The scrutiny teams will examine whether manpower requirements and operating costs could be reduced through simplification of work procedures, streamlining of organizational structures and investment in computerization, automation and other labour-saving devices. The extent of manpower savings, including the number and type of staff which would be affected, can only be determined after the completion of the scrutinies. However, it is expected that, on an overall basis, there will be reductions in most grades of appointments and not merely lower-level staff. It is recognized that the cost savings arising from reductions in higher grade staff will be much more than the reduction in an equivalent number of lower grade staff. I will now try and deal with the specific questions raised by various Members, not necessarily in their order. The Member for Thomson has asked whether there is a law to protect companies from creditors when they go into liquidation and suggested that we might adopt something similar to Chapter 11 of the United States. He wanted to know, I believe, what is the position in regard to the control of company directorships under the amended Companies Act. The Ministry of Finance will be making suitable amendments to the Companies Act to protect companies from creditors and from going into liquidation. The amendments, which will also cover the control of company directorships, will be made known with the introduction of the Companies (Amendment) Bill in 1986 on completion of the debate on the budget in the committee of supply. It is proposed that the Bill will go to Select Committee. The Member for Thomson has also asked whether Government could consider employees' stock option schemes. I agree that stock options can play a useful role in fostering employee loyalty and commitment. However, preferential tax treatment for gains arising from stock options can open up many opportunities for tax avoidance. There is also the question of equity as stock options are only available to senior management. If at all favourable tax treatment is to be accorded to stock option schemes, I would like such schemes to be made more widely available and not just to directors and senior staff. My Ministry is presently looking into these and related issues. The Member for Radin Mas has asked about the question of powers of directors and the consequences, if they were directors of companies going into liquidation. This will be dealt with by the proposed amendments to the Companies Act. The Member for Jalan Kayu has asked why the Ministry has suddenly raised the interest rate on renovation, micro-computer and vehicle loan schemes. The reason why Government has decided to do so is that despite the increase in interest rates, Government loan schemes are still very attractive compared to commercial loan rates. The move is made, in fact, in consonance with Government's attempts to reduce subsidies, where it can and to cut costs. The Ministry is of the view that the small increase in the interest rate will not deter the increasing use of micro-computers. The Member for Chong Boon has raised a question regarding Government's computerization programme, and I would like to give a few details. The civil service computerization programme commenced in late 1981. Originally, this programme called CSCP involved the development of 110 application systems for seven Ministries. The scope of the CSCP has since been extended and now covers 12 Ministries, for whom 200 application systems would be implemented by the end of 1989. The total cost of the scheme is estimated at $150 million. Slightly more than $65 million, or 43%, has been spent up to the end of 1985. A total of 50 application systems or nearly half the systems, included originally in the CSCP, were operating by then. Full details of these systems are given in the National Computer Board's annual report of 1984. Projects included in the CSCP were chosen after an assessment of the benefits, both qualitative and quantitative, to be gained from the computerization and the costs involved. The benefits would include improvements in administrative and operational efficiency of departments, better services to the public and also savings in manpower and operating costs. The National Computer Board, together with the CSCP Ministries, have commenced a programme of post-implementation audits to assess the extent to which the anticipated benefits and savings have been realized in practice. NCB's preliminary assessment is that for most of the completed systems, the expected benefits and savings have been achieved. For example, the Civil Aviation Authority spent $1.5 million on its computerization programme under the CSCP. After computerization, the Authority has been able to reduce manpower requirements by 32 posts. Computerization of the Authority's billing system has resulted in prompt collection of revenue, with consequential gains on interest on bank balances. In all, annual savings of some $1 million has been realized, more than justifying the investment in computerization. Apart from the monetary savings, other application systems have resulted in a better level of service to the public and the business community. For instance, the inward/outward trade declaration processing system implemented for the Ministry of Trade and Industry and the Trade Development Board allows for the release of monthly trade data within two weeks as compared with four months previously. My Ministry and the NCB are closely monitoring the implementation of the scheme to ensure that the anticipated benefits of computerization are fully realized. The Member for Geylang Serai has asked what schemes the Ministry may have to help public officers evaluate performance of their staff. The system of staff appraisal for junior officers was last revised in 1973. Generally, supervisors report on the performance and conduct of the staff annually. The criteria and attributes used are known to all junior civil servants. Supervisors are required to inform their subordinates of shortcomings and to help them improve on their performance. Supervisors attend supervisory management courses at the Civil Service Institute where they are taught how to help their subordinates perform at their best. There is therefore no question that junior civil servants do not know what is required of them in their jobs. There are adequate safeguards against victimization. The staff report form is countersigned by the supervisor. In addition, all staff reports are collated and checked by personnel sections within each department or Ministry, which among other things look for instances of victimization. Grievance-handling channels are clearly spelt out in the Instruction Manuals. An aggrieved officer may approach his senior officers, Permanent Secretary, recognized staff associations or unions for help. Cases of victimization are thoroughly investigated by the authorities. Because the present system is working well, the Ministry does not intend to make any change to the staff appraisal system for junior officers. On the question raised by the Member for Yuhua, I regret that the reply has to be similar to ours given in the past. But perhaps I could restate the reasons. The question of extending medical benefits to children of female public officers who are not widows or divorcees was studied by the Ministry of Finance in 1985. It was then noted that the most cogent reason for extending the medical benefits to these children is the principle of equal treatment for the sexes, which is especially important in our meritocratic system. However, while this principle of equal treatment per se is commendable, any liberalization of medical benefits for public employees will have financial and other implications for the private sector. If the dependants of female public officers are provided with medical benefits, there will be pressure on the private sector companies to provide similar medical benefits to their employees. At present, many companies do not even provide medical benefits to dependants of their male employees. However, extension of medical benefits to children of female public officers will be quite costly and this would not be consistent with current measures taken by Government to trim public sector costs. As the present economic situation weighs against any move which may be interpreted as setting a trend and leading to additional costs, the Ministry thinks that the extension of medical benefits to children of female public officers should be considered at a later date. Given the current employment situation, it is unlikely that the non-provision of medical benefits for their dependants would discourage women from working if they are otherwise inclined to work. Finally, the Member for Buona Vista raised questions about the use and application of the Skills Development Fund. The SDF secretariat is conscious of the need to provide training for handicapped persons so that they can pursue new vocational opportunities beyond entry level positions. The Fund has in the past supported generously efforts of companies and social service organizations to train handicapped persons to assume meaningful work responsibilities. Some of these efforts include the training of visually handicapped persons to become typists and telephone receptionists. The Fund has also given generous incentives to encourage charitable organizations to train qualified teachers and trainers who can render job training to handicapped persons. In fact, the SDF secretariat recently met with the Council of Social Services to discuss the Council's plan to coordinate and organize the training for these personnel. The plan was to prepare them for jobs in electronic gadgets assembly, computer operations and book printing and binding trades. In the case of workers who have met with industrial accidents and become handicapped, it is likely that the retraining will be in areas of work which do not involve significant skills retraining or upgrading. Fortunately, the secretariat has not encountered such request for support from employers to date. In normal circumstances, training grants are given in support of skills upgrading. In the case of retraining of workers who become handicapped as a result of industrial accidents, sympathetic consideration may be given if the employers concerned really require incentives and encouragement from SDF to enable them to provide retraining for these workers. 5.00 pm I agree that more publicity should perhaps be given on the possibility of SDF funding support for the retraining of this group of handicapped workers.