Hansard, 2000-03-09

asked the Minister for Health if he will review (i) the policy of restricting the number of overseas universities for approved medical studies; (ii) the criteria for the recognition of overseas medical degrees; and (iii) the list of universities with degrees approved for registration in Singapore.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the intake into the NUS medical school is currently 200 a year. Each year, we expect about 80 overseas graduates to be registered for practice in Singapore, including both foreign doctors and overseas trained Singaporeans. The 20 universities whose medical degrees are registrable with the Singapore Medical Council are in various developed countries, such as the UK, USA and Australia, so we have sufficient choice of graduates. This number also excludes the 160-odd doctors who are under temporary registration in Singapore at any one time. The overseas medical schools are top ranking institutions in their respective countries and have been assessed to be of a standard comparable to the NUS medical school, or better. The list is reviewed from time to time and updated. The present list remains relevant and serves our needs.

May I ask the Minister if we are in fact short of doctors here again and, if it is so, why are we adhering with the policy of restricting the number of recognised universities for medical students?

When we debated the health policy in the White Paper in 1993, we made it quite clear that we want to prevent over supply of doctors and specialists in Singapore. Because if there are too many doctors and specialists, the demand for medical services will be inflated and healthcare costs will go up. So that has been the fundamental pillar of our policy. In the White Paper, we would control the output from NUS at 150 per year and also from foreign trained doctors at 50 per year. Because of the change in population policy, we have increased the intake in NUS to 200 and also the intake from foreign trained doctors from 50 to 80. So we have made the necessary adjustments to meet the higher population that we have. The situation is quite comfortable today.

May I ask the Minister whether it is likely that we will be requiring many more doctors for multi-factorial reasons, one of which will be the ageing population that will need more medical care. And will a shortage of doctors in fact be perpetual in the coming years, especially if we have to depend mainly on our own university for the supply of our medical personnel?

We are constantly reviewing our requirement for doctors. The need for doctors for an ageing population is in fact factored in the White Paper when we studied the issues in the White Paper in 1992/1993. The population profile and the ageing phenomenon in Singapore are quite well understood. This is something that you can project 30-40 years ahead of time. What is new now is our thrust into life sciences. That is a new factor which we are taking into consideration. As you may know, Dr Tony Tan has set up a task force to look at how Singapore should respond to life sciences. It is entirely possible. Because of this new requirement, we may have to increase the intake of doctors, both in servicing for clinical trials as well as for research. So I do not rule out the need for more doctors from both our local intakes, local training as well as from overseas sources. But for the time being, the 20 universities that we have, as registrable under the SMC, serve our need because we can recruit what we want from these 20 universities. And those who do not come from these universities, we can put them either on temporary or conditional registration.

Will the Minister be able to get better postulation on our medical staff requirement, considering that medical training takes many years to complete and that many years of advance planning is necessary?

That is indeed one of the considerations, that it takes many years to train a doctor, and also the people, particularly Singaporean parents and students, make their decisions based on what we put up. When we say that there are 20 registrable universities, they would put their children in these universities and those who have done so since 1993 will have reason to be upset if we chop and change every other year. So when we do projections for medical personnel, particularly doctors, we have to do so in a very deliberate manner. And we did so in 1992-1993. The situation has changed somewhat. We have adjusted it in 1998, not so long ago, by increasing the intake in our university and allowing more registrations from overseas. Now, there is another new consideration, how to position ourselves for life sciences. As I said, this is something that we are studying and it is conceivable that, because of this very major change, we may have to make further modifications to our plans. But I would be reluctant to chop and change because people are making very important decisions based on what we publish as registrable universities.

May I just ask the Minister whether he has the figures for the number of doctors per year that come from the overseas institutions?

I do not have the detailed breakdown with me. But I presume the 80 doctors that we recruit every year will come from these 20 universities. Because the people who can come in and are registrable without having to go for extra examinations are the ones listed in these 20 universities. So I assume the 80 doctors come from the 20 universities.

Would the Minister be prepared to review the earlier list of universities that he had delisted and consider reinstating them? He has the original list of the universities when he first started and he had delisted some of them. Will he be able to reinstate some of these comparable universities?

I thought that has been the purpose of my whole answer. In 1993, we changed from 170-odd universities and we trimmed it down to 20. People made their decisions based on this list of 20 universities. They have committed their children to study in these 20 universities. If now we change without good reasons, I think if I were a Singaporean parent, I will be quite upset. But if there is a significant change in the direction that is needed, say, for example, life sciences, and we cannot generate the graduates to meet this requirement from within - that is the subject of a task force set up by Dr Tony Tan - then, of course, we may have to broaden or widen the list to take in the necessary numbers from overseas. But, today, we have expanded from 50-odd to 80 doctors and the 20 universities can provide the 80 doctors that we are recruiting every year. Those who do not come from these universities, we will put them under temporary or conditional registration, that means they work under certain hospitals or VWOs for very specific purpose. The situation today is that our needs are met through temporary and conditional registration of these foreign doctors. My primary concern is if you tell Singaporeans that you will recognise these 20 universities and they have gone overseas for studies, I will be very reluctant to chop and change so frequently.

May I ask the Minister how accurate is this manpower projection because it is always changing from time to time? Since it is changing all the time, how accurate is your projection for such manpower needs?

We do not have a fixed ratio that we target for. It is not to say that if you have one doctor to 700 population, you are going to get so much better medical care than 1:750. These are not critical numbers or planning norms. Basically, the indigenous population of Singapore can be quite easily projected. What happens is in 1996, we made a major strategic decision to increase the intake of PRs and that changed the scenario quite drastically. Now, we are considering the second strategic decision that we have to take probably this year and, that is, we have to look at doctors not just as servicing the healthcare industry, but also as participants in this new life sciences industry. So I see these as two major changes in the strategic scenario. Other than that, you cannot project accurately how many will stay after they have passed out from their university. Give and take 10 or 20 every year, it does not change your situation that drastically. What we are looking for are significant changes in direction, ie, the 1996 population intake of PRs, and now what we are going to do strategically for life sciences. These are major decisions which of course will have an impact on the production of doctors. Beyond that, we are quite comfortable. Our primary care sector is well taken care of. We are building new hospitals, and all these projections are taken care of.

In view of the move by Singapore to make our place a medical hub and to develop a medical centre of excellence, are these factors taken into consideration in the projection for manpower?

This is nothing new. This was already anticipated in the 1993 White Paper.

Order read for consideration in Committee of Supply [2nd Allotted Day].

Head O (cont.) - Resumption of Debate on Question [8th March, 2000], "That the total sum to be allocated for Head O of the Main Estimates be reduced by $100." - [Dr Ong Chit Chung]. Question again proposed.

Sir, yesterday on Foreign Affairs, many Members raised issues on a wide variety of subjects, our relations with Malaysia, Indonesia, the position in ASEAN, East Timor, United Nations, technical assistance, amongst others. My colleague, Mr Zainul Abidin has touched on Singapore-Philippines relations, and this morning, we will address the other issues which were raised. 12.45 pm First of all, Malaysia-Singapore relations, a matter which several MPs touched on. They asked me about the state of relations as well as some specific aspects, such as updating on the package negotiations. As far as the overall relations are concerned, I last touched on this at our sitting on 17th January this year when I updated the House on the status of the package negotiations on outstanding bilateral issues. Sir, I would describe our relations with Malaysia to be in a "holding pattern". Following three rapid rounds of discussions on outstanding issues in March, April and May last year, the momentum of negotiations except on CLOB has grounded to a halt. We all know that for the better part of last year, Dr Mahathir and his Government had been preoccupied with domestic issues such as the general elections in November and there has not been a focus on relations with Singapore. Now that the elections are over, it is our hope of course that efforts can be resumed to renew and enhance the cooperation between our two countries. But having said that, let me emphasise that Malaysia and Singapore are indeed bound by a multiplicity of different ties. Any such close relationship inevitably must go through different phases. I think it is natural that there will be ups and downs during our relations. But Singapore's relations will be marked by both competition and cooperation to advance our respective national interests. Singapore's position remains unchanged, that is, we are committed to forging a mutually beneficial long-term relationship with Malaysia based on mutual respect, trust, reciprocity and mutual benefit. We believe in the principle of prosper-thy-neighbour and we would continue to take a constructive approach towards realising the full potential in our bilateral relationship. Members also asked for an update on the package negotiations. As I said, the senior officials met in March, April and May last year on the package of outstanding bilateral issues. Singapore tried to be helpful and took the approach of offering "maximum benefits for both sides" by trying to accommodate new Malaysian requests on issues such as the POA and the CPF withdrawal by West Malaysians. However, Malaysia has not given any indication yet that it is prepared to accommodate Singapore's request on the various issues, especially the supply of raw water to Singapore after the expiry of our water agreements. I have informed this House previously that it is Malaysia's turn to host the next round of talks. The Malaysians have on several occasions indicated that they are aware that the ball is in their court. But they have not yet responded with specific dates. We want to resolve these issues as soon as possible. When Malaysian Foreign Minister Datuk Seri Syed Hamid visited Singapore last year, we agreed that officials from both sides should try to narrow the gaps on the issues, so as to arrive at a win-win package deal. That continues to be our expectation and our approach. However, it would seem that the immediate priority of the Malaysians is on the UMNO General Assembly elections in May. As such, it remains to be seen whether there will be significant movement on the discussions of the bilateral package before that date. But it is clearly in the best interest of both countries to resolve the issues as soon as possible. I will not touch on the CLOB issue where the Singapore Exchange and the Kuala Lumpur Stock Exchange have reached a comprehensive and legally binding solution, because the Deputy Prime Minister had dealt with this in this House comprehensively yesterday. On the railway land, which is also part of the package deal, all I need to do is to reiterate what I said in this House before. The fact that there is a package discussion going on and that it has taken some time to resolve this matter does not, in any way, affect the legal position of these agreements and undertakings under the law. Some of these issues involve questions of principles and questions of law. And these positions of principles, whether it is sovereignty or on legal interpretations of existing agreements, such as the railway land, have to be maintained by Singapore. For example, under the Points of Agreement, Members will recall that there are clear legal undertakings and responsibilities and a time schedule which has to be adhered to. There are certain obligations to be performed and undertaken under the agreements and that continues to be our position. As I pointed out in Parliament on 5th June 1997, the POA provides for a "maximum period for the railway station to be moved from Keppel, that is, within five years from the time the MRT reaches Woodlands New Town, which it did on 10th February 1996." Some Members also referred to Pedra Branca, but I wish to point out to the Members and they will recall that I informed this House last year in January that officials from Malaysia and Singapore did reach an agreement in 1998 on the text of a special agreement to refer Malaysia's claim to Pedra Branca to the International Court of Justice. Hence, this matter is no longer a pressing issue which explains why it was not included in the package of outstanding issues for bilateral negotiations. Mr Chiam See Tong had reiterated his suggestion for an economic union between Singapore and Malaysia. I would refer to what Prime Minister Goh said in reply in this House on 5th June 1997, and I quote: "He (Mr Chiam) got his economic history of our Malaysia days wrong, and he has ignored important non-economic factors, but the economic logic of his proposal is correct. However, cooperation takes two willing parties. I do not think this is the right time to talk about an economic union when bilateral relations are strained and we are still having difficulties implementing specific items of cooperation." And he said: "Singapore and Malaysia share a symbiotic relationship. I fully subscribe to Dr Mahathir's philosophy of 'prosper-thy-neighbour'. It is an important way to strengthen our two countries' symbiotic relationship and help each other to become developed." That was what Prime Minister said. What Mr Chiam was saying yesterday is whether an economic union of the Suzhou type of project or other economic projects, there are many opportunities for the two sides to undertake to strengthen economic cooperation. I agree. I would say that there are endless opportunities for both countries to cooperate for mutual benefit. But there must be political will from the other side to respond to Singapore's efforts. If there is any perceived lack of progress on economic cooperation, let me say that it is not due to any lack of effort on our part. Members of the House will recall that Prime Minister Goh had proposed a framework of wider cooperation with Malaysia in line with the 'prosper-thy-neighbour' philosophy which Dr Mahathir has espoused. Under this framework for wider cooperation, Prime Minister Goh had proposed concrete cooperation projects such as the development of water resources in Malaysia for sale to Singapore and the joint development of Malayan Railway land in Singapore. Members may also be aware that Prime Minister Goh spent a lot of time and effort and, in fact, he met with Dr Mahathir eight times in the past two years. More recently, Prime Minister had indicated that he is prepared to meet Dr Mahathir. We will continue to press on and persevere with our efforts to promote bilateral cooperation. Mr Zulkifli Baharudin's suggestion was for more resources to be made available to the civil societies, and in particular, the Singapore International Foundation and Singapore Institute of International Affairs for the promotion of people-to-people cooperation between Singapore and Malaysia. I would agree that the fostering of good relations is not the sole prerogative of governments. The private sector, civic organisations, cultural organisations, sporting organisations, to name a few, all play a role in promoting good relations between our neighbours. As to his specific suggestion that more finances and resources be made available to civic bodies, if there are specific and worthwhile projects and a request made to MFA, we will of course be prepared to consider them on a case-by-case basis. Of course, Members have to bear in mind that many civic organisations are autonomous organisations and might want to retain their autonomy. Mr Charles Chong, Mr Hawazi Daipi and a few other Members spoke about the letter by Mr Malik Tahir which was published recently in our local press. They asked whether Mr Malik Tahir's views typify the general feelings of Malay Malaysians. I of course cannot speculate if his perspective respresents the views of the majority of Malay Malaysians. But let me say that we should make a distinction between the views expressed by such individuals and private parties on the one hand, and the official views of a Government. Sir, as I mentioned before in this House on several occasions, after separation, Singapore and Malaysia have, in fact, evolved and developed into two distinct societies. It would not be possible for Singapore to give up its system which is based on meritocracy and multi-racialism. But our approach would be, notwithstanding the differences between our two systems, both countries stand to benefit greatly from bilateral cooperation. Such cooperation must be on the basis of sovereign equality and mutual benefits. It cannot be on the basis of unequal or differential relationship prescribed by Mr Tahir. Connected with this matter, Mr Sin Boon Ann asked whether we are doing enough to put our position across to the Malaysians so that our views, stand and positions can be disseminated better or more effectively in Malaysia. Let me say that when issues arise, we do, in fact, take considerable measures to put our views across, not only here, but also in Malaysia. And where there are reports in the Malaysian media which are erroneous or false, we rebut them. We also publish our speeches, press releases and rebuttals on our MFA website as well as in the website of our Mission in Kuala Lumpur. Therefore, I wish to assure Members that MFA and our Missions abroad have been proactive in putting Singapore's views across when necessary. This has even been noted by the Malaysian media. For example, on the CLOB issue, the New Straits Times reported on 29th February this year, and I quote: "One of the lessons of the CLOB affair is perhaps the value of effective public relations. The Singaporeans had their whole Government involved, including their overseas missions, telling their side of the CLOB story. In Kuala Lumpur, for example, the Singapore High Commission was sending copies of CLOB-related documents to the media. The same intensity was absent from the Malaysian side." So I think this speaks for itself. Mr Charles Chong asked about the latest developments, if any, on the Singapore-Johor bridge which Malaysia was reported to have proposed to construct to replace the Causeway. The answer to that is that we have not received any official proposal from the Malaysian Government. As this is an important issue involving two sovereign countries, naturally, we can only consider this matter when a formal proposal is received from the Malaysian Government and not through any other party. 1.00 pm I think Mr Charles Chong also referred to newspaper reports in Malaysia to the effect that Malaysians have briefed Prime Minister Goh during his recent visit to Johor. Indeed, during the Hari Raya party which the Johor Mentri Besar hosted for the Prime Minister on 30th January, the Mentri Besar, Dato Abdul Ghani, showed Prime Minister some models and pictures of a possible new bridge over the Causeway, but there was no discussion of the issue. The Prime Minister made it clear to the Johor Mentri Besar that it should be regarded as a non-briefing. In other words, it was not an official briefing. As I have said before, Singapore has, to date, not received any official proposal from Malaysia. If and when an official proposal is received, I think there are obviously some key questions which will have to be considered. First and foremost, what is the justification for wanting to replace the Causeway with a bridge? If there is a proposal, we need to consider carefully whether it is feasible. And to consider and conclude whether it is feasible, one would have to make a careful cost benefit analysis. If the study shows that the proposal is not feasible, then we will not be able to support it. Anyway, as I said, no proposal has been put to the Government and therefore, at the moment, there is nothing to study. Members then turned to the situation in Indonesia. They asked me about the state of our relations with Indonesia and also certain specific questions. If I may make some broad observations about the situation in Indonesia, I would say that Indonesia is actually in transition. There have been political, economic and social changes there, and there have also been greater demands for regional autonomy, as well as regions requesting a greater share of local resources. The election of Abdurrahman Wahid as President and Megawati Soekarnoputri as Vice President represents a legitimate leadership. Notwithstanding its legitimacy, I would say that it has a difficult job in dealing with post-Soeharto changes. With this new leadership, other power centres have also emerged. They are seeking a greater say in government as well as acting as a check and balance. The role of the armed forces is also being reshaped. President Wahid has begun a process of political consolidation, national reconciliation and restoring international confidence. This is important for the return of economic stability and foreign investment. President Wahid also sought to deal with the regional pressures for greater autonomy and, in some cases, even calls for independence. But he has received the endorsement of the international community on Indonesia's unity. President Wahid continues to face considerable challenges. Singapore supports the Indonesian government, and wishes President Wahid well in his efforts to deal with the political, economic and social changes. As regards our relations with Indonesia, I said in last year's Committee of Supply debate that relations then, one year ago, were going through a difficult period. At that time, various Indonesian leaders and officials had made all sorts of allegations and negative comments against Singapore. Members will recall that, subsequently, later in the year, in November, responding to a question on bilateral ties, I said that Indonesia was one of our closest neighbours and a major trading partner, and we would like to see a prosperous and stable Indonesia. That is our position. We are ready to work with Indonesia to assist in its economic recovery. We are a small country and our contribution can only be modest. But we can play a catalytic role to help restore investor confidence through practical measures. Singapore and Indonesia now enjoy warm and friendly ties. The foundations of our relationship are strong and have withstood many storms. We have cooperated for mutual benefit for many years, and Singapore is one of Indonesia's largest foreign investors and our bilateral trade remains strong, notwithstanding the economic crisis. We have a vested interest in Indonesia's stability, growth and prosperity. Furthermore, Indonesia is strategically important for both Singapore, for the region and for ASEAN. It is therefore in everyone's interest to see a prosperous and stable Indonesia. Even during the difficult times, Singapore did not lose confidence in Indonesia. Members will recall the West Natuna Gas project and the Pertamina-Singapore Power agreement reflected Singapore's faith and long-term confidence in Indonesia. I would add that President Wahid's decision to make Singapore his first stop in his ASEAN tour also underscores the importance he places on relations with Singapore. And the return visit by Prime Minister in January continued the process of further strengthening bilateral relations. As regards the questions by Mr Sin Boon Ann and Mr Hawazi Daipi about the recent troubles in Bintan and whether it has affected Singapore's investments there, this matter has been addressed by the Minister for Trade and Industry. But let me say that the demonstrations in Bintan were over the issue of land compensation. It was unfortunate that the issue resurfaced. When development works by the Indonesia-Singapore joint venture company on the Bintan Industrial Estate began more than five years ago, compensation for the land had been fully settled and the land was free of encumbrance. The demonstrations which occurred recently caused losses for companies operating there as work had to be stopped. It also affected tourist arrivals and, consequently, the livelihood of the people was also affected. Therefore, if such disturbances are unchecked, it would affect investors in the Bintan Industrial Estate and, in turn, dampen foreign investors' confidence in Indonesia. And it will affect our role to act as a catalyst to enhance investor confidence. Sir, we have conveyed to the Indonesian authorities at all levels the importance for Indonesia to resolve this matter. But let me add that the disturbances in Bintan should be seen in the context of other incidents of social unrest in various other parts of Indonesia. President Wahid himself has said that the outbreaks of unrest in Indonesia were the product of a conspiracy against his government. The Indonesian authorities have indicated that the disruptive elements from other parts of Indonesia had been involved in Bintan. They recognise the nature and potential impact of the problem, and they have taken swift action to end the disturbances. Since then, the situation in Bintan has been stabilised, and it is our hope that investor confidence will not be affected by the demonstrations. Such incidents should not deter Singapore from pursuing bilateral cooperation projects with the Indonesian government in the Riaus. Finally, Mr Chiam asked whether the Government could consider leasing from the Indonesian government one of the Riau islands to develop it into an economic area with Singapore having full control on, such as security, immigration and allowing entry by Indonesian nationals and so on. I think Mr Chiam must know that this is not a practical proposal, because he himself pointed out that this is a very sensitive issue. I think he knows that it will be open to all sorts of misunderstandings and interpretation, particularly when what he proposed may be seen as impinging on Indonesia's rights of sovereignty. This is especially so when Mr Chiam's proposal envisaged that the Singapore Government will exercise what may amount to sovereign functions like immigration and security control in another territory. At a time when there is so much sensitivity in Indonesia over calls for separatism, autonomy, independence, I think Mr Chiam will agree when I say that it is unlikely that this proposal would be considered, in his words, as a purely "business" or commercial deal. Related to Indonesia, some Members also asked about East Timor. Three questions were posed. One is to ask about the assistance which we have already given; second, about the technical assistance or training which we may give to East Timor; and, thirdly, prospects of East Timor becoming independent and they applying for ASEAN membership. On the assistance we have given to East Timor up to now, as a member of the UN support group for East Timor, we have contributed US$230,000 to the UN Trust Fund for East Timor. The Trust Fund was set up to fund UN activities in East Timor. Then, as Members will know, there was the International Force for East Timor (InterFET) and our contribution comprised a medical detachment, military observers, logistics support and two landing ship tanks. Altogether, a total of 250 personnel were involved. The cost of maintaining our contributions in East Timor was not small. We incurred some $22.2 million for maintaining our contributions to InterFET and the United Nations Assistance Mission to East Timor. InterFET then was replaced by United Nation Assistance Mission in East Timor (UNAMET) and our contributions to UNTAET are 40 civilian police, 8 military observers and staff officers, a level one medical team comprising up to 26 members. The 40-man civilian contingent will be deployed to East Timor on 6th March and I assume they are already there. An SAF officer has also been appointed as a deputy chief of staff for military and civil affairs in UNTAET. If the UN accepts all our contributions, the total contribution to UNTAET is estimated to cost about $9.1 million for one year. As to the kind of technical assistance and training which we can give to East Timor, the leaders, Mr Xanana Gusmao and Jose-Ramos Horta, visited Singapore in January, as part of their regional tour to establish the groundwork for future relations with friendly regional countries, and they were also wanting to gain support for East Timor's construction efforts. They expressed an interest in Singapore's development experiences since independence. At their request, briefings were arranged with EDB, HDB, MPA and PSA. They also visited a HDB new town and met our businessmen. Mr Gusmao thanked us for our contributions to InterFET and UNTAET, and he also requested our help in providing technical assistance to East Timor. They were particularly interested in the area of human resource development such as port and airport management. We have assured him that within the limits of our resources, we would do what we can to help out. We have extended an invitation to a team of Timorese officials to visit Singapore to discuss how we can dovetail some of our technical assistance to East Timor's requirements. I expect the team will come in due course. 1.15 pm As regards East Timor's independence and thereafter applying for membership, we had informed Mr Gusmao and Mr Jose-Ramos Horta during their visit that while Singapore would be open to the question of East Timor's membership in ASEAN, it was really premature to consider this issue now. Our message to them was that in the next few years the priority should be to achieve independence, reconstruction and nation building. East Timor's reconstruction needs are enormous and will require massive assistance and strong political backing for some time. The UN and the international community will be the people with the resources and experience to best facilitate East Timor's transition to independence. It is important that the international community and the UN remain engaged in East Timor. ASEAN countries themselves do not possess all the necessary capabilities to undertake this task of reconstruction for East Timor. Many ASEAN countries themselves are recovering from the financial crisis. But this is not to say that ASEAN should take a hands-off approach. ASEAN will be involved, as we have been with INTERFET and the UN support group for East Timor, and individual ASEAN countries, I am sure, including Singapore, will continue to support the international effort for East Timor. As for membership of ASEAN, when they eventually apply for membership, I am sure ASEAN will have to give it serious consideration. East Timor, like any other aspiring member, will have to meet certain criteria and we will have to take this one step at a time. In any case, ASEAN membership has to be decided by consensus. They have to follow a procedure. There has to be an application first. Usually the country becomes an observer, after that they apply for membership and membership comes after undertakings to adhere to certain basic ASEAN agreements, including the Bangkok Declaration, the Treaty of Amity and Cooperation and various other agreements. There are some six agreements which aspiring members will have to undertake to be bound. Members then asked about ASEAN. A common question was: has ASEAN outgrown itself? I think Dr Ong Chit Chung asked that. Mr Ravindran asked: have we expanded too fast? Because of the expansion, has ASEAN slowed down? These are valid questions which even members in ASEAN are asking themselves. I would say that ASEAN is going through an important testing period. It is going through a difficult period because, firstly, many of the countries are recovering from the financial crisis. Secondly, ASEAN has been touted for many years as the most successful regional grouping. If it was considered as the most successful regional grouping, it was because many of the members were doing well economically, and there was political stability. That is not so now: Economically, some of the countries are having problems. Politically, some of the countries like Indonesia are going through very difficult challenging times in their political transition. The perception is that ASEAN's reputation has been dented. It has lost its shine or lustre. So the challenge for ASEAN is how it can reorganise itself, re-invent itself, so to speak, to recover its relevance as a vibrant regional grouping. This is an important challenge and ASEAN will have to demonstrate that it is relevant to the region, and relevant to the external players. As I have mentioned in my answer to Dr Ong Chit Chung on the strategic situation, ASEAN has been relevant in the past because of its ability to engage key powers in discussions on security in the region. If ASEAN does not live up to this challenge, then it will be marginalised and it will be just another one of those many organisations that we have seen in the world today. But I am confident that ASEAN will face this challenge squarely. Questions were asked about Singapore's chairmanship of ASEAN for the previous year, which culminated in our hosting the ASEAN meeting and the ARF meeting. As Chairman of ASEAN, we initiated an honest reappraisal of ASEAN at the meeting which Singapore chaired. It is precisely because of these difficulties that ASEAN is going through that I introduced, with the agreement of the other Ministers, for the first time ever, an ASEAN Foreign Ministers' Retreat, in other words, just the Foreign Ministers without officials at all. We had a frank exchange of where we are going. The consensus was that this was a very candid exchange of views. To indicate the candour, we took note of the danger of ASEAN becoming a two-tier organisation, in other words, some of the new entrants like the Indochinese countries on the one hand, and on the other hand, the original ASEAN member states. It was important that we should prevent ASEAN from becoming a two-tier organisation. To prevent that, it was important to concentrate on efforts to integrate and assist the newer members of the organisation. As regards Singapore's role during our chairmanship and after our chairmanship, I would say that we have tried to play a constructive role by coming out with practical ideas to advance ASEAN's role. For example, Members will recall that the Prime Minister proposed, and the leaders accepted, the idea of sending missions or road shows abroad to demonstrate to Europe, America and elsewhere that ASEAN is determined to get back on its feet. These missions were agreed upon, and one mission already took place to Japan led by Malaysia with other members of ASEAN. BG George Yeo, the Minister for Trade and Industry, will lead this ASEAN mission to the United States in May. Thailand will also lead the third mission to Europe in May. Singapore will be represented in all these missions. Other Singapore's initiatives and efforts which were agreed upon were the Prime Minister's e-ASEAN initiative, which is intended to transform ASEAN into a borderless and seamless market instead of 10 fragmented markets. They also endorsed Prime Minister's proposal to accelerate AFTA. So Singapore continues to play a constructive role in ASEAN by coming out with ideas which have been agreed upon. Also to indicate how ASEAN is trying to adjust, the leaders agreed that we should have an ASEAN Troika. Because once you have 10 members and if you meet once a year at Foreign Ministers' Meeting, and leaders meet once a year, how do you deal and respond to fast changing events? So it was proposed at the Leaders' Meeting that we should have a troika of three members to have a faster mechanism for ASEAN's response. This was agreed to. What was Singapore's major task ahead this year for ASEAN? I wish to inform Members that we will be hosting the Fourth ASEAN Informal Meeting in November this year. We intend to build what has been achieved in Manila. I doubt if we want to have some grand visions or themes. Rather, we hope to focus on the message that ASEAN has to renew itself. On the ARF, responding to Mr Simon Tay, I agree with him when he says that moving into preventive diplomacy is very important. Singapore is very mindful of that and Singapore supports the practice of preventive diplomacy. For the other Members who might not be very au fait with ARF, the ASEAN Regional Forum had three phases of evolution. First was confidence building measures. The second phase is preventive diplomacy, and the ultimate objective is to make the ASEAN Regional Forum into a body which can be engaged in conflict resolution. For the past few years we really have been focusing on confidence building measures. Some of us, like Singapore, feel that we should now nudge ourselves into the preventive diplomacy phase. So I agree with Mr Simon Tay when he says that Singapore should support preventive diplomacy. I want to assure him that we are ready to do our part in terms of preventive diplomacy. But in terms of Singapore itself engaging in preventive diplomacy, that is a slightly different matter because he knows that in international practice and international law, preventive diplomacy, if you offer yourself as good offices, depends on the consent of whichever parties are disputing. You just cannot impose yourself on disputing parties. We will work with the other ARF countries to see how we can accelerate slowly the process of ARF moving towards preventive diplomacy. Mr Ravindran asked about Myanmar. I can say that the situation there is generally calm and the State Peace and Development Council remains firmly in control. I understand that they are concerned over Myanmar's economic slowdown as a result of a combination of various factors including the Asian financial crisis. He asked about ASEAN's role and constructive engagement. I have explained in this House before that being an ASEAN member, Myanmar has greater exposure and opportunities to come into contact with the other countries in ASEAN. We take this opportunity to have a quiet, frank discussion. Many of us, individually and separately, quietly exercised some suasion in trying to persuade Myanmar on the ways of achieving normalcy, as in some of the other ASEAN countries. But we do not take the approach of some other countries like in the East who are inclined to imposing their views and insisting that various measures be taken. We think it is better to have quiet diplomacy. Notwithstanding the help and encouragement Singapore and other ASEAN countries can give Myanmar, in the end the pace of reform measures must still be left to them to decide. Mr Charles Chong asked about ASEAN-EU relations. It is true that there is a difficulty and that difficulty is because the EU has a common policy with regard to Myanmar. Because of the common policy, they maintain that they will not be able to allow the Myanmar Foreign Minister to attend any meetings held in Europe. Therefore, for the first time last year, the ASEAN-EU Foreign Ministers' Meeting, which has taken place regularly for many years, was cancelled. It was to take place in Berlin. It was cancelled because the European Union insisted that they would not give a visa for the Myanmar Foreign Minister but the rest of the ASEAN Foreign Ministers could come. Naturally, ASEAN could not accept that condition, and the meeting therefore did not take place. 1.30 pm Our position on Myanmar vis-a-vis the European Union is to tell the Europeans that they are free, and should feel free, to take whatever position they want with regard to Myanmar, but to distinguish their relations with ASEAN as an organisation from their relations with Myanmar. Just as when we held meetings here, as I chaired the meetings last year, we had the Myanmar Foreign Minister and the European Union here, and they had no difficulty in sitting down in the same meeting with Myanmar Foreign Minister. So this is a real problem. We have persevered with European Union. There are many countries in the EU who would like to break this impasse and get back to the productive ASEAN-EU relationship. So we will work with them to see how we can revive this ASEAN-EU Ministerial process, and many behind-the-scene discussions are going on. I believe Mr Charles Chong also asked, if we should have a "tit for tat", and will ASEAN take a similar position on the Austrian government. I cannot speak for the rest of ASEAN, but I doubt it. Because if ASEAN wants to be consistent over the position we have taken with EU on Myanmar, then it should follow that ASEAN's relationship with EU, which is a bloc-to-bloc relationship, should not be contingent on whether a particular government or a particular Minister is in that government. Mr Simon Tay and a few others asked about our United Nations Security Council candidature. First, to give an update. Singapore is bidding for a seat, which is in Asian Group seat, for the United Nations Security Council, non-permanent member. The election will be later this year, around October or so. Because it is in Asian Group seat, and there is no rival Asian candidate competing with us, and the Asian Group earlier has endorsed Singapore's candidature as the Asian Group's agreed candidate, I would say that the prospects of us being elected are very good. But we are not being complacent. We are continuing with all our efforts to talk to other countries in other regions to ensure that we have a good result when voting takes place in the United Nations. But I am reasonably confident that we will be elected, and the election is for a two-year term starting in January 2001. But I would like to say this. If we can get elected to the UN Security Council, we should not get carried away by the fact that we will be in the Security Council for two years. And it does not mean that we have suddenly arrived or that for two years we will have some magical power status bestowed on us. That is not the case. During the two years, if we are on the Security Council and thereafter, we will still continue to be a small country and we cannot pretend to be otherwise. I thought I should emphasise this. We should have a sense of proportion and not have any delusion that we are not a small country. And the reason why I make this point is yesterday, as I was listening to some of the comments, questions and observations in the cuts on Foreign Affairs, I thought that there was a little lack of proportion, a little lack of realism. When I listened to some of the comments, say, "look, can we send so many more military missions, peacekeeping operations, can we expand our technical assistance, not just human resources but also try to influence the policies in these countries", and so on, I would say, you better come down to reality and remember that we are a small country with limited resources. We shall do our best to be active in foreign policy - to advance our interests, to be a responsible international citizen and to have constructive ideas on issues, whether in the region or in international organisations. Having said that, let me say that if we are elected to the Security Council, we will do our best to contribute to the work of the Council by bringing to the Council - and I think this is Mr Simon Tay's question - the perspective of a small country, and we will try to demonstrate wherever possible that a small state can also play a useful role in the Council. And we will work with like-minded countries in the Council, including those from the Non-aligned Movement and the G77, on issues of common interest. As the endorsed candidate of the Asian Group, naturally we will also work with the Asian Group to reflect their views and concerns in the Security Council. Mr Simon Tay asked whether on issues we would side with the big powers. I think our record speaks for itself. In all these years, people consider Singapore to have taken positions on the basis of principle and that we would have an independent foreign policy, and we shall continue to do so, whether we are in the Security Council or we are not in the Security Council. I will now ask your permission, Sir, for my colleagues Dr Ow Chin Hock and Mr Zainul Abidin to deal with the remaining issues.

Sir, on Singapore-Japan relations, I agree with Dr Ong Chit Chung that the bilateral relations are warm and close, and I may add, the relations have strengthened significantly in recent years. First, during the Asian financial crisis, both countries have consulted closely to assist the regional economy in overcoming their economic difficulties. Japanese government delegations visiting the region also visited Singapore and had substantive discussions with our leaders and officials on regional development. Second, bilateral cooperation and interaction have broadened and institutionalised. Several key bilateral projects endorsed at the highest political level have been implemented. These include the Japan-Singapore Partnership Programme for the 21st Century, Japan-Singapore Symposium and Japan-Singapore Business Council. Further, Prime Minister Goh's visit to Japan in December last year was successful. The visit provided more opportunity for Singapore and Japan to explore new areas to further enhance bilateral economic cooperation in the new millennium. During the visit, Prime Minister Goh and Japanese Prime Minister Obuchi agreed to launch a joint study on the feasibility to establish a Free Trade Agreement (FTA) between Japan and Singapore. Both sides hope that the joint study will help to enhance bilateral economic integration and cooperation as well as further complement ongoing efforts of the two countries to strengthen the multi-trading system. Dr Ong asked for the progress on FTA. The first meeting or inaugural meeting of the joint study has just been concluded. It was held on 7th and 8th. Both countries were represented in the joint study by senior officials from various Ministries and members of the private sector and academia. The first meeting had made positive progress in identifying the scope of such an FTA. The next meeting will be in Japan in late April this year. Both sides will strive to complete the study and to submit by November 2000 a joint report to their respective Prime Ministers, with the recommendation on whether both countries should proceed with formal negotiation for such a Free Trade Agreement. Now, let me turn to Singapore-China relations. Singapore-China relations are good, underscored by the frequent exchange of high level visits. There are no major bilateral issues between our two countries. Following the resolution of the Suzhou Industrial Park issue or dispute, relations have been problem-free. The strongest basis of our bilateral relation is in the area of economic cooperation. Bilateral trade between Singapore and China has been steadily increasing at an average annual rate of 14% since 1990. Singapore is also one of the top investors in China. China's impending entry into the WTO is expected to provide new opportunities for our businesses and investors. Some new areas for cooperation, such as public housing, IT and the financial sector, have already been identified during Premier Zhu Rongji's visit to Singapore last November. Singapore would continue to explore stronger economic cooperation with China in these new areas. This year also marks the 10th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations. We are confident that future cooperation between Singapore and China will continue to expand and strengthen. Dr Ong also commented on the PRC's White Paper on "the One-China principle and the Taiwan Issue". Some observers have pointed out that the White Paper has introduced a new condition, that China will resort to force if the Taiwan authorities refuse indefinitely the peaceful settlement of cross-strait settlement or reunification through negotiation. But the Chinese leadership has countered that this has been its consistent position. However, the fundamental position of the White Paper is that China would not renounce the use of force to settle the Taiwan issue. This is not new. However, China has clearly set their OB markers against independence for Taiwan which Taipei would not breach. Given that both China and Taiwan are currently enjoying high economic growth, it is unlikely that they will want to be drawn into a conflict at this time. However, as the Minister has pointed out yesterday, the Taiwan issue is one of the most significant uncertainties in the region. An escalation of cross-strait tensions would be disastrous for the region at a time when it needs stability to sustain its economic recovery. In the interest of the region's stability and prosperity, it is our hope that the parties involved will continue to exercise restraint in their efforts to resolve differences across the Taiwan Strait. Dr Ong also asked what is Singapore's stand on the cross-strait relationship. We have always abided by the One-China policy. The release of the Chinese White Paper will not affect our policy. Nonetheless, we hope for the sake of peace, regional peace and stability, any cross-strait problem can be resolved peacefully between the two parties. Dr Ong further asked whether Singapore can play a role. Let me point out that cross-strait relations are considered by PRC as an internal matter or family affair. Singapore can play a role only if we are invited to do so by both sides. For instance, in 1992, we facilitated the Wang-Ku Hui Tang, or Wang-Ku Talks, by providing the venue for their dialogues. 1.45 pm

Sir, I would like to respond to two questions raised by Members, one on EALAF and the other on technical cooperation. As the Member, Mr Ravindran, mentioned yesterday, East Asia has got institutional links with both North America (through APEC) and with Europe (through ASEM). There is this obvious missing link between two dynamic regions of East Asia and Latin America. Thus to bridge this gap, EALAF was initiated by Singapore, in fact by our Prime Minister, to provide opportunities for closer interaction in political, economic, social and other spheres. This is how we feel that Singapore can play a facilitator role in the international scene. For some update, which was asked by Mr Ravindran, the inaugural meeting of officials was held in September last year where in fact 27 countries participated. There were three major outcomes out of this meeting last September. The first was the Foreign Ministers' Meeting in Chile which would be held in the first quarter of 2001 and would be preceded by two preparatory Senior Officials' Meetings (SOMs). Second, EALAF should be the working name for the Forum pending consensus on the new appellation to be agreed upon later. Third, EALAF will have a multi-dimensional nature covering political, economic, social, cultural and other tracks. The meeting also has confirmed 17 projects, three of which were offered by Singapore in different areas, to give substance to EALAF's multi-dimensional character. The three projects which Singapore has offered include (1) an economic study on obstacles and potential for greater economic linkages between East Asia and the Latin American countries, spearheaded by ISEAS; (2) a Journalists' Visit Programme (JVP) for Latin American countries. One journalist each from Brazil and Peru has been selected for the first JVP. In fact, Thailand has also indicated interest in dovetailing a similar programme in Thailand with the JVP; and (3) a Travel Trade Fair (TTF) for Latin American countries to be held in conjunction with the PATA Travel Mart in April 2000. Thus far, three countries - Mexico, Venezuela and Ecuador have agreed to participate in this fair. For the next EALAF meeting, the Chileans have proposed the dates of 16-18 August 2000 for the next EALAF SOM to be held in Santiago, Chile. And this will be followed by another preparatory SOM meeting back-to-back with the first Ministerial Meeting scheduled also to be held in Santiago, Chile, in the first quarter of 2001. A summit is planned to be held later. And finally, EALAF is a Singapore initiative, and we will continue to actively pursue it. Although EALAF is in the initial stages, we are heartened from the responses of member countries thus far, and remain optimistic that the EALAF process will take off as planned. Next, on the cut on technical and developmental assistance. Mr Simon Tay has raised quite a number of observations. This is the second year he is raising questions on technical development assistance. Mr Simon Tay, in his cut, has asked that MFA need not say "yes" but to agree to at least review its policy on technical assistance. Let me first say that MFA always makes it a policy to evaluate the programme's effectiveness and we will continue to do so. Nevertheless, it is unlikely that we will change the fundamental thrust of the Singapore Cooperation Programme (SCP). It is time-tested and has been proven right by the feedback we get from its beneficiaries. The basis of the SCP has always been human resource development. This is what was asked for by the beneficiaries and we will need to continue with that thrust. Before I answer some specific questions and comments raised by Mr Tay, allow me first to give a broad picture of the SCP and its achievements. The SCP is Singapore's contribution to the international community for the benefit of the developing countries. We believe in sharing our developmental experience with developing countries, just as Singapore had benefited from assistance from international organisations and developed countries. Since its inception in 1992, the SCP has grown not only quantitatively, but also qualitatively. From a modest budget of S$8.1 million in 1993, it has doubled to S$17.8 million last year. The total number of participants grew nearly three times from 849 in 1993 to a projected 2,500 (and not 1,200 as stated by Mr Simon Tay) this fiscal year. To train 2,500 participants in one year is significant for a small country. They are from 123 countries with the majority of 74.5% coming from Asia. On 22nd November last year, the programme celebrated its 10,000th participant to the SCP. We have also the Third Country Training Programme (TCTP) with other partners in order to organise and run training courses jointly for developing countries. This has enabled us to stretch the SCP dollar to reach out to more developing countries and tap the expertise of international organisations and partner countries. To date, Singapore has signed TCTP MOUs with 21 partners, including the World Bank, IMF, the Commonwealth, Colombo Plan, UNDP and WTO. And we will sign an MOU with the International Atomic Energy Agency shortly and negotiations are also going on with the EU for another possible TCTP MOU. The annual total cost of Singapore's technical assistance to foreign countries is estimated to be more than $50 million. This includes training provided under the SCP and those organised by other Ministries and their agencies. Sir, Mr Simon Tay would be happy to know that yes, when special circumstances arise, we do provide special responses. Do not forget, during the financial crisis, our assistance to the region included -

May I seek clarification from the Senior Parliamentary Secretary on his response on the technical and developmental assistance. First of all, on the attachments. Clearly these training institutes, as I understand them, are run by the statutory boards which he has named. I take it also that his comment that the experts cannot be away for long would mean that we are on the same manpower. Some of the institute people are also from the agencies that run the institutes. Am I correct on that? Secondly, while I accept his reassurance, this arrangement means that most of the money we are spending is based in Singapore and most of the training happens here. Am I correct on that? Thirdly, I am gratified again that the Ministry is willing to consider the policy again, as it always does. May I ask the Senior Parliamentary Secretary, in this ongoing review, will the Ministry take into consideration the Minister's own remarks that there is a newly recognised danger of a two-tier ASEAN, and will, in this sense, this new recognition of a development since 1992 spurs us to do more?

My Minister will answer the last question. On the first two questions, since they are ongoing programmes which are conducted by our training agencies, I do not think it is an extra imposition on them. So they are run concurrently with the existing programmes where Singaporeans also benefit from. These participants who are from overseas are also part of the training programmes. On the question of money spent, if we go on the principle that it is best held here, and as beneficiaries of these programmes themselves request that they come to Singapore to see how Singapore implements its developmental programme, they will have to come here. When they do come here. , they will have to live in our hotels or our accommodation and the training programme costs will be expended here. So I think it is only natural that it should be done that way and that in fact is also the way done by many donor countries. 2.00 pm

Sir, when we want to prevent a two-tier ASEAN, the other ASEAN countries have to help these newer countries to integrate with the rest of ASEAN and in this regard, I should say that, firstly, we have a special Indo-China Assistance Fund under our Technical Training Programme specifically dedicated to the Indo-Chinese country. And secondly, on the figure that the Senior Parliamentary Secretary mentioned that we train over 2,000 persons every year, more than half are for ASEAN countries.

Sir, Dr Ong Chit Chung asked about Foreign Service staff careers and training. I thank him for his concern. I agree with him that MFA must have a fair share of local talents. Indeed, for Singapore to remain successful in carving out diplomatic space for itself in spite of its small size, MFA must ensure that it has high quality and well-motivated Foreign Service officers through a comprehensive and integrated recruitment, training and career development programme and an attractive scheme of service. Our recruitment, I must say, so far so good. Dr Ong may be pleased to learn that in spite of the severe competition from the private sector and other Government agencies, MFA has so far been able to attract good quality officers to the Foreign Service. Currently, more than half of our Foreign Service officers have at least a Second (Upper) Honours degree. In addition, since 1996, 17 PSC scholars have been attracted to the Foreign Service. We also complement our pool of Foreign Service officers with talent injection of Administrative Officers and PSC scholars. At the Heads of Mission level, we have as Ambassadors people who have distinguished themselves in their respective careers, for example, Chan Heng Chee and Walter Woon. On terms and conditions, the foreign service is a challenging but tough career. The prestige and glamour of a diplomatic career is no longer an attraction or draw for our younger Singaporeans as it used to be. On the other hand, the disruption to family, in particular, to the career of their spouses and their children's education is becoming a disincentive. MFA has put in place a good training scheme and package of overseas cost of living allowances and other allowances to make MFA career more attractive. However, we are mindful that nowadays, Singaporeans who like to experience living and working overseas, have many other attractive career options, in both private and public sectors. MFA would have to continuously review and improve the terms and conditions of its scheme of service to ensure that we continue to attract good quality officers to join the Foreign Service. Dr Ong raised two specific points: First, on language training, let me say that MFA administers three main schemes to encourage officers to acquire, maintain or upgrade their language skills. Firstly, officers who are going for overseas posting where the language that is commonly used is not English, are given intensive training in that language before they assume duty. The training is conducted in the form of part-time class or tuition in Singapore at the country of posting or at a third country. Secondly, officers are eligible for language allowance if they attain the minimum required proficiency level. Thirdly, part-time language courses are open to everyone in MFA. The course fees are fully reimbursed. On the second question on the education of the children of diplomats, under the Education Assistance Allowance (EAA), officers with school-going children up to the age of 18 are fully reimbursed for tuition in an approved school in the country of posting. For officers stationed in countries where the educational facilities are inadequate and the child cannot remain in Singapore for his education, the officer receives the EAA for the child to be educated in a third country. On their return to Singapore, MFA facilitates the reintegration of these children into the Singapore school system in close cooperation with the Ministry of Education.

Sir, I want to thank the Ministers and the Senior Parliamentary Secretary for their answers. Since we are running out of time, Sir, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The sum of $181,606,920 for Head O ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. The sum of $80,273,900 for Head O ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. Head R -

Head R - Ministry of Information and the Arts. Amendment No. 1, Mr Chew Heng Ching.

Sir, I beg to move, That the total sum to be allocated for Head R of the Main Estimates be reduced by $100. The Prime Minister, at the last National Day Rally, mentioned that we should develop Singapore into a renaissance city or a global arts city to provide the cultural ballast to our nation-building efforts. Artistic creativity is an important component of a knowledge-based economy. Sir, our local arts scene has made good progress and strides in the last ten years or so. Credit must go to the National Arts Council whose activities and programmes have helped nurture a more vibrant arts scene in Singapore. However, what has been achieved to-date is not enough to make Singapore a renaissance city. We still have a long way to go. Our arts and cultural scene would have to grow to support this vision of a renaissance city. Singaporeans need to be nurtured to appreciate the arts and greater efforts need to be made to attract, develop and support both our local and foreign arts talents. Local artists and the arts community should be rendered further assistance. They need to win the support and patronage of Singaporean audiences, whose willingness to spend on the arts or on the various arts forms will influence their progress and development. Sir, I am disappointed with the grant given to the National Arts Council in the proposed budget. The NAC this year will receive some $20 million in grant, a slight increase of $3 million from the $17 million allocated last year or the current financial year. In the budget, the development grant comes to $620,000 and this is peanuts. How can we develop a renaissance city with this money? With this budget, our spending on the arts in the budgeted year works out to only about $7 per capita per year. In contrast, the budget allocated for the promotion of sports comes up to some $80 million, $40 million on current expenditure and another $40 million on development expenditure. Our funding for the sports works out to about $25 per capita per year. We are not according the same priority to arts that we do to sports. To realise our dream for Singapore to be a renaissance city, the Government must commit more funds to promote the arts. There should be a total plan to develop and promote the arts scene. The current grant of $20 million allocated to NAC is grossly inadequate. Our per capita funding for the arts of $7 per year is very low compared to cities like Hong Kong, where the spending is $24 per capita per year; London, $108 per capita per year, and even in the state of Victoria in Australia, the arts spending comes to $15 per capita per year. So we have a long way to go to be a global arts city and more needs to be done. I believe that MITA has embarked on a major study to develop a total plan to make Singapore a renaissance city. I would therefore like to ask the Minister if he is ready to tell the House his Ministry's plans and whether the Government would commit more financial resources, and how much, and over what time-frame. Unless we commit as much resources and priority to arts as we do to sports, we can never be successful in making Singapore a renaissance city.

Sir, our Prime Minister revealed in his National Day Rally speech that MITA is developing a vision for Singapore to be a renaissance city. It has created some excitement among people in the arts community and Singaporeans at large. Sir, we have come a long way. MITA has been proactive in the arts scene. I am aware that both the Minister and MITA officials have been very encouraging towards local artists. The National Arts Council has been making milestones in initiating new projects and strengthening existing programmes. I am happy to see in the latest NAC magazine, a message from their Executive Director where his appeal to the arts community is "To work with us". He called for a linkage of minds and efforts between the arts community and the NAC. His call is a win-win approach as both are dependent on each other and have to work together if we are to make Singapore an arts hub. Sir, we must do more if we are to become a cultured and cultural society. All involved must do more if Singapore is to become an international arts hub. My wish list for the arts scene are many. Some of these are that we must further develop local talent by enhancing training and giving them more scholarships. They must be given more opportunities to perform so that they can become professionals. We must also help create more audience locally by educating the public on the arts as the key to the survival of our arts groups and artists are occupied seats, and not empty seats. We have also got to encourage and give incentives for our local productions to be created and marketed both locally and overseas. We have also got to increase Government financial support to our arts groups and individual artists, and I share the concern of my GPC Chairman, when he said that the funding for NAC is way, way below as compared to our regional neighbours. We must also continue to build more performance arenas and make it affordable for arts groups. We have also equally got to ensure that foreign talent and arts performance companies set up office here and would hold shows here so that they not only serve the local market, but also the regional and international markets. In this, I would also urge MITA to see how we can initiate and hold more international arts events here to attract both locals and tourists alike. I would also like to ask MITA how they are working with other Ministries, like the Ministry of Finance and the EDB, to offer tax and other financial incentives and grants to attract businessmen to pursue opportunities in the arts field. Sir, I am confident that many Singaporeans share the same ambition of making Singapore an international arts centre and are behind the Government to ensure that we succeed. I would also like the Minister to share with us what are MITA's plans to realise our vision of making Singapore a renaissance city.

Sir, like the two Members before me, I am rising to plead for more funding for the arts. Alluding also to the Prime Minister's National Day Rally speech last August, we were most excited to hear that there was a promise for more funding to be going to the arts and that unfortunately does not seem to have been translated in this year's budget. It sounds good in terms of a 14% increase for the NAC's budget because the base is so small. In absolute terms, as Mr Chew has noted, at $20 million worth of funding for all of the arts programmes that we have under the NAC banner, I do not know how much you can achieve with that. I also noted that when you look at the audience reach, in the workload and in productivity indicators, you will find that the reach in fact seems to be shrinking. For the arts programmes, we have about 277,000 audience reached the year before and it is estimated to drop to 210,000 for FY2000. The arts education programmes and the outreach programmes, both in terms of activities and outreach, seem to remain static. Once we have this comprehensive plan that MITA is putting together to turn Singapore into a renaissance city, and if that plan could be very quickly forthcoming, perhaps we might be more successful in getting more resources for the arts. 2.15 pm

Sir, may I take my two cuts together?

Yes.

Sir, before I begin, may I say that I strongly agree with MPs before me on the need for much more funding for arts activities. Trebling of the amount would be just about right, I should think. This morning, I received a very informative file containing the programmes for the Singapore Arts Festival in June this year. In it, I see a fascinating programme and the organisers are to be congratulated for it. There are shows from the four corners of the world for the people of Singapore and visitors to enjoy, and it is indicative of the most vibrant cultural scene in Singapore. My subsequent comments should therefore be taken in this context. I believe that the arts and culture scene to be ever improving in Singapore and all that I would like to do here is to contribute, if I can, to making it a little better. While I admire the programme for our arts festival in June, I am slightly disappointed to see that we do not invite more participation from our ASEAN neighbours. There are only two items on the June programme from our ASEAN neighbours. Now, ASEAN with 10 countries must be said to be one of the most culturally diverse areas in the world. Some countries like ours may indeed have several different cultures, all exhibiting different costumes, musical instruments, dances, songs. If we add on the different artistic styles that they have, we have enough, I believe, for several arts festivals. I know that Singapore, as with other ASEAN countries, has a national ASEAN COCI secretariat. And one of the objectives of this secretariat, I believe, is to preserve and revitalise ASEAN cultures. I hope that ASEAN COCI in Singapore can come up with a flagship project that would highlight ASEAN cultures. And this brings me to my suggestion: can we not consider in Singapore a permanent cultural centre devoted to ASEAN cultures? Such a cultural centre can be, to use the phrase of the times, a one-stop centre - a museum for ASEAN cultures to be part of our Asian civilizations museum network, a theatre for performances by ASEAN artistes, a concert hall for musicians and so on. Singaporeans, young and old, as well as visitors to our island, can enjoy the vibrancy of ASEAN cultures in Singapore. I am looking, of course, not at the centre only as a tourist attraction. I am hoping that it can be a well funded centre that will help also in documenting and encouraging scholarly research on ASEAN cultures. What can such a centre hope to achieve? First of all, the centre's activities will be to educate and entertain Singaporeans and visitors. We have heard much about the lack of understanding among Singaporeans for our ASEAN neighbours. Unfairly or fairly, we are said to be xenophobic and tend to be a bit smug towards our neighbours. I believe a centre like this would have great advantages. It would be a good learning experience for Singaporeans. It would also send a signal to our ASEAN neighbours that we are interested in learning about their cultures. In so doing, we also increase the understanding of our people, making people-to-people contacts among ASEAN countries much more pleasant and, of course, even business people may find understanding our neighbours in the region a bit easier. Second, such a centre can serve as a resource centre for ASEAN cultures, promoting the idea of Singapore as a cultural hub for the ASEAN region. Of course, my wish is that all other ASEAN neighbours will, in due course, build similar centres, so that we can all be networked to become one. But until that time comes, we can endeavour to establish ourselves as a strong resource centre for ASEAN cultures. Third, and finally, we might want to regard the centre as a public statement of the commitment of Singapore to the ASEAN region, ie, our ASEAN peoples living together in a zone of peace, neutrality and harmony. I hope that the Ministry will consider such a centre.

(In Mandarin): Sir, I have read an article in which the author wrote about his stay with his friend in the countryside. His friend was a blind man. During his stay there, every morning, he and his friend would take a walk at the woods nearby. One day when he came back from the walk, his friend asked him, "Did you have any new discovery in the woods today?" The author replied, "No. Isn't everything the same here every day?" His blind friend was very surprised by his reply. He said, "How could it be? Did you not notice that yesterday's flower buds are in full bloom today? The wild strawberries are giving out the fragrance of ripeness. I think they must have ripened." The author was shocked when he heard what his friend had said. His blind friend seemed to have seen more than he did. Although they had a walk together, the effect was quite different. Actually, the principle is very simple. Very often, we look but see not what is around us. Our sensibility is not as acute as the blind man. We have eyes, but we do not pay attention to what we see. We can only feel that there is pressure from our work and we have forgotten the pleasure that we can derive from mother nature. Sir, we should spend more time to promote more cultural activities to widen our scope and to let us enjoy the pleasure in life. Let the melodies and musical notes open the eyes in our soul, so that we can really enjoy life. Cultural activities will not only make us relax but also give us a better harmony and balance in our life. I remember that when I was young, I watched a lot of shows put up by the children's drama groups, eg, a musical by the name of "Tiny Screwdriver" left an indelible impression on me, and I learned about our traditional values through these performances. Therefore, now that we have done well in our economic development, we should spend more resources to popularise cultural activities among our people. In recent years, there has been a breakthrough in the promotion of culture and arts in Singapore. The Government has already made great efforts to build up a "cultural garden". We are no longer a cultural desert. However, I hope that on this basis, the Government should finance and support our cultural organisations so that they can do better. I also hope that the National Arts Council and MITA would bring arts and culture to our working place so that our workers will have the chance to enjoy some artistic performances. The NTUC spends about $80,000 every year to sponsor some 20 cultural activities for our workers, but that is not enough. I hope that the NAC and MITA would consider encouraging and financing more arts groups to bring their activities to reach out to the workers. Perhaps we should also give discounts on concert admission tickets to our workers, like what we do to our SAF personnel, so that our workers would have more opportunities to enjoy the various cultural performances. Sir, I hope that when these cultural bodies are putting up their performances, they could perhaps set aside one special show for the workers. I also hope that our cultural organisations would consider putting up some not so heavy performances for our workers to appreciate.

Sir, we are fortunate that many of our arts groups are given help in many ways by MITA and, in particular, the National Arts Council. The two main complaints of local arts groups were that they did not receive financial assistance and that the cost of having their own building premises was too high. Sir, the first problem has been partly alleviated by both Government and the private sector joining hands to help them. It shows that many of our arts groups have gone on to bigger productions. The second common complaint by our arts groups has been that they do not have their own buildings. A home is very critical for arts groups. It helps them keep their members and audiences, and creates a bond between them. It will certainly remove any uncertainty, particularly among new members joining these groups, where it will be in the long run. It also gives them a certain sense of permanence. Here, the National Arts Council has helped through the Arts Housing Scheme. Through the scheme, one gets space for training, practise peformance, administration and storage. The NAC identifies suitable Government buildings and convert these spaces to house arts groups and organisations at subsidised rental. I understand that as at end 1998, the NAC had managed 17 buildings and 10 units of shophouses, housing 49 arts organisations, 26 visual artistes and two arts institutions, including NAFA and LaSalle under the Arts Housing Scheme. Sir, what I would like to ask the Minister is: have we done enough? I would like to ask the Minister whether his Ministry could do more. An innovative scheme was thought of when some of the arts groups were co-located in two new community centres, namely, Marine Parade and Ulu Pandan CCs. Can we also work out a scheme whereby all arts groups who wish to be co-located at an existing community club or a new community club can register themselves either with the People's Association or with the National Arts Council? Is there such a coordination already in place? If not, can we establish such a form of coordination so that arts groups can let know their intention that they are looking for a place? Sir, I would also like to ask how can MITA facilitate and encourage even the private sector to co-locate arts groups within their buildings. Here, Creative Technology has shown a fine example by offering $2 million and offering 12,000 sq ft of space at its headquarters building to be used for multi-cultural theatre training. We must find new ways for our arts groups to be housed not only in old vacant buildings but in new buildings as well. Grants should be given to such groups who are prepared to co-locate in these new buildings, be they from the Government or the private sector. For the private sector, perhaps incentives could be given whereby selective property tax and other monies expended for the arts groups' housing should be considered for tax deductions to further promote this idea of housing the arts groups. Would the Minister share with us the steps taken by the Ministry to provide housing for local arts groups?

(In Mandarin): Sir, today, we are debating the allocation for the Ministry of Information and the Arts, but everybody is talking about money. So "Money Not Enough" is not just a problem for the lower income group, it is also a problem for our arts groups. I agree with the Chairman of the GPC. The Government is giving more money for sports but certainly not enough for the arts. Our Minister for Education said that we want our students to be thinking, and able to appreciate the arts. But with all this emphasis on sports and so little on the arts, our students may grow up to be physically strong but mentally simple. I think the most practical way is to practise what we have preached. Creative Technology has donated $2 million for the promotion of arts. It is a laudable deed. The Government should take the lead and give more money to MITA. Then it will inspire the private sector to follow suit. Sim Wong Hoo's gesture is a very good example. The media has given it good coverage. He is giving back to society what he has benefited from it. The successful entrepreneurs should also do the same. In the past, MITA presented commendation awards to entrepreneurs who donated $50,000 or more to the arts. If you have only donated $49,999 it is not good enough. It is only if you have donated $50,000 or more, then you will receive an award. From this year onwards, so long as you donate more than $10,000 you will receive a commendation. There are many successful businessmen in Singapore. Let them donate whatever amount they so wish to donate. Even if it is a few thousand dollars, we should also commend them for that. I hope MITA will seriously look into this matter and give the arts groups the support they deserve. 2.30 pm Apart from recognising the sponsors, we should also recognise the performing artistes. They sacrifice their time and energy and even money to present their arts to the people. For most art bodies, we have not given them due recognition. So in order to encourage more performing groups and artistes, we should give them more space so that they can perform in better facilities. For example, the Istana is open to the public a few times in a year and a great number of members of the public have been visiting it. But on every occasion, we saw just school or military bands playing music. Why can we not invite more local artistes to perform there? In fact, our performing groups should be very happy to be given the honour to perform at the Istana. Every year, we have this National Day Rally and every year we have just an orchestra performing a few pieces of music there. Why can we not also invite the local artistes to perform there? Sir, on this cut, I would like to talk about money too. Cable TV has reached almost all the families in Singapore. We can now tune in to a lot of channels. When any important event is happening, we can switch from one channel to another channel to follow the coverage. For example, at the Countdown to the New Millennium, our Singapore viewers had the chance to view the various events taking place in a number of countries in the world. Now our audience can say the programme in one country is more exciting than that in another country. The audience can turn from one channel to another channel at ease. According to a survey, viewership for TCS programmes is declining, not significantly, but there is some slight decline in viewership. Our audience has now a greater variety of programmes to choose from. Over the past one or two years, TCS has spent a lot of money on recreational programmes, but there is still a lot of room for improvement in its current affairs programmes. I think we should do better in this aspect. In current affairs and arts, our programmes are still lagging behind the other countries. So, the opening of Cable TV is a good thing. It brings competition. The question is whether the Government would allot more money to TCS to enable it to send our journalists to other countries to make more detailed reports, as it is done by the TV stations in the other countries. Otherwise, we will be lagging behind the others.

Sir, currently I understand that the main local television channels are operated by subsidiary companies under the Singapore International Media Private Limited, a Government-linked company. Other foreign channels are relayed to the channel under Singapore Cable Vision. The TV media here are thus almost monopolised by either the Government-linked company or SCV. Is this situation desirable? And does it not run counter to the principle of market economy? During the sitting of Parliament on 21st March 1995, MITA's Parliamentary Secretary said that the Government has to be certain that it will be economically viable before a licence is given to another commercial TV station. He also said that the SBA will monitor the industry to determine when the market should be liberalised. I would like to ask the Minister whether the time is ripe now to allow another TV station to be set up. In the area of foreign TV station programmes, currently it has to be carried by SCV's cable. Would the Government consider allowing foreign broadcasting stations to broadcast directly into households?

Sir, the new millennium saw our MediaCorp group restructuring its various TV Channels to achieve a new look, a new image and to meet the competition. This is a laudable move. TV12 has restructured its existing channels (Prime and Premiere) to a fully Malay Channel (Suria) and one niche channel concentrating on children and arts programmes as well as Indian programmes (Central). Sports programmes on Premiere have now moved to a new channel called SportsCity under TCS. Channel NewsAsia, which recently celebrated its first anniversary, is now expected to go regional before the end of this year. Sir, the increased segmentation and specialised focus of the various channels allow them to cater to different interest groups, reflecting our multi-racial society and the differing needs of different age groups. MediaCorp has no choice. Unless it constantly changes and moves with the times, it will lose out to SCV and other foreign TV channels. Sir, restructuring is one thing. Equally, if not more important, is the need to recruit, motivate and retain talents within the MediaCorp Group. On this aspect, I am concerned whether MediaCorp is ready to compete on an equal footing with the foreign broadcast media. In the last year, we have seen the departure of several big name broadcasters and artistes like Christine Tan, Darryl David, James Lye and the impending departure of Lynette Tye from Channel NewsAsia. And recently, we read about the resignation of TCS' former CEO, Lee Cheok Yew. Sir, in order to be effective, competitive and relevant, I would like to suggest that the current HR policies within the MediaCorp group be reviewed. This is in order that we can ensure that with all the best laid plans such as Channel NewsAsia's intention to go regional, we would be able to continually attract and retain the best talents to achieve this goal. . Sir, for MediaCorp to succeed in the long term, it has to quickly address its manpower problem. Unless it is able to recruit, motivate and retain talents in the group, it will lose out. I would therefore like to ask the Minister what plans MediaCorp has to meet its challenges ahead, in particular, its HR policies to attract, motivate and retain talents in the group.

Sir, 30th January 2000 saw the relaunch of two existing channels and the introduction of a new channel, namely, Suria, Central and SportsCity. Last year, we also saw the launch of Channel NewsAsia. These are new and bold initiatives of TCS and the Media Corporation of Singapore. First, let me deal with the topic of Channel NewsAsia. Sir, I am impressed with the quality of Channel NewsAsia programmes in reporting. It has certainly kept many Singaporeans updated on local and international developments, particularly on regional developments. Sir, my only complaint is, how long are they going to keep their broadcast on Channel 5? In the mornings between 6 am and 9 am, it gets boring to watch the same news being repeated on Channel NewsAsia between 6 am and 9 am. One cannot get away from them if we switch to Channel 5. While I understand the original rationale that some Singaporean homes could not access CNN, it has continued to slot on Channel 5 for far too long. I long for a breakfast programme like AM Singapore on Channel 5, and I also think there could be better use of broadcast in the morning on Channel 5. I hope this could be looked into. Let me now move on to the new Channel, which is Central. There are three slots here. The first slot belongs to Arts Central. I get good reviews on Arts Central because it has got a good programme mix and is well received by arts lovers. In trying to meet the needs of three segments, MCS has tied its hand with strict time slots. Arts Central was originally scheduled from 9.30 pm to 1 am. It was tough for arts lovers which include students too. Many of them carried heavy eye bags under their eyes. Sir, I am happy that the time slots have been brought earlier to 9 pm. What I am worrying is that instead of restricting arts programmes to between 9 pm and 1 am, is it possible that some of these arts programmes be shown on earlier time slots when there is broadcast time, and even shifted to SportsCity whenever there are no sports programmes being shown on SportsCity? Let me now move to Vasantham Central, which caters to Indian audience. Sir, originally the time slot was from 7 pm to 9.30 pm, and now it has become from 6.30 pm to 9 pm on weekdays. The quality of the programmes has improved and it is heartening to see more local productions and children's programmes. Sir, the feedback I receive is the concern over the allotment of time for Tamil and non-Tamil programmes. There is a fear that slowly more non-Tamil programmes are coming into Vasantham Central. Perhaps the Minister can allay the fear by explaining what is the proportion of time that is allocated for Tamil and non-Tamil programmes. Perhaps the Minister could also disclose the viewership numbers for these two types of programmes. If there is indeed a programme from the non-Indians for movies like Hindi movies and dramas, would the Minister consider removing this slot to Suria where at present there is no broadcast before 5 pm on weekdays? Two groups of audience can enjoy these programmes if they are put on other channels provided a dual sound broadcast is also provided. Two groups of people can also enjoy on these time slots. Sir, let me move on to Kids Central. Sir, I think it has got a good programming slot and meets the needs of our kids, whether they are from the morning or afternoon school sessions. What I hope to see is more local children's productions and live broadcast of children's events from our schools on large scale community events. Finally, Sir, let me move on to SportsCity. It has clearly satisfied the needs of many ardent sports lovers. Many of us who are sports lovers are happy to see more local events on competition being broadcast live on television, like the S-League games. I certainly hope that more local events can be shown more regularly on SportsCity, if possible, live on TV. This will certainly raise the profile of our local sportsmen and motivate many others to take up sports seriously. Perhaps the Minister can tell us how the Ministry intends to ensure a substantial number of local sports programme content and what is the future direction for SportsCity.

Sir, the Programme Advisory Committee (PAC) has once again completed its review of our local TV programmes and released its report recently. I agree with most of its recommendations and I applaud the Committee for its efforts. In particular, I agree with its recommendations that our locally produced TV programmes should reflect more of our multi-racial representation and that imported TV programmes should not be biased towards American-produced programmes. Instead we should source more programmes from other countries, so that our citizens would not be unduly influenced by any one culture. Sir, I am, however, not entirely convinced by the PAC's recommendation that there appears too much violent content as well as the promotion of negative values on prime time TV. The report cited prime time programmes such as Buffy the Vampire Slayer and Charm amongst others. Many young people I spoke to disagree with the PAC. They enjoy programmes like Charm and Buffy the Vampire Slayer for their entertainment value. Frankly, I believe that Singaporeans today are more cosmopolitan and are more mature to handle and distinguish between entertainment and real life. Indeed, a quick channel check of Channel 8 shows that many programmes on Channel 8 as well involve horror, ghosts, gangsterism and violence, although they are so called Asian content programmes. They too have good entertainment values. Sir, TCS has a difficult task. It has to stay commercially viable, as well as relevant to our own citizens who have increasing access to alternative channels or mediums for entertainment including the Internet and cable TV. TCS also has a critical role to serve in national education and information. I would like to suggest that we should grant them as much flexibility in their choice of programming as possible so that they can continue to be relevant to Singapore and to Singaporeans as a whole. They would then continue to be an effective medium for national interests as well. I therefore would like to ask the Minister if his Ministry agrees with the PAC's recommendations and what follow-up actions will the Ministry take as a result of the recommendations. 2.45 pm

(In Mandarin): Sir, in the past few years, there has been remarkable improvement in the standard of Chinese programmes produced by TCS. Many TV programmes have won not only the praises from the audience but many international awards as well. This is very heartening indeed. Our media are different from other countries because they have to take into consideration the multi-racial, multi-lingual and multi-cultural characteristics of our society, apart from keeping a high sense of social responsibility. Under such constraints, TCS is still able to maintain its credibility by not simply lowering its taste to please the public, and has even managed to produce some quality programmes. This is indeed very remarkable. Sir, apart from producing a number of TV serials with local flavour such as Stepping Out, they also produced some very good current affairs and informative programmes, such as Cultural Escapades, Asia - A New Horizon, The Forensic Detectives, Tuesday Features, Focus, etc. They are very good and have received good comments from the audience. They are informative and interesting, commanding very high viewership. As Mr Seng Han Thong has said, there are a lot of channels and a lot of programmes available to the viewers. I hope that TCS could reinforce our current affairs section, so that they will be able to produce more excellent Chinese informative programmes. As for recreational programmes, I feel that so long as MITA can give TCS more flexibility to purchase better programmes from other countries, that is enough. But for current affairs, they must have high credibility. They have to take into consideration our neutral position. We have to put in more money and more human resources to improve the quality and quantity of our current affairs programmes. On the locally-produced Chinese programmes, there is another aspect that we should pay particular attention to, that is, the children's programmes. I am glad to notice that in recent years, TCS has also attained some breakthrough in the children's programmes. For example, there are a number of very good children's programmes which are very popular. My children are faithful followers of these programmes. TCS should produce more such programmes that are educational and appealing to the children. Hopefully, they will pull the children away from over-indulgence in computer games.

Sir, I would like to ask the Minister to find ways to increase the time allocated to the broadcast of parliamentary debates. I do so because, first, Parliament is a key institution in debating the important issues of the day. Second, many MPs, including PAP backbenchers, make good speeches and deserve to be heard and they play a role in raising important questions and suggestions. And thirdly, in the making and understanding of public policy and law, it is important not only to know the final results but also the discussion, and even what has not been fully accepted. The present coverage gives too little time for this. All we get are the answers. It is like watching a football match with just the goals. Recently, a Straits Times' journalist pondered whether 10 days were necessary for this Budget debate. I believe it is. And as we all know, we move at a very brisk pace to keep it to 10 days. Many other parliaments take much longer. But I cannot help but consider whether the public understands. Can they understand why we take a whole day or afternoon for a sitting, when all they get is 15 minutes of the compressed answers? I would ask the Minister to consider more air time. It should not be live; it should be edited down. But it should be substantial enough to capture the exchanges, the mood and the discussions. Of course, this may be a minority interest. But it is an important minority of open and active citizens concerned about public issues. The means for this can differ. We now have a full time news channel, Channel NewsAsia, with a one-hour news. There is increasing penetration of cable and this gives many more channels. There is also now web-casting of what could otherwise be televised. Parliament is a public forum and we should use these means to let the public see and understand more of our proceedings.

Sir, Channel NewsAsia, following its launch last year, has proved to be a successful station. It is now known as the news channel of quality and fair reporting, presenting not just a Singaporean viewpoint but also an Asian viewpoint. The coverage of major events is timely and balanced. The success of Channel NewsAsia has strengthened Singapore's position as a media hub. I congratulate the management and staff. However, Sir, I would like to make a suggestion concerning the one-hour news broadcast which, to many, seems a bit too long. For most of us, we are interested in the news itself and not so much the analyses and discussions. Perhaps MITA can advise Channel NewsAsia to reformat the one-hour news to a half-an-hour news, followed by a second half hour devoted to more in-depth discussions and analyses. Channel NewsAsia plans to launch the Asia service by satellite later this year. Many of our business community, especially those who travel often, will welcome this service. But the question is: why limit the broadcast to Asia? Why not extend this service to the other countries? In view of Channel NewsAsia's success, is there any plan to have a similar broadcast also in Chinese? Many of the Chinese business community who are unable to understand English are currently unable to enjoy the benefits of this news channel. In the meantime, perhaps some Chinese subtitles could be used to help the Chinese-speaking community. Sir, may I go on to the next amendment, please?

Yes.

Thank you. Sir, over the years, TCS has produced many artistes; however, a substantial number have left. When they left TCS, I believe they left the station but not their acting career. But, unfortunately, our film industry is still small. Ex-TCS artistes have to take up other jobs to earn a living. This is a waste of good acting talent, especially in the context of our limited manpower and talent pool. We have today a substantial pool of acting talent and supporting technicians to support a film industry. We have also the financial resources to develop Singapore as a film centre. The Singapore Film Commission was formed in 1998 in response to the rapidly growing local film industry. Some of our local productions have been well received locally and overseas. The Commission helps to facilitate 12 productions in the past years through grants. The first locally produced 3-D animation, Rex-2000, The Young Heroes, has high quality animation and an interesting story line. We therefore now have the capability and the capacity to develop Singapore as a 3-D animation centre. Sir, film making is an expensive business, but it is a high value-added industry. MITA should work closely with EDB to provide attractive grants and incentives to encourage more local productions. Co-productions could be encouraged, especially co-production between local and overseas parties. Getting permission to make a movie is still a very tedious process in our regulated Singapore. Many applications have to be filled and submitted to different Government departments. Would MITA consider setting up a one-stop service centre where movie production houses could submit all the relevant applications for permits, and MITA, with its efficient staff, help to get fast clearance with the other relevant agencies?

Sir, the Singapore film industry is making a comeback. A number of production houses and film makers have increased manifold. With the recent success of films like Money No Enough, Liang Po Po, That One Not Enough, more companies and individuals are looking at the film industry seriously. It will certainly encourage more film makers to consider making films here. The annual Film Festival has gone from strength to strength, and it has grown to bigger shows. It clearly shows that the film industry enjoys good support from the local audience. Sir, I am concerned whether we have enough talent to make film making a thriving and viable industry in Singapore in the long run. Are we producing the necessary actors, directors, production technicians, sound engineers and other support staff? If not, are we liberal in admitting foreign talent to supplement these talents? Are the right incentives and tax benefits in place for entrepreneurs to consider film making as a business venture? I would also like to ask whether enough is being done to bring foreign production houses into Singapore. Is the EDB actively working with MITA on this score? Similarly, Sir, the Singapore Film Commission was set up in 1998 under the National Arts Council. Its mission is to nurture, support and promote Singapore's talent in film making, production of Singapore's films and the film industry in Singapore. I would like the Minister to explain to the House as to how the Singapore Film Commission has gone about fulfilling its mission to-date. I also would ask the Minister to share with us his Ministry's programmes and plans for the film industry in Singapore and answers to the above matters.

Sir, in view of the greater liberalisation of the news media and its impact on our local print media, I have a few concerns. We are aware that our local print media, ie, our newspapers, are driven by commercial interests as they are owned by a publicly listed company. In view of the scarcity of resources in a small country like Singapore, it appears that, with increasing regionalisation and global competition, it is inevitable that our local print media will have to promote entertainment and more coverage of populist stories in its newspapers in order to sustain readership. Sir, my concern stems from the fact that as the industry consolidates and we open up to the world, our local media may be tempted to neglect its nation-building role. If they continue to play that role, will they succeed or be dwarfed by the major competition from the big boys? It is also true that if they are perceived to be mere mouthpieces channelling official press releases from the Government, they would suffer a credibility gap and our citizens would simply shift to more accessible Internet channels or other cable stations for their news. I would like to ask the Minister if there are indeed plans to ensure that our local print media, ie, our newspapers, will continue to remain relevant and to play an effective nation-building role. Or are there other viable alternatives should our local newspapers embark on pure commercialisation, in order to remain competitive in the future? Should we, for example, encourage the formation of a second newspaper company? Perhaps the Minister could enlighten the House on the Ministry's stand on this, since he has taken over as the Minister for Information and the Arts for some months now.

Can I just inform Members that we are falling behind schedule on this amendment. Mr Chew, do you want to continue?

Sir, the National Library Board embarked on a major project to open a library at the Ngee Ann City, Orchard Road, in October last year, and that Library targets young adults or the yuppy crowd. I understand that the Library there is very popular now and that the National Library Board will continue to try out new strategies to make our library services useful and accessible to all age groups. Sir, in the proposed Budget, some $86 million is allocated for current expenditure and another $101 million for development expenditure under the Library programme. Development expenditure shows a five-time increase over the estimated development expenditure for the current FY. Presumably, a large portion of this development expenditure is earmarked for the new National Library. We have heard about the recent debate and understood the decision to relocate the National Library to Victoria Street. I would like to ask the Minister if he could elaborate on the special features that the new National Library would have, the costs of the investment, and what the public can expect from what is to be the most technologically advanced facility in the region when this National Library is completed in year 2003. Further, could the Minister also comment on any IT initiatives to increase library utilisation as well as participation by Singaporeans? For example, are there plans to improve accessibility such as through the Singapore One network or through our educational institutions? 3.00 pm

Sir, I wish to speak on neighbourhood libraries. I have spoken on this subject before. After I have mooted this idea in Parliament some years back, I noted that not long after, such a library was built in the Prime Minister's constituency at Marine Parade GRC. The point is why such a neighbourhood library can be built in the Prime Minister's constituency but such similar libraries cannot be set up in other constituencies. I hope that it is not a case of favouritism. Is it because Marine Parade is the Prime Minister's constituency that it is given preference of having such a useful facility and other constituencies are deprived of them? Sir, when I brought up this question of building such a library in Potong Pasir, the then Minister, Dr Seet Ai Mee, said that there were libraries already built at Toa Payoh Central and the children in my constituency could take buses to get there. If that is so easy, why build a neighbourhood library at Marine Parade constituency? Why did the Prime Minister accede to the request of the grassroots leaders to build a neighbourhood library in his constituency? Why did he not ask the children there to take a bus to go to the community library or some other library in that area? He did not do that and went ahead to build a neighbourhood library. Because the Prime Minister knows that it is important that libraries must be built close to the homes of the children. The library must be easily accessible and within walking distance of their home. The Prime Minister knows that for young children to take a bus to the central or regional library is time-consuming, and sometimes even risky. The round trip may take about one hour. In that one hour, children can do homework or something useful at home. Travelling by bus and walking in public roads may be dangerous to unescorted children, especially female children. If they are unlucky, a female child may meet a molester. Children can also be knocked down by careless drivers. Therefore, it is not preferable to ask children to go to a library which may be a long way from their homes. But it is better to bring the library nearer to where the children live. Building of neighbourhood libraries is within the financial means of the Government. The Government enjoys budget surpluses every year and its coffers are bulging with funds. What a neighbourhood library needs is about a floor space of about 3,000 square feet, walled up and tiled at the void deck. There must also be sanitary facility. The rest of the job could be left to the residents of the constituency. I am certain residents in the constituency shall be happy to help out to furnish the library with books and furniture if they are asked to do so. Sir, I am calling not only for such a neighbourhood library to be built in my constituency at Potong Pasir, but in every constituency which does not have one at the moment. Neighbourhood libraries are educational tools. They are necessary to teach children to read at an early age. In this way, more future citizens shall learn to read and be better equipped for the knowledge-based economy. Marine Parade GRC has one such library. I cannot see why the Government cannot provide other constituencies with such facilities. Money is not a problem. In fact, the Government's reluctance to build a neighbourhood library in every constituency is going against its own policy in the Singapore 21 vision and the new economy. I ask the Government not to delay any further but to go ahead and build at least one neighbourhood library in every constituency.

Sir, first, I declare that I am a member of the Advisory Council on TCS on Chinese Programmes. It is in that capacity in the last two years that I realised how many Singaporeans watched television and how important it can be as an educational tool for families and children. For example, 900,000 Singaporeans watched the last episode of Stepping Out, a 30-chapter drama documentary serial on the successes and failures of Singapore migrants. I remember clearly what Mr Wijeysingha, the former Principal of Raffles Institution, once said, that television is not a bad thing. As long as adults are watching these programmes with their children, there is less fear of the negative impact of some of the programmes because parents can take the opportunity to moderate the influence by discussion and guidance. It is therefore an important task for the Ministry to continually review, support and strengthen not just the entertainment element, but the educational value of television. More resources could be committed to importing and developing good programmes locally and internationally. I support the call by Mr Chew Heng Ching and Mr Yeo Guat Kwang earlier. That leads me to raise another aspect of television as public education. I was most impressed by the latest commercial series put up by the Ministry of Defence. It was their "Total Defence" campaign which ran over two weeks, using five different versions of 15-second TV commercials. The messages were captured in a powerful visual that educates and communicates to the public about the role in defending Singapore. I congratulate the Ministry of Defence for this series of brilliant commercial. And I was told that the campaign cost $200,000 for a total number of 96 spots in prime time as well as fringe time programmes. I was also informed that the Ministry paid the rates which apply across the board. Sir, one of our concerns in doing social work is how do we reach out to the public with our messages, how do we inform Singaporeans what voluntary welfare organisations are doing. The situation resulted in a frustrating vicious cycle of mismatch. Good social service programmes are available but they do not reach the kind of people who most need them. Could I propose that TCS allocate some slots of air-time for community services to publicise their activities at a much subsidised rate as part of a national commitment to public education? I know MCD had in previous years committed resources to producing many good commercials, like the series on the elderly people last year. Sir, I am requesting for financial support for similar initiatives to emerge from the people sector to complement the work of the Government. There are many ways television air-time could be maximised by VWOs. They can extend their reach by using good visuals during commercial slots in prime programmes to present their services, spread their messages, recruit volunteers and publicise their programmes. All these will only add to public awareness in an extremely cost effective manner. From what I gather, if I were to buy into a programme, let us say, Growing Up which has a loading of 6.5 times, it costs me $6,500 for a 30-second commercial spot. Rates for buying into the fringe programmes are much less. But if we add up, all this is still too much for VWOs. In order to achieve the reach and frequency, we need a mix of prime and fringe programmes. So I would urge the Ministry to really consider special rates for VWOs. By lowering these charges, more sponsors will be attracted to fund the commercial. This is apart from talking about funding the production of the commercial. The potential of using television as an education tool, an instrument for raising social awareness and the bonding process for the community must be apprised within the overall objective of building community understanding by matching services and people's needs in the social service sector. This is just one more suggestion.

Order. I will take the suspension now. Thereupon Mr Speaker left the Chair of the Committee and took the Chair of the House.

Order. I suspend the Sitting and will take the Chair again at 3.30 pm. Sitting accordingly suspended at 3.09 pm until 3.30 pm. Sitting resumed at 3.30 pm

Debate in Committee of Supply resumed.

Head R (cont.) -

Sir, I take the cue that we are behind time. I just like to ask the Minister on MITA's plan to promote good English.

(In Mandarin): Sir, this is an old issue. With our society being more open and the advent of information technology, Internet is impacting heavily on our lifestyle. We know that it is not easy to curb pornographic materials on the Internet and this has been the concern of many countries. However, we should try our best to control the undesirable materials in our movies and magazines. I feel that our censorship is getting too liberalized now. In this open society, people sometimes are so used to all strange happenings around them that they are simply immune to them. As it is said that if you are in a smelly toilet for too long, we would be immune to the stench there. It would appear that I am the only MP speaking on censorship in this year's Budget debate. Perhaps I am really too old-fashioned. Notwithstanding that, I would like to know to what extent will censorship in Singapore be liberalised and opened up? Would the lack of stringent censorship influence the minds of our people? Take a look at the reports in Shin Min Daily News, a Chinese evening press. There are more and more cases of molesting, rapes and abandoning of babies and there is even a report of a very bold and uninhibited female who is in the habit of walking around stark naked in her flat. I think we have become too liberalised in the censorship criteria. If you look at the newspapers, you can see a lot of advertisements of R(A) movies, for example, "Virgin of 8 Wonders", "That's it", "Holy Smoke", "Downfall Prostitute", "Women Soup", "Surrogate Woman", etc. Must we allow this kind of movies to flood our cinemas? Why should we allow it? One day, I suggested to my children to go and watch the movie "Shakespeare in Love". My children told me not to go because I am an MP and that we should not be seen watching this kind of movie. It is a R(A) movie. Since when has Shakespeare been linked to a R(A) movie? I insisted on going because I wanted to know what kind of censorship criteria MITA was adopting. In my view, there were only two scenes which were objectionable. Have them cut and the story-line of the movie would still be intact, and the R(A) movie could easily be re-classified as PG. And there is one lecturer who showed me a children's magazine and he asked me why such a magazine which contains pornographic material is allowed to be circulated in Singapore. Our children are allowed to read such magazines. This is a great puzzle to me. In this year's Asian's Film Festival, we have got Asian pornographic movies and the Chinese readers' reaction is that these are no more than blue films under the disguise of art. Therefore, although we cannot control Internet, we would be able to control the kind of films to be shown here. If we try our best, we can control such films. I hope that MITA can look at this problem seriously. We should not further liberalise our censorship and I hope my views would be looked upon seriously by the Minister.

Sir, I am urging the Government to provide a systematic review of documents and information that it holds, with a view to releasing as much as possible to the public. Why? I make this suggestion because (1) information is the life blood of the knowledge economy; (2) people need to have better information in order to evaluate decisions and Government actions; (3) there is a danger otherwise that we breed a culture of suspicion and secrecy; (4) there is a cost in keeping too much information secret; and (5) timely release will help foster greater understanding, transparency and accountability. I recognise that something will always need to be kept secret. But we cannot reach the situation in which the only Government department paper that is not secret is the toilet paper. I would be grateful if the Government will consider setting up such a system of review and release.

Sir, various reasons have been cited for restricting public use of satellite dishes, such as control of content, censorship, prime time for the corportisation of TCS and for local broadcaster to compete, and that satellite dishes are bulky and unsightly. However, with the meteoric rise of the Internet, several factors have changed. First, the cabling of our nation has led to many Singaporeans having broadband access to the Internet. Images, news reports, video clips and whole programmes can be downloaded and viewed on the Internet. To add to this, we have wireless access to the Internet from portable devices such as 3-G phones and WAP phones. All these mean that we have the ability to view any site and any information that is on the world wide web. Second, the technology has and will continue to transform the ugly duckling of the satellite dishes into increasingly smaller versions. While this has made the satellite dishes more appealing in looks, technology has also made them much harder to detect and therefore, harder to monitor and restrict. In the light of these changes, I would like to ask the Minister whether the prohibition of satellite dishes is still necessary. Is it time for regulations to change to respond to a rapidly changing technology?

Sir, I would like to thank Members for their comments and suggestions. Mr Chew Heng Ching and Dr Jennifer Lee reminded us that PM Goh promised more funds to promote the arts at his National Day Rally speech last year. PM announced then that MITA was developing a vision for Singapore to be a renaissance city. I am pleased to inform Members that the "Renaissance City Report", articulating this vision and proposing the strategic direction to guide our promotion of culture and the arts has been completed. This "Renaissance City Report" is available on the MITA website from today and a printed version will also be available soon. Sir, the last comprehensive overview of our arts and cultural scene was in 1989, by the Advisory Council on Culture and the Arts. That report laid the foundation for the burst of cultural activities that we witnessed in the 1990s. It has been a decade since the Advisory Council's report. It is timely to review the progress made so far and set the direction for the future development of culture and the arts, in the context of our overall national development. MITA consulted with members of the cultural community to gather inputs and views. The resulting Renaissance City Report has been accepted by the Government. The Report has two aims. First, it is to establish Singapore as a global city of the arts. We want to position Singapore as a key city in Asia and as one of the cultural centres in the world. The idea is to be one of the top cities in the world to live, work and play in, where there is an environment conducive to knowledge-based industries and talent, where Singaporeans can be creative and well-rounded individuals. Second, it is to provide cultural ballast in our nation-building efforts. In order to strengthen Singaporeans' sense of national identity and belonging, we need to inculcate an appreciation of our artistic and cultural heritage. We need to strengthen the Singapore heartbeat through the creation and sharing of Singapore stories, be it in theatre, dance, music, literature, film or the visual arts. The need to articulate a vision came about because we wanted to explain how culture and the arts can contribute to the national picture and how they can enhance individual lives. We asked ourselves what kind of society we wanted Singapore to have. How do we want to position Singapore in the international context? And what part does culture and the arts play in all of this? The result was a vision that is described at the level of the individual, the society and the nation. At the level of the individual, we envisage a Singaporean who is well-rounded, has an inquiring and creative mind, a passion for life, and is a civic-minded active citizen. He appreciates and cherishes his heritage. His graciousness is underpinned by a fine sense of aesthetics. At the societal level, our Asian heritage is enhanced even as we evolve a Singaporean identity. We encourage and reward experimentation and innovation, whether in the arts, in technology or in business. Culture and the arts are mobilised to animate and add character to our city. In the international arena, Singapore is an active international citizen with a reputation for being dynamic and vibrant. The "Made in Singapore" label is known for technologically advanced, aesthetically designed and creatively packaged products and services. Our arts and cultural scene helps to project a positive and well-rounded image of Singapore internationally. We have used the term "renaissance" to embody the wide and diverse range of attributes that I have just described. This is by no means a desire to hark back to the post-medieval days of European Renaissance. Rather, it is the spirit of creativity, innovation and multi-disciplinary learning and of socio-economic, intellectual and cultural vibrancy that we want to help create. In the era of the knowledge-based economy, such qualities take on an added imperative because they contribute to innovation, imagination and the creation of new knowledge - key inputs in the future economy. To develop our arts and cultural scene, the Report has adopted two approaches: Firstly, to nurture audiences with a deep appreciation for the arts and keen sense of aesthetics. Secondly, to attract, develop and support both local and overseas creative talents. MITA will pursue six strategies. They are: 1) Develop a strong arts and cultural base. This involves enthusing Singaporeans with an interest in culture, particularly through arts education programmes, and supporting study and research in our arts and heritage. 2) Develop major arts companies. Currently, only the Singapore Symphony Orchestra and the Singapore Chinese Orchestra receive a level of support that allows them to focus on raising their levels of professionalism and producing works of an international standard that Singapore can be proud of. The Report's main recommendation in financial terms is that a substantial amount of additional funding be made available to support and groom up to eight more of such companies. 3) Recognise and groom talent. This calls for initiatives to discover, groom and recognise promising artistic talents that can contribute to the arts and cultural scene in Singapore. 4) Provide good infrastructure and facilities. The provision and maintenance of good infrastructure will continue to be an important factor in supporting culture and the arts. 5) Go international. In order for Singapore to be a cultural centre in a globalised world, we must promote our arts and heritage in the international arena and encourage international collaboration between Singapore and overseas talent. 6) Develop what we call an arts and cultural `renaissance' economy. We need to invest in programmes that will add to the excitement and attraction of our cultural scene, and do this in such a way that positions Singapore as an international city of culture. MITA has projected that we will need additional funding of $50 million over the next five years. The Government has generally accepted the recommendations in the Report and is prepared to provide the additional funds. A few of the recommendations, particularly those relating to tax incentives would, however, require further study before they can be considered for implementation. This sum of $50 million is over and above existing Government arts funding. It is not inclusive of capital and operating expenditure for infrastructure projects for which funding will be separately considered. Mr Chew Heng Ching is right to note that our expenditure on arts and culture is below those of Hong Kong, the United Kingdom and Australia. On a per capita basis, Government operating expenditure on the arts in Singapore, which is currently about $7, is about half that of the state of Victoria in Australia, and less than a third that of Hong Kong. The additional $50 million over 5 years will raise our per capita operating expenditure to about $10. While still modest compared to the levels of funding in more developed countries, it is an important step in the right direction. Over the next few months, MITA and its agencies will implement the recommendations in collaboration with our partners in the cultural community. Other Members have raised specific comments on what we can do to promote arts and culture in Singapore. I agree with Mr Seng Han Thong that we need to broaden and vary the form of recognition for artists and arts patrons. MITA has identified a list of artists who could be invited to attend suitable state events. The National Arts Council also facilitates opportunities for arts groups to perform at the Istana. 3.45 pm Mr Ravindran asked if we could look into providing more facilities for arts groups. NAC has been administering an Arts Housing Scheme to provide arts groups and artists with rehearsal and administrative spaces at below market rental rates. NAC has also been working closely with community organisations and the People's Association to co-locate arts facilities in residential heartlands as part of its aim to bring the arts closer to the masses. NAC will continue to explore opportunities for new arts housing spaces in the heartlands. NAC would be happy to match-make arts groups to be housed with community centres, as well as with private commercial spaces. Creative Technology's gesture in housing a drama training programme is exemplary and we hope other benefactors will follow suit. Mr Yeo Guat Kwang asked what we are doing to bring the arts to the workers, while Mr Ravindran was interested in what more can be done to bring the arts to the people. Audience development and outreach programmes are very important in our efforts to promote the arts. NAC has been organising a number of activities as part of its outreach programme. Programmes such as the fringe activities under the Arts Festival see tremendous turnout. NAC will continue to explore what further can be done in this area. In response to Mr Yeo's query on workers, he may be aware that concessions such as a 10% discount for performances under the Singapore Arts Festival are extended to NTUC members and NTUC Income policyholders. I want to reassure Members that MITA has always emphasised the need to reach out to our heartlanders. This is acknowledged in the Renaissance City Report. Arts and culture cannot just be for an elite few, not if we want to be a society and a nation. Prof. Chin Tet Yung has raised some points about the ASEAN Cultural Centre. I think it is something worth considering and given the opportunity, I will raise this with my ASEAN colleagues. Sir, let me now turn to some information and media matters. The media landscape is changing rapidly. The recent merger of AOL and Time Warner sent a loud wake-up call around the globe. No one could have dreamt that an Internet company with limited physical assets could buy up one of the largest media conglomerates in the world. Wireless broadband technology will take off in the near future. It will enable personal digital assistants and cellular telephones broadband access to the Internet anytime, anywhere. The convergence of traditional media, such as broadcasting and print, with the Internet has changed the way people obtain information and are entertained. The challenge for Singapore is to ride the wave of media convergence and globalisation while enabling a Singapore identity to flourish among Singaporeans. In the deluge of foreign content entering Singapore, especially via the Internet, Mr Chew Heng Ching rightly asked if we should examine how local media can retain their nation-building role, yet compete effectively against foreign media. MITA shares his concerns. We have been studying this issue of creating a functional and competitive industry with great care. Whatever media structure emerges, Singaporeans must have our own media which continue to report on local highlights and viewpoints, and anchor Singaporeans to Singapore. Our local media should continue to cover local events and news attractively. They should also not be disadvantaged when they cover the events at home compared to foreign media allowed into Singapore to also report on Singapore news. We must judiciously create a level playing field. During election time, the same campaigning rules must apply to foreign media as to MediaCorp or SPH. We are working on the necessary guidelines and procedures. Several Members asked whether we should introduce more competition by granting new licences for newspaper and TV stations. One thing is certain: our media companies must gear themselves up quickly to face increasing competition and to seize opportunities presented by the Internet. When companies have to compete for customers, it quickens the pace of innovation, and spurs management to try out new ideas and take risks. The media industry is both a local industry and a global one. There is no shortage of competition globally and, increasingly, this is being felt here through the Internet and cable TV. For the local market, we need to recognise that we are a small market, and have limited talents. There are only so many hours of time each person will spend on TV, Internet and reading newspapers. There will be competition between different media, as well as within one particular class of media. Competition is still possible within a small market. However, we need to consider how best to structure the industry so that our companies can be more competitive locally, grow regionally, and compete effectively against global media players. Our local media companies will then be in a better position to hold their local audiences and contribute to our nation-building efforts. MITA is studying this issue and we expect to reach certain conclusions this year. Mr Ong Kian Min, Mr Ravindran and Mr Low Thia Khiang have asked if we should not lift the ban on satellite dishes now and allow them to provide the competitive push, since it is increasingly untenable to continue the ban. In the Budget debate last year, my predecessor BG George Yeo said that we would allow wireless subscription TV service into Singapore to compete with SCV when its monopoly ends in 2002. As part of our study into the media industry, we are looking at all possibilities, including the pros and cons of introducing another free-to-air or pay TV operator, be it terrestrial or satellite-based, into the market. I have asked my colleague, Mr David Lim, to answer the other questions concerning the media. Sir, MITA will launch a Speak Good English Movement next month. It will be known as a Movement because we hope to make it a grassroots effort. It will also take a more light-hearted approach to encourage people to speak good English. The Movement will be led by a Committee comprising individuals from both the private and public sectors. Col. (NS) David Wong, Senior Advisor, Ernst and Young, has agreed to chair the Committee. The Movement will not disparage Singlish as there are Singaporeans, especially from the older generation, who did not have the opportunity to learn English formally and therefore cannot speak it well. As such, the Movement's initial target audience will be Singaporeans under 40 years old, including school, ITE, polytechnic and university students, working adults and parents. Mr Peh Chin Hua asked for more control to be exercised on R(A) films, publications and the Internet. MITA shares Mr Peh's concern over the impact of undesirable materials on the young. Our position on censorship remains unchanged. The controls over R(A) films remain strict. Explicit sex, violent scenes and objectionable themes continue to be disallowed in R(A) movies, and R(A) cinemas are still not allowed in HDB estates. We also conducted 281 raids last year against uncensored and pornographic videos. Some one million uncensored and pornographic VCDs were seized and the distributors charged in court. If Mr Peh could inform us of the children's publication he mentioned, we would be glad to follow up. It has been the practice for MITA to be slightly more relaxed in relation to films shown in the Singapore International Film Festival as it caters for a small audience. Even then in this year's festival, out of 300 films to be screened, only 14 are in the "Sex in Asian Cinema" segment. They will be shown for one or two viewings to small groups. Sir, I will leave the other points to be answered by my colleagues, Mr David Lim and Mr Yatiman.

Sir, can I have your permission to seek one clarification?

We are running out of time. Mr David Lim has the floor.

Sir, my Minister has dealt with the broad vision and the direction of the arts and media industry. Now let me deal with the field of more practical and easier questions. Mr Chew Heng Ching and Mr Seng Han Thong have asked if MCS has sufficient talents and financial resources to meet the challenges of competition. The short answer is yes, but the rate of change in the media industry is accelerating and MCS will have to move even more quickly. It is preparing to list on the Stock Exchange within the next one or two years. This will sharpen their commercial sense and I think it will also enable them to better retain talent because they will be able to pay more market oriented compensation packages. Sir, a number of Members have made various suggestions about changes to TV programming. They have suggested that we should have more coverage of Parliament, more coverage for Tamil programmes, more sports, more arts, more Chinese current affairs, more Chinese children's programmes and more educational programmes. I think the only thing they said less of was the news. I am not sure that reflects anything. At least, I think it reflects diversity in our society and how we are changing and how our interests are broadening out. I think MCS will be glad with all the Members' feedback, but the principle is this. Unless there is an audience, it is not commercially viable for MCS to put on the programme. You take Parliament, for example. We put on a live telecast debate some years back, and less than 1% of people viewed that programme. So it is not just a matter of putting on more programming but also ensuring that there is an audience for it, because what is the point if you screen something and nobody watches it. Then you might as well not screen it at all. Dr Ho Tat Kin also asked about CNA and whether we could not encourage it to go world-wide now that it has taken the first step to go to Asia. Yes, but again, we must not forget that CNA is barely one year old and going into the region already involves a great commitment of resources. Going beyond the region will require even more. So I think we should take it one step at a time. But in the meanwhile, if you really want to watch CNA and happen to be in New York, you can always tune on the Internet, especially if you have got broadband. 4.00 pm Mr Yeo Guat Kwang made a suggestion about buying more foreign Chinese drama rather than producing them locally. Local dramas are very popular. As Mdm Claire Chiang said, the series Stepping Out received a very good reception. She mentioned the figure of 900,000 viewers. I have a slightly more modest figure, but I think they are in the same order of magnitude. But the value of local dramas lies beyond just the popularity. Local dramas may deal with the same themes as foreign dramas, whether they be about love affairs or about entrepreneurs, but they are set in the familiar surroundings that Singaporeans can resonate with, the buildings, the costumes, the language, even the little vignettes, the stories within stories. These tend to bring out a warmer and more personal reception among Singaporeans. This is a good thing. In the Internet age, we run the risk that people will lose common experiences. We watch different movies, we subscribe to different magazines, we go to different places on holiday. So having dramas produced locally that everyone can relate to and talk about creates shared experiences. These are the basis on which we give meaning to shared values. This helps to solidify a Singapore identity and it contributes to nation building. So I hope Mr Yeo will agree with me that spending a little bit more money on local dramas is perhaps well worthwhile. In any case, many of them do travel overseas and are quite comfortable. Mr Chew Heng Ching asked a specific question about the Programme Advisory Committee regarding Buffy the Vampire Slayer and Charm. I am neither a vampire slayer nor very charming, but the intent of the Programme Advisory Committee was more to caution about violence and supernatural content in these programmes and not to recommend their removal. We do recognise that again there are a variety of interests and some people do enjoy these programmes. Finally, may I address the question that Mdm Claire Chiang brought up about allocating air time or setting preferential rates in the local media for community services. She has given many good reasons why it is useful for us to publicise and raise social awareness about the services provided and also the purpose of these voluntary welfare organisations. But I think it is better that we keep separate commercial decisions and community service decisions. As Mdm Chiang herself has pointed out, air time is very expensive. So there is a real opportunity cost involved. But if we keep these decisions separate, I think it ensures that media companies will run their businesses competitively but without ignoring their role in the community. So we can leave it to SPH or MCS to decide on the rates that they want to charge for commercial services as well as to what amount of discounts or sponsorship they are willing or able to provide for community services. Where public messages by the Government are concerned, Ministries can, within their own budgets, buy air time for advertisements for their own public education programmes and campaigns.

Sir, Dr Ho Tat Kin and Mr Ravindran asked about the development of our film industry and of Singapore as a film centre and whether we have enough local talent. Sir, the formation of the Singapore Film Commission in 1998 was timely as its role of nurturing and supporting local talent in film-making, the production of Singapore films and a film industry in Singapore will help us towards our goal of becoming a Film Centre. Last year in this House, it was reported how the Commission has been helping the local film industry in three main areas: talent development, facilitation and financing. For talent development, the Commission gives out scholarships, bursaries and grants for film-related courses and programmes. Sir, the Ngee Ann Polytechnic's Film Sound and Video School works closely with the Commission. As the local film industry grows and foreigners choose to produce their films here, we envisage a shortage of film professionals, which we gradually have to build up through continuing programmes to nurture local talent and by bringing in foreign talent to supplement them. Facilitation is a key initiative of the Commission. Local film-makers can and indeed do come to the Commission for help either for a general letter of support or for specific requests. Film-makers sometimes still have difficulty with some agencies and we are working with them to see how these can be resolved. In the area of financing, the Commission gives out small grants to makers of short films. Dr Ho raised the matter of co-productions. I understand that discussions on two co-productions with Singapore producers are underway, one with Canada and the other with Indonesia. The Commission also works closely with the Economic Development Board, the Singapore Tourism Board and the National Arts Council. To help make Singapore an attractive Film Centre, the Commission is currently studying what countries with more mature film industries offer in terms of business incentives and film financing and how we may learn and adapt from them. These alone, however, are not enough. Creative scriptwriters, talented film-makers and good business and marketing sense are also crucial. Sir, to turn Singapore into a thriving film industry hub including 3D features will thus require sustained effort to develop talent in all aspects of film-making and sound business and marketing acumen, essential elements to a vibrant film industry. I am hopeful that slowly but surely we shall get there. Mr Chew asked about the special features of the proposed new National Library Building. The National Library is Singapore's main repository of books, information and resources. The new building must reflect Singapore's aspirations to be a learning nation. It will be a one-stop library, offering an integrated learning experience with its special reference libraries such as the Singapore Heritage, the Arts and Business Libraries. For example, the Singapore Heritage Library will hold a comprehensive collection of all materials on or about Singapore. It will be a world-class centre for research on Singapore. The new library building will also house the Central Regional Library. Collectively, the building will house about one million library books and other library materials. In addition, the building will also have a multi-media centre, exhibition hall, auditorium and a select range of outlets like cafes and other shops to enhance the library experience of the visitors. The building will incorporate the latest technology to transform the library into a borderless library with state-of-the-art facilities and connectivity to information all over the world. Mr Chew also asked about IT initiatives to increase library utilisation. Since 1995, with its NL.Line, NLB has opened its doors to a network of borderless libraries, linking the publicly funded libraries in Singapore to overseas libraries. The amount of information available on-line, such as databases, CD-ROMs and optical discs, has grown tremendously that library users can now access some 400 databases and news services worldwide. The NLB has created a network of borderless libraries by co-operating with overseas sources of information including the National Library of China, Shanghai Library, British Library and Russian State Library. The NLB has also developed a Student Virtual Community (SVC), launched in September 1999, to connect students to the information world and promote interaction over cyberspace. More recently, the NLB spearheaded the creation of HuayiNet, a major resource portal on the Chinese Diaspora. This was launched last month. Sir, Mr Chiam See Tong has asked for a neighbourbood library in Potong Pasir. Somehow he assumed that there has been some favouritism. But I think he did not get his facts correct. The Marine Parade Library was set up not as a new library but as a replacement of the old library. The old library in Marine Parade, known as a regional library, has already been there since Marine Parade Town was built. Secondly, he appears to be exaggerating the danger of travelling in public areas in Singapore, picturing Singapore as though it is like New York. I think he has overdone it. Anyway, Sir, he had asked the same question in 1993, 1996 and 1997 without fail. I am offering the same reply. I am afraid my reply will be nothing new to him. I would like to inform him that the children's libraries here are built with the support of the NLB according to certain planning parameters such as geographical factor, population density, age group, proximity to other libraries, and not according to the parliamentary constituencies. We are targetting 100 CCLs and our objective is eventually to have it everywhere, hopefully, including Potong Pasir, many, many years later. Nevertheless, if Mr Chiam is impatient, there is nothing to stop him or his Town Council under his charge to set up his own library subject to the approval of the HDB and other relevant authorities. After all, Mr Chiam himself said that it costs very little. Just put tiles on 10,000 sq ft area, put up a wall and hence we have a library.

Order. It is "guillotine" time.

Sir, on behalf of all those who spoke, I thank the Minister and his colleagues for their crisp replies. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The sum of $201,414,300 for Head R ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates.

The sum of $177,618,500 for Head R ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. Head M -

Head M - Ministry of the Environment. Amendment No. (1), Mr Heng Chiang Meng.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the total sum to be allocated for Head M of the Main Estimates be reduced by $100. Sir, how green is our society? I mean in every sense that the word connotes, that is, environmentally aware, environmentally friendly, actions and practices which are designed to minimise damage to the environment, economic development that is sustainable. Here, I mean the whole community or businesses, each and every one of us as individuals. If we were to consider our anti-littering and clean toilet campaigns as surrogates, then I would have to say "not very clean". These campaigns have not been successful but it is not really the fault of the Ministry of the Environment. In fact, I think they have done a fantastic job in keeping Singapore clean and green. But that is their job. The job of keeping Singapore clean and green seems to rest on the shoulders of the Ministry alone. That our streets are litter-free is not due to the absence of littering but rather due to the thousands of cleaners going about their jobs to keep Singapore litter-free. That our toilets are not smelly and dirty is due more to the frequent cleaning by the toilet attendants than the toiletry habits of the people. Sir, despite the efforts that we have put into trying to make Singaporeans environmentally friendly and green, we cannot honestly say that we have succeeded. Perhaps it is time to rethink on the way we tackle these issues. First, I would really like to see a complete stock-take of where we are now. How green are we? What are the practices and habits of our community that can be considered as environmentally positive? What are the practices of our businesses considered as friendly to the environment? What are the governmental and regulatory measures that encourage green practices by businesses, the community and the people. Let us have a complete report card on these and other areas. Then I would like to set objectives on where we want to go and the appropriate desired time frames to achieve these objectives. Having said this, the next thing would be to apply all available resources, public, private and the community, including financial measures to achieve these objectives. Periodic report cards such as annual stock-takes should then be produced to provide markers on the progress made. What I am proposing is not really new. We already had successfully used this method in the cleaning up of Singapore River. We set a time frame for the Singapore River to be cleaned, and we applied the resources to that time frame and we had periodic reports along the way. Also, the green plan produced by the Environment Ministry some years ago will be a good place to start for this environmental master plan. The green plan currently is more like a statement of what we want Singapore to be. All that is needed, Sir, is to make the green plan more comprehensive and to add in the specific action plans and resources to achieve specific goals. Sir, I think this approach could work. At least, I think it would be more effective than what has been done so far. What is needed is the inclination and willingness of the Government to put enough resources into this plan. And by resources, I do not mean just more cleaners and attendants, but rather the resources to change the mindset of the nation. The approach should not emphasise on the cleaning up but rather be more directed at prevention in the first place. In other words, Sir, we should do all we can to ensure that we do not pollute in the first place and not spend most of our resources on cleaning up the pollution. I believe that a comprehensive Master Plan and a total approach can energise all three sectors - the Government, the businesses and the people - to make Singapore a truly green island. It is an idea worth considering, Sir.

Sir, a few years ago, recycling has been promoted actively. Government departments were using recycled papers and recycled bins were placed in the main thoroughfares for recycled items to be dropped in. The public was reminded that recycling should be practised whenever possible to preserve our earth's scarce resources and not to deplete our natural resources mindlessly. There seems to be not much follow-up action by the Ministry. It would be ironical that the nation that is completely without natural resources can afford to ignore the importance of conserving such scarce resources. Recently, on one of my visits to Canberra, Australia, I observed that the authorities have limited the size of the refuse bin of each household. The objective is to limit the amount of refuse generated, a compulsory way of compelling everyone to recycle and not to unnecessarily generate refuse by needlessly throwing away reusable articles. Perhaps the Ministry can consider ways to encourage residents to limit the amount of refuse. This can be done by making it one of the criteria to be included in giving rebates to blocks which are judged to be the cleanest in our HDB estates. I call on the Ministry to put through the message of recycling and come up with more creative ways to promote this cause. For example, the Ministry can call on the people to limit the usage of disposable plastic cups and polystyrene food boxes and plates, as they cannot be recycled or biodegradable and are harmful to our environment. If this cannot be practised at the commercial places, at least at home, for hygiene and time taken to clean usable utensils are not critical. Any programme we can come up with will, of course, take some time for everyone to get used to. This involves changing not only our daily habits but the whole mindset of the nation. But unless we can make a start now, we may create serious problems for our future generations.

Sir, half of the water consumed in Singapore is supplied by Malaysia and the other half is from our own reservoirs. The first water agreement with Malaysia will expire in 2011. To-date, there is still no sign of what will happen upon the expiry of the said agreement. Much has been reported about the development of the water catchment in Indonesia and the exploration of desalination technology. Lately, there was a report about selling of high-grade industrial water in Jurong. Sir, industrial water or recycled water could be an important source of water supply in meeting our water needs when we fail to secure other reasonable raw water supply deal with our neighbouring countries. In fact, almost all the used water enters into our sewer system, together with the rain water. Our sewer system discharges more than what PUB has supplied into the sea after treatment. If half of the water discharged is recycled, we shall be self-sufficient in our water needs. Based on today's technology, the low pressure membrane is able to produce water of good quality and at very reasonable cost. This is why high-quality industrial water is able to find its market under the private sector initiative in Jurong. From the people in the water business, I know that the Ministry has an ongoing project on the research and study of recycled water. May I ask the Minister on the progress of the said recycled water project? Does the quality of the recycled water meet that of the Bedok or Chua Chu Kang reservoirs' standard? What is the cost of producing the water? What is the application of the water produced so far? Is there a possibility that the recycled water can meet the water needs of Singapore? If so, what plans do we have in making people to accept recycled water as an alternative when we should be self-sufficient in our own water supply?

Sir, in recent times, there has been much talk, and unfortunately much misunderstanding, about genetically modified (GM) food. This is not surprising as the idea of having food that we consume, a product of some form of modification by the addition of a gene from another source using biotechnological techniques, can be quite discomforting, to say the least. What sort of impact would such food have on us and our descendants, since GM food is unlikely to occur in nature even with the most sophisticated form of cross-breeding? Are we not playing God? How would they square against our religious and ethical beliefs? What sort of impact would such organisms and food have on the environment and the ecology? Sir, I do not really know what the answers are. The technology is new, only about 20 years old, and I doubt that there are many in the world who would say that they have the complete answers to all these questions. All I can say, Sir, is that GM food is here to stay. The world needs it. The fact is that the spectre of Malthus' prediction is not upon us is due mainly to the advances scientists have made in the production of food. GM food is but just another step in the same direction. In fact, with populous countries, like China and India, on the way to becoming middle class countries, and with rising affluence, we will have more demand on food. The demand on food in the world can only intensify in the future. Sir, as a matter of interest, even in Singapore, can we really say that we have not been really consuming GM food? Take the ubiquitous soya bean and the products made from it. We take it in the form of soya sauce, bean curd, soya milk and in various forms like tou chiu, tou gua, tou pok, tou kee, and various types of tou. Soya bean is also used in many of the food we eat. We also eat the meat of animals which feed on soya-based feed-mill. The reality of the matter is that the US is the world's largest exporter of soya beans, and that is, about 50% of the soya bean crops in the United States are already genetically modified. So can we honestly say that the food that we consume in Singapore, especially processed food, contains none of those beans in one form or another? Sir, in light of this, I support the rationale and practical approach taken by the Environment Ministry on this issue. We should not irrationally condemn all GM food as unfit for human consumption. On the other hand, if there are reasonable alternative sources, then obviously we should avoid GM food as much and as long as possible. However, I believe that on this issue, individual consumers should have the final say on the type of food they wish to consume. It is therefore the Government's responsibility to provide all available information for our consumers to make their choices. And here, Sir, I am referring to the subject of labelling. I think the Ministry should implement a labelling policy immediately. I am aware that there are technical difficulties involved - issues such as threshold. For example, what percentage would the use of GM food in processed food have to be before labelling them as containing GM food? Despite all these difficulties, I think an imperfect labelling policy is better than no policy at all. I do not think that we have the luxury of waiting for a perfect solution to this issue. Let us start, Sir, with some form of labelling and change the labelling specifications and standards with improving technology and testing techniques. In this way, while the Ministry keeps the broad parameters of ensuring that Singapore has safe food, the final choice lies with the consumers, with us, Singaporeans.

Sir, I support the views put forward by my GPC Chairman, Mr Heng Chiang Meng, on the labelling of genetically modified food. What is genetically modified food? It is food containing ingredients coming from the genetically modified crop. These are crops which have genes taken from other organisms, plants and animals and inserted into the genetically modified crop. Soya bean is the most commonly grown GM crop, followed by corn, rape seed and potato. In theory, anything containing these crops or lecithin, which is made from soya bean, could come from the GM ingredients. We consume food every day which is genetically modified but we do not even notice it. If you ask the manufacturer whether the food is genetically modified, from experience of other advanced countries, clear answers are hard to get. Therefore, it is hard to know whether it is GM food or it is safe to consume, unless they are forced to disclose by law. The dangers of genetically modified food are unknown. The main concern is that food has subtle and long-term effect on health and we seem to be making a significant change to our food supply without checking whether or not it will be having any impact on our health. There are also concerns about the effect of introducing genes which are resistant to virus, herbicide, as GM crops are certainly a cross-breed with weeds. Morally, there are also other problems, like introducing genes of animals into the food which may cause religious and also moral concerns. It also causes certain species of plants to lose their nature of reproduction. On the contrary, it could also cause it to reproduce so quickly beyond the control of human beings. From the manufacturer's point of view, GM food could be produced at a much lower cost, lower risk in production, fetch better price for the product and will be more marketable if the consumers preferred the characteristics of the food to be enhanced. These include the colour, flavour, size and any other preferred ingredients. There are also hopes that there will be increase in productivity of the developing nation in increasing the food production. To the consumers, they may get cheaper and better looking food, but the impact on health due to the food is relatively unknown and uninformed. In a recent conference sponsored by the OECD held in Edinburgh, consumer groups, scientists and legislators were gathered to discuss the matter concerning GM food. The term "substantial equivalent" used to assess the safety of the GM food was debated and strongly criticised by the consumer groups. The modern GM technology was compared to the early days of nuclear power technology development. Scientists then expounded on their incredible potential without realising or warning about the danger of nuclear power. The scientists were urged to be more truthful about what they did not know on the issue of GM food. The term "substantial equivalent" was introduced by the OECD in 1993 to assess the safety of GM food. It was adopted three years later by the United Nations Food and Agricultural Organisation and the World Health Organisation, and has been used ever since. But even some scientists have criticised it for not being accurate enough to prove that GM food is safe. It is only a guide for safety assessment and there are different interpretations and much is dependent on the expertise of the people making the assessment. When we deal with the GM food issue, we must be careful in the adoption of the term "substantial equivalent" in approving the sale of GM food here. The consumers' long-term health safety must precede commercial and scientific interests. Sir, the consumers in Singapore are ignorant about GM food and their health implications. They deserve to be better informed about what scientists are doing to their food and what they are eating. If nothing is done, GM food will flood the market and the people will continue to consume the food by not knowing the implications. If GM food should go wrong one day, the Government has to be responsible for not keeping the consumers adequately informed of the matter. I feel that we should consider mandatory measures by asking the GM food producers and importers to disclose the content and what they had done to the food and compulsorily labelling all GM food sold locally. Mandatory labelling allows consumers to decide for themselves whether they like to eat GM food. I urge the Ministry to seriously consider the labelling of GM food and the compulsory disclosure of the content of GM food sold locally. 4.30 pm

Sir, despite concerted efforts to eradicate the problem of littering in Singapore, one of the major complaints the town council has received from the residents is the untidiness and lack of cleanliness in the estate. Although the legislation provides for severe fines for people who litter indiscriminately, enforcement remains a big problem. Keeping the estate clean and tidy depends very much on the civic consciousness of the residents, and not on the frequency of the cleaning. Theoretically, if nobody litters, the environment will remain clean even without cleaning. A good example is in the comparison between the public housing estates and the private condominiums. The standard of cleanliness in condominiums has always been higher and it is not because they are cleaned more frequently. It is more in the mindset of the residents that they regard the area even outside their units as their own. Therefore, they are more conscious in keeping the estate clean and tidy. Apart from the necessary expenses caused by cleaning up the public housing estates, it also affects the environment we live in. And Singapore being an urban city, we must cultivate civic consciousness in everyone of us whether we live in private or public estates. I hope the Ministry can put more efforts in promoting public consciousness, keeping our environment clean and stepping up enforcement in catching those who litter indiscriminately. One area which needs to be looked into is how to deal with those businesses who send out fliers to the residents in HDB estates. These businesses, while saving on their advertising cost, have indirectly generated a tremendous amount of litter as 99% of the residents would discard these fliers immediately after taking them out from the letterboxes. Some measures have been taken by some town councils to modify the letterboxes to prevent this by building a trough under the letterboxes to collect these discarded fliers. But in most housing estates, this still remains a source of environmental pollution. Perhaps, a form of fine or levy can be put on these businesses who indiscriminately send out fliers in our public estates to defray the extra cleaning cost incurred by the town council.

Sir, Mr Kenneth Chen seems to imply that people who live in condominiums are more civic minded. I am not too sure whether his assessment is correct, and whether it is fair to the people who live in HDB estates. Sir, using punishment by inflicting economic losses through fines and publicly shaming offenders seem to be the cornerstone of the Government in solving social problems. Heavy fines and CWOs to punish litterbugs is one such example. However, these do not seem to be effective in solving the problem of littering in Singapore. I share the same view as Mr Kenneth Chen on the problem that we are facing in HDB estates. According to the Straits Times' report, such offenders are on the rise. And the Ministry is again considering harsher anti-littering penalties. Sir, I wonder whether the Ministry of the Environment will consider other measures, besides imposing a penalty, to minimise the problem. I think one area it should consider is how to encourage the neighbours and the community to put pressure on the littering behaviour. It could also consider how to empower individuals to deal with litterbugs. The Ministry of the Environment has made offenders to perform CWOs by cleaning up some areas. So far, I have not known of any offenders being made to clean up areas in Hougang Estate. I wonder how the Ministry selects which area to clean up. Does the Ministry only select areas in the PAP wards?

Sir, I would like to say to Mr Low Thia Khiang that I am not aware that my housing estates are being cleaned by CWO workers too. So it is not just Hougang that is being excluded. I do not think the CWO serves the purpose of cleaning up housing estates. Sir, essentially, Mr Low is right in that it is not fines and it is not CWOs that would ultimately solve the root of the problem. The root of the problem is community consciousness, as he has pointed out, and a civic consciouness among people such that there is this shame or perhaps humiliation if you are seen to throw something on to the floor when it is clean. Unfortunately, we have a problem here in that, culturally, Singaporeans, and Asians, in general, do not find it a comfortable thing to do to confront somebody in public and tell them, "Hey, you dropped something. Can you please pick it up?" We have seen also, where handphones are concerned, that the reaction could be something very violent. So I think it is a long way more and a big cultural change that we may have to institute. I say this because I do believe that this problem affects two other areas. I want to talk particularly about the Singapore River and the Civic District. Seven million tourists visit us every year. Some of these are journalists and government officials, and they leave Singapore with the impression that it is clean and green and then they spread the word and send more people our way. We have indeed done very well and our Ministry of the Environment deserves high praise for the work they have done. This is particularly so when we realise that the cleanliness is achieved through sheer diligence in sweeping the streets and, as Mr Low says, heavy fines and the Corrective Work Order for recalcitrant offenders of our anti-littering laws. Special efforts seem to have been put into keeping Orchard Road, our prime tourist belt, and Changi Airport, spotlessly clean. Somehow, I think cleanliness does beget cleanliness and, as I said earlier, if the place is clean, the person who throws litter will feel a little bit conscious if he were to be the first to make the place dirty. But a person who wants to litter will feel less compunction if the street is already very dirty. Ultimately, we must change the attitude of the people. But today, I am not here to talk about what kind of civic campaigns we must introduce or what new fines we must institute. I just have a small request of the Ministry. I walk between this area - Parliament Place, the Padang, Empress Place - to my office in Battery Road every day. Along the way, I pass a construction site: naturally it will be a bit dirty and dust flies all over. And I pass the historically quaint Cavenagh Bridge where I have the pleasure of seeing fishermen fish from the Singapore River. This River is a long way from the black, smelly, immensely filthy river of my childhood 30-40 years ago. All credit goes to the Ministry again for the miracle they have wrought. People actually travel on this river now on pleasure cruises! Sir, I appreciate that keeping up such cleanliness is a difficult task. I just wish to alert the Ministry to the fact that more attention should perhaps be given to the river and the Civic District through which it runs. I have had on many occasions written letters to the Ministry on the unsatisfactory state of cleanliness during my daily walk. Beer bottles are littered at odd hours of the day; leaves clog drains; debris float on the river; oil stains on the river and on the roads; tour buses running their air conditioners while they wait for their passengers to rejoin them and spewing, in the meantime, lots of pollutants into the air. Can the Ministry pay the same attention to this area as they do for Orchard Road and the Airport before many of the tourists visiting here start telling their friends that Singapore is not really that clean after all?

(In Malay): Sir, when we see, read or hear about floods occurring in Africa, Europe, America and China through the print or electronic media, we would be worried and fearful if it would happen here where lives would be lost and properties destroyed. We live in a small island surrounded by water and the fear is more real when heavy rain continues for several days and the tide is high. In the 70s, we saw the development of 3,178 hectares of flood prone land involving $20 million worth of manpower and about $68 million in improving canals in flood prone areas. In 1998, there were 260 hectares of flood prone land left that can still be developed. These flood prone areas can cause difficulties to the public when flood occurs and there would be traffic jams and damage to vehicles and properties. The question is: why did the Ministry of the Environment not develop the 260 hectares of flood prone land? Is it due to shortage of budget or other factors that flood prone areas still exist? Where is the location of the 260 hectares of land? What projects are underway and will be carried out? Can I say that in 10 years' time from today, Singapore will be free from flood? 4.45 pm Sir, it was reported in 1998 that there were about 5,183 dengue cases and 75 cases of dengue haemorrhagic fever. With regard to malaria there were 405 cases, of which 369 were cases reported to be brought in by victims from overseas. Only 36 cases of malaria occurred here. Although the figure is quite high, only one died from dengue and five from malaria. The responsibilities of reducing dengue and malaria cases rest on the shoulder of the Vector Control and Research Department, Ministry of the Environment. I would like to know whether the said department has thus far been successful in informing the public on the importance of eradicating dengue fever and malaria? What are the figures for both diseases? At the end of 1999, were the figures going up or down? If it had gone down, what are the contributory factors? If in 1998 malaria had taken five lives and dengue one, what about 1999? Is the death toll increasing? We were informed that 369 malaria cases were brought in from overseas. What measures have been taken to reduce the figure? Lastly, how many researches were conducted by the Ministry of the Environment so that dengue and malaria problems could be overcome, if not eradicated? I hope the Ministry of the Environment will continue to do the necessary to ensure that Singapore is free from dengue and malaria. We do not want our country, known as a "clean and green city" to be otherwise. Not many tourists will come if there is a dengue and malaria epidemic in Singapore. Singapore is well-known for its cleanliness and greenery and her citizens live in comfort. According to WHO, water and air pollution is well under control. The public and private sectors have both actively participated in various projects to enhance our healthy and clean environment such as the "Clean and Green Week 1998". All these activities will enhance public awareness on the importance of living in a clean and green environment. In April 1996, refuse collection has been privatised and taken over by SEMAC Pte Ltd (Singapore Environmental Management Company). I have been informed that to enhance cleanliness, the Ministry of the Environment has introduced competitors to collect 7,790 tonnes of refuse per day. From the administrative point of view, the effort of the Ministry of the Environment is commendable but, in practicality, we find that in recent months, the refuse collection has not been going on smoothly and according to schedule. At times, we find that the collectors were slow in collecting the refuse and the job performed was unsatisfactory. They used to collect the refuse very early in the morning. However, they suddenly did not collect the refuse for one or two days. What worries me is that their inconsistency and slow clearance of the refuse would bring about an unhealthy environment and various diseases. Do the selected contractors lack the experience? Or is it because they lack manpower? In addition, they use smaller vehicles compared to the ones used by the Ministry of the Environment. What action would the Ministry take on the contractors that could not complete their tasks? When will the new tenders be released? During the selection of contractors for this task, I hope the Ministry of the Environment would be more selective and it should impose heavier punishment to be rendered on contractors who could not perform their job satisfactorily so that Singapore's status as a "clean city" is ensured.

Sir, my cut is on refuse collection from residential properties. When the Ministry engages private contractors to collect rubbish from private residential properties, it sends a letter asking private house owners not to use rubbish bins, but to tie up their rubbish in plastic bags and leave them outside their houses early in the morning. Their collection trucks are supposed to come early to collect those rubbish that are left outside in the open. The problems are: 1) The rubbish trucks do not come early as promised but come in the late morning or sometimes past twelve noon. By then, dogs and cats would have torn up those plastic bags to look for food and pieces of fish bones, chicken bones and other perishable materials would be strewn on the road, which are not only very unsightly but also attract flies and other insects; 2) Some householders do not employ maids and cannot get up at 5 am or 6 am to leave the rubbish outside. So they take out the rubbish and leave them outside in the night. That is even worse. The rubbish left out in the night are sure to attract not only dogs and cats, but rats as well. The plastic bags will be torn open and foodstuff and other waste materials would be strewn all over the place. Another complaint is that private houses also have gardens and they often leave cut branches, cut grass, dead branches and other debris outside their houses. For some unknown reasons, the rubbish collectors do not seem anxious to collect them away in a hurry. Such rubbish left outside the nice houses situated in nice estates can be quite an eyesore and do not look well for the general appearance of the estate. Can you imagine if visitors from overseas are brought around to see some of those private housing estates and the beautifully built houses, costing a few million dollars each, with piles and heaps of rubbish left in front of those beautiful houses? The Ministry should do something about rubbish collection in private estates. I still think using standardised rubbish bins like the ones used in Australia would be the best solution. Another problem which I would like to highlight is that I notice nearly all the rubbish collectors do not wear gloves. I do not know whether those rubbish collectors take on second jobs as food handlers at hawker centres. If so, they need a lot of washing of their hands when they take on their second jobs at hawker centres. I think it is good that rubbish collectors be supplied with gloves and to ensure that they wear them. It is also for their own safety. They may sometimes be handling broken bottles or pieces of glass and broken branches with thorns, and they may get hurt. I hope the Ministry shall take note and do something with regard to what I have just pointed out.

(In Mandarin): Sir, recently, the issue of public toilets seems to be a hot topic for public discussion. It was reported in the TV news recently that some public toilets in United Kingdom had to be closed down because they were not properly maintained. The residents and visitors were not happy and complained about it. In Korea, great care is taken to keep the public toilets spick-and-span. The people there are so proud of it that tourists are often invited to visit the toilets, and almost without fail, the toilets would win full marks for their cleanliness. In Japan, cleanliness of public toilets is also taken seriously. When high-ranking officers from Japan are invited to visit your factory, the first thing they would look at is your toilet. If your toilet is clean, he would have confidence in the management of your company. But if your toilet is dirty and messy, the conclusion he would draw is that there must be something wrong with the management. In China, the public toilets are notorious for their uncomplimentary characteristics, some of the public toilets have no doors. If you want to go to the toilet, you need to bring an umbrella with you. In Singapore, of course, we are not as good as in Korea or Japan, but we are not as bad as those in China or England. Prime Minister Mr Goh Chok Tong has said that if we want Singapore to become a gracious society, we have to start from our toilets. If we cannot keep our toilets clean and presentable, how can we talk about having a gracious society? Last year, in the process of picking the cleanest hawker centre in Singapore, I found that some of the public toilets in the hawker centres were very old and in very bad shape. I think we should renovate all these public toilets in Singapore. I have a few questions for the Minister. I would like to know how many public toilets are there in Singapore and if we want to upgrade all these public toilets, how much would it cost the Government. When can the Government start to upgrade them and when can this be completed? Secondly, after upgrading these public toilets, can the Ministry of the Environment set up some guidelines on how to maintain these public toilets so that the money spent on upgrading them would not go down the drain? Thirdly, can the toilets in the coffeeshops in HDB estates and in the private sector be also included in the upgrading programme? Fourthly, can we have the cleanest public toilet competition in Singapore? When we have this competition, the Ministry can pick the three cleanest toilets and, at the same time, single out the three most dirty toilets so that something can be done about them. I believe we should take this matter seriously. Only then can we enjoy the reputation of being a country with the cleanest public toilets around. Lastly, when we are upgrading these toilets, we should also look into the facilities of these toilets. Recently, I led a lion dance troupe to take part in a competition in Guangzhou, China. When we reached the stadium, some members of our lion troupe went to the toilet. They complained to me that all the taps were not working and there was no water. I was not convinced, so I went into the toilet to check for myself. To my surprise, I found that the toilet was fitted with the latest type of automatic taps. All you had to do was to put your hands under the tap and water would flow out and stop automatically. They are more advanced than we are, so much so that our boys did not know how to use these modern gadgets. Yes, we are actually falling behind the Chinese. Yet we are frequently joking about the pathetic state of some of their public toilets! Perhaps, it is time for us to catch up by installing some of these modern taps which are more hygienic as we do have to touch them to turn them on. I hope the Minister would consider my suggestions.

Sir, it is my understanding that the Environment Ministry has since the late 80s, stopped issuing new hawker stall licences to applicants. Additionally, new markets and eating centres developed by the HDB are now tendered out en-bloc to private contractors who in turn rent these stalls to private operators at a commercial rate. The operators will typically be those who are well-established in the trade, or are connected to the party who won the bid. What happens is that common people who are interested in renting these stalls but who do not have the necessary business experience or financial ability, or for that matter connection, have a hard time trying to get a stall at these centres. Unfortunately, the people who need to set up small businesses to make a living for the family are usually not the ones with the financial ability or the business experience. They would invariably be people coming from the poorer section of our community. In the course of my work in the meet-the-people sessions, I have come across, and I am sure my colleagues do too, many requests for canteen stalls in schools. For many applicants, getting a stall not only provides them with an income but also allows them a certain flexibility in time management. These stalls are usually rented out at nominal rates and would typically provide a modest income for the stall operators to get by. Getting a stall in a school would mean great financial relief to those in need. These would include cases where there is only one parent in a family to support young children. Unfortunately, as things go, there are many more applications for such stalls than they are available in school canteens. For my constituency alone, there were 500 applications for four vacancies in a school canteen when a new school was opened recently. While the school tried to allocate the stalls on the basis of financial need, there were many other equally needy families who had to be turned away. In other words, the fact that there are so many applications for such stalls from a sizeable number of people with financial need would suggest that there is a crying need for more of such stalls to be made available to them. We have always advocated the principle that we should not only just give our people fish but we should teach them to fish so that they can help themselves. I would like to ask the Minister whether the Government would reconsider its policy of not issuing hawker stall licences and to consider setting aside more stalls for the needy. Perhaps as a suggestion, the Government should do the following. First, to have a certain number of hawker stalls or market stalls set aside for the poor and needy families while the rest can be tendered out. Secondly, to set basic criteria that the families must meet in order to qualify. Thirdly, to have information and advice on hand to teach and help these families to run the business. Lastly, to provide some soft loans as start-up capital if necessary. We want to make Singapore the best home for our people. We do not want this statement to ring hollow for the poorer Singaporeans. We must be seen to be doing more for them. By doing this, I think the Government would come across even more strongly in show that they really care.

Sir, it is received wisdom that Singapore has no resources and therefore in our power needs, we have to rely on fossil fuels like oil, coal and even natural gas. It is, of course, important for strategic reasons that we should vary the sources of energy that we have and so we have actually signed deals with Indonesia, for example, to use natural gas. Actually, I think that we are sometimes wrong when we say that we have no resources and people would say that our resource is manpower but we cannot have people running and keeping the power stations' turbines turning. So, we have got to think of realistic resources. And one realistic resource is sunshine. We have lots of sunshine each year. I think it is important for us to harness this energy to give us our needs in electricity. 5.00 pm However, I do understand that solar power energy is difficult to convert and the technology is still not very advanced and it requires huge amounts of money and lots of space for the solar panels. I would just like to ask the Ministry if they could give the House an update on some of the efforts that can be made in this area. Perhaps we could think of tax incentives or grants to the universities here to do research into solar panels, so that eventually we could find some technology which we can use for our power needs.

(In Mandarin): Sir, the emission of black smoke from heavy vehicles is one issue that we discuss year in and year out. Last year, this matter was taken over by the Ministry of the Environment. Now the Ministry is stepping up enforcement against the offenders. From August last year to February this year, about 5,820 heavy vehicles and 1,900 motorcycles were summoned for emission of black smoke. Perhaps these vehicles were too old, probably exceeding 10 years. Therefore, some owners of these vehicles are suggesting that the Ministry of the Environment or the Ministry of Communications and Information Technology could give them some incentives such as reserving COEs for them, so that they can replace their vehicles to solve the problem once and for all. Secondly, they have doubts on the accuracy of the video cameras used to detect the black smoke. Is there some way we can help drivers of heavy vehicles to condition their vehicles and to prevent the emission of black smoke? Thirdly, Malaysian registered vehicles are running on our roads. Will they be also subjected to the same enforcement action? Are they also issued summonses for emission of black smoke too? The penalty is too heavy. I believe for the first offender, the fine is $500. At this time when the economy has not fully recovered, this is a very heavy burden on the drivers of these heavy vehicles. I would like to ask the Minister whether or not we could give them some rebates during this difficult time. Do not fine them so heavily and, at the same time, use other ways to educate them on how to prevent the emission of black smoke and how to maintain or service their vehicles so that they will not have to face this predicament.

Sir, we all know that we live in the 21st century with advanced technology in almost every frontier of science. Yet, we are still haunted by the difficulty in controlling diesel smoke from the more than 100 years old technology. It seems to be an insult to mankind in this modern information age. As I said in last year's speech on diesel pollution, the diesel technology is so advanced that preventing diesel vehicles from having smoky exhausts is no big deal. Why do so many people still complain of being booked for emitting excessive diesel smoke? They are either ignorant of the technology or they do not bother about their vehicles until they are caught and fined. Sir, no doubt we are in the IT age. Some people just do not practise the right thing. Instead, they cut corners, try to save some work and some money. In the case of diesel vehicles, some vehicle owners, instead of practising preventive maintenance, they practise breakdown repair. In other words, they only maintain their vehicle when it breaks down. This is really unfortunate. In dealing with such diesel emission violation, the Ministry imposes heavy fines on both the driver and the owner, and I have no qualms about this. However, as a form of education, incentives and disincentives might perhaps help to improve the present system of penalty. As the Ministry is responsible for the policy on environmental pollution by vehicles, certain incentive concept could be built into the law to better achieve the goal in pollution control. One could ask the recalcitrant vehicle owner for more frequent inspections, say, half yearly instead of annual, for private lorries and cars. Those who always manage to keep their exhausts clean could be granted incentives by having lesser inspections, say, biennially. Those who are genuinely ignorant of how to keep exhausts clean could be sent for courses in ITE. Could the Minister comment on this proposed measure? For the 2-stroke motorcycles, under the current regulations, registration of new 2-stroke motorcycles has stopped. But there are still many on the road which were registered prior to the new regulation. The exhaust of unburnt hydrocarbon from these 2-stroke motorcycles is excessive, visible, smelly and irritate our visual and respiratory system. I recall that once I entered a motorcycle lane at the Causeway Checkpoint by mistake. The level of hydrocarbon from the motorcycles in the holding area was highly unbearable and almost suffocating. One hearing this may just come to the conclusion that these are Malaysian motorcycles. To many people's surprise, these motorcycles bear Singapore registration plates. Sir, if that is the case, many of the old 2-stroke motorcycles are already being disowned by our fellow Singaporeans. It is time that we should consider phasing out all these old and polluted machines from the road. We have a COE system which entitles all vehicles to be on the road for 20 years upon paying the prevailing COE premium, regardless of whether the vehicle complies with our current emission standards. In the case of the 2-stroke motorcycles, it is time for us to phase them out completely on the ground of pollution when their current COEs expire. It is insensible for one to pay so much for owning an environmentally clean vehicle, yet allowing this obvious pollution generator to be still on the road. Could the Minister comment on this matter? Sir, our car users have invested very heavily in keeping the high quality of clean air in Singapore, because cars are very expensive, partially because of the anti-pollution devices. I would like to ask the Minister to consider imposing the same vehicle emission standard for all foreign vehicles entering Singapore.

Sir, motorcyclists are now charged for the offence of polluted exhaust based on video evidence. This topic was recently discussed in the media but doubts linger. The practice of using video evidence for this purpose is a departure from previous practice where a vehicle was stopped to have its exhaust measured for pollutants. Some measurements were made and if the numbers exceed some values, the motorcyclist was then charged. Today, it seems that an enforcement officer merely carries a video camera, takes a video of a vehicle with smoke emitting from its exhaust and then sends the motorcyclist a summons. This description may seem simplistic, but this is how the public sees it. Many questions come to mind. Some dangerous gases are colourless and not all coloured gases are dangerous. Besides, what is captured on the video also depends on the lighting conditions at the time and place. In the past, some numbers had to be adduced by measurement to substantiate the charge. Unless the legislation has been changed, what scientific basis has been used to unmistakably correlate the video evidence to the previously used measurements in terms of the nature and density of the polluting chemicals? I ask this question because some motorcyclists who have been so charged had sent their vehicles for the mandatory annual check-up of their machines. The vehicles passed the exhaust test carried out in the traditional way. I want to clarify that the check-ups were carried out at about the same time that the vehicles were said to have committed the polluting offence. The motorcyclists assured me that they did not modify their vehicles in any way before the check-ups. As a result, they were very baffled. However, if the legislation has been amended to admit this form of evidence, then I assume that there is some basis for its use that will stand up to scientific and legal scrutiny. This is important as most vehicles, be it motorcycles, cars, lorries, trucks, etc, do emit some smoke sometimes. I would appreciate it if the Minister could share with the House the basis upon which video evidence is now used as evidence and, in so doing, help to answer some of the questions that I have just raised and hence assure the public of the soundness of this new practice.

Sir, in Singapore, foul smell is not a pollution controlled parameter, unless it causes public nuisance or public health. It is not uncommon that people are irritated by foul smell, either from rubbish bin centres, rubbish chutes, liquid leakage from garbage trucks and smell from the farms. Most of the people in the garbage collection business proudly claim that their operations are mechanised. However, in their dealings with foul smell from garbage, nothing much has been done, partly because there is no environmental control requirement and partly because the people are immune to the smell after their frequent daily contact with garbage. I feel that some odour standard should be set by the Ministry to keep all the odour generators from moderating their emission. Certain operational guidelines could be recommended for the bin centres, chutes and liquid leakage from garbage trucks, so that some physical installations are in place to avoid or reduce the generation of foul smell. Sir, foul smell is not only in Chua Chu Kang. I think places like Cheng San and other places also have a similar situation.

Especially PAP wards!

Hougang also sometimes has foul smell. Sir, I would like to talk about other types of foul smell, besides what happens in Hougang. I would like to talk about smell from animal waste from the farms. It is common that people complain about smell from the farms and point their fingers directly or immediately at the egg farms that generate the waste. There is no doubt that these farms generate the waste. But the smell of the waste could be intensified by the widespread application of the biological fertiliser used by the landscape companies and vegetable farmers. The reason is that we now have so-called organic farm products which are very attractive to consumers. So a lot of biological fertilisers are used and they generate a lot of smell. Certain farms have their own waste treatment facility. Those who do not have waste treatment facility supply the raw untreated waste to farmers. And the way the farmer uses the raw waste can cause the objectionable smell that leads to people's complaint. On one occasion, a NUS researcher wanted to do a modelling of the pollution dispersion from a chicken farm. When the farmer asked him to provide some data to know what will be the acceptable emission level at the complainant's end, no answer was given. What does it mean? It means that even the pollution researcher himself has no basic pollution emission standard for him to use as a basis for his study. In other words, there is no standard of what the odour level will be acceptable. Without an acceptable odour limit on the complainant's end, the complaint would then become relatively arbitrary. In my view, we should try to find out from other advanced countries and learn from them how we could set an acceptable odour limit. Only by doing so, our farmers could then concentrate on their production issue instead of having to deal with the environmental officers every now and then when the people complain. We should also have guidelines for the planters to follow if they are using the untreated biological fertiliser. 5.15 pm

Sir, I wish to thank all Members for bringing up a wide range of environmental issues. This gives me an opportunity to clarify the situation and also to explain some new initiatives on the part of the Ministry. I was very happy to note also that the debate has been very lively and it seems to have provided a lot of room for humour. First, Mr Heng Chiang Meng's point that environment is everybody's concern, and it is unfortunate that the present situation of our clean streets and low level of littering is mainly due to the work of our cleaners. Ideally, we should evolve to a stage where people just do not litter. The schools are teaching the students this. Day-in day-out they are teaching them not to litter, how to clean toilets and so on. Unfortunately, this message still has not been internalised. I think this could be partly due to the fact that a lot of people moved from the kampongs and the villages in the past. In those days when you were in the village, it did not matter, you just threw your rubbish everywhere. If you were living in a low rise attap house, it did not matter if you threw out your TV set, if you wanted to. But nowadays if you are living in a highrise building, you may kill somebody. In fact, some years back when I first started as an MP, I think HDB had to station teams to catch people who threw bags of curry powder out from their windows and caused a lot of problems. Hopefully, this situation has now improved. Unfortunately, littering is still a problem. If Members have good ideas on how to overcome this problem, I would be most grateful. Of course, we are also trying to involve the community, and as mentioned by my predecessor, Mr Yeo Cheow Tong, we should have a civic group to help us in this area. Therefore, I am happy to announce that we have this year formed a private group known as the Anti-Littering Steering Committee which is chaired by Mr Wong Yew Kwan, the former Commissioner of Parks and Recreation Department. The Committee consists of some 20 civic-minded individuals from both the private and public sectors as well as non-government organisations. So far, they have had two meetings this year since its formation and I am hoping they will be able to come out with some fresh perspectives and fresh ideas on how we can tackle this problem.

5.20 pm Fortunately, for us, there are also other people who are similarly civic-minded and I would like here just to mention a few groups. One, of course, is the Singapore Environmental Council on which several Members are involved, including Mr Simon Tay. I think they are playing a very useful role in areas, for example, like the haze problems and other areas, the green plan, for example. Also, there is the Waterways Watch Society, which consists of members who come together and patrol the Singapore River in the Society's boats on a regular basis every Sunday to look out for stretches of the river that are polluted. They will then provide the feedback to my Ministry and to the Marine and Port Authority to take action. Fortunately, after all these years of cleaning up the river, we have achieved a tremendous result. And if you compare the condition of the river at the time when we were children, many of us were schooling in town, the river was just terrible. We had to hold our noses when we went by. Now it is clean and fish is able to breed. We have not only cleaned up all the unsewered areas, but we have sewered them. We have cleaned up the rivers, provided drainage and so on. But also we have these booms which trap the rubbish. These are placed at various locations draining into the Singapore River. Even now, every day my Ministry has to collect some two tonnes of rubbish. We must continue to press on with our efforts to make sure that the environment is kept clean. I want to assure Prof. Toh that we do pay special attention to the Singapore River and the civic areas. Of course, these are very crowded places, especially where there are food centres. It is important that these areas are provided with adequate facilities to handle the volume of rubbish. We have our inspectors go around to make sure that they do not throw rubbish into the river. Unfortunately, as it was mentioned, the river is not spotlessly clean all the time. We do have to be vigilant. Prof. Toh mentioned that some vehicles keep their engines running in Chinatown when they drop the tourists off. If possible, they should shut off their engines and reduce the volume of pollution. But it is fair that before the tourists go on board they cool down the bus a little bit. So for a few minutes, they should run their engines and cool down the buses. Otherwise they should shut down the engines and avoid polluting the atmosphere. Mr Low Thia Khiang seems to say that our fines are too heavy and CWO is not working. I am not so pessimistic. The data is a bit difficult to interpret because it partly depends on where our officers are, whether they happen to catch the people and also the amount of manpower we have to deploy. This idea of empowering more civilians is a good one. Of course, I do not know how many individuals are willing to do it. We have offered it to grassroots leaders and some of them are reluctant because they have to meet their neighbours and there is always this fear that if you are too tough you might get a bloody nose, or something worse. Mr Kenneth Chen mentioned an interesting point, and that is the condominiums seem to be cleaner. I think this has to do with the mindset. He has a valid point there, although Mr Low Thia Khiang seems to think otherwise. It is a fact that somehow when they move into a better environment they have this feeling of responsibility. I think within condominiums and private housing they have a greater sense of ownership. So the residents are more careful. For example, in private estates the lifts are generally cleaner. Whereas for many years, the HDB lifts are terrible. Every time I went for my house-to-house visits we just had to bear the stench in the lifts, so much so that we have to depend not only on public education but also on installing the devices in the lifts to actually catch the people who urinate in the lifts. So we can come out with new ideas, not just educating people, using peer pressure and so on, but maybe new devices, new methods, new perspectives. Next, I want to touch on this point raised by Prof. Low Seow Chay about the recycling of sewerage effluent. He is correct. We are in the process of setting up a pilot plant of 10,000 cubic metres per day capacity at the Bedok Sewerage Treatment Works. It is currently under construction and will be in operation in May. So it is not quite operating yet. Thereafter physical, chemical and micro-biological tests will be carried out over a two-year period on water samples from the plant. The purpose of the plant is to test the technology and costs for consideration as an alternative source of reclaimed water. The reclaimed water from the plant will be used for non- potable applications such as watering of lawns and golf courses and for industrial use. Of course, in extreme cases, if you look just at water scientifically, it can be shown that the quality is as good as water from natural catchments. It can even be used for drinking but there is the psychological barrier we have to overcome. It is a fact that in some countries water is in fact recycled many times. If you are living along the banks of the Thames River, for example, by the time you receive the water downstream, I do not know how many times the cycle has gone through. Of course, the natural system is that sunlight brings up the water and it comes down as rain and you are quite happy with that. But when you use the technical treatment to get clean water from the sewerage effluent, you can use it for industrial purposes. I think we still have to pause and do proper education if we ever want to put it back, say, as a source of raw water. So these are the possibilities we are experimenting. Of course, we are also doing work on reverse osmosis processes for the desalination of sea water. In Singapore, there is a good case for us to put in all the efforts and allow research into various means of reclaiming water, both from the sea and from other sources. The subject of genetically modified food is, of course, a very controversial subject. It is the result of the tremendous developments in gene technology where it is possible to take genes from insects, for example, and plant them into crops and so forth, and get qualities which were not there before. As a result of this, people are fearful of the unknown. At the same time, it promises us solutions to the hunger problem, to diseases and all that, but it raises many ethical questions. It raises doubts. That is why the Government is following this very closely. It is a potential area for us to develop. We are putting a lot of resources into research. We hope to be a centre of life sciences, not only in terms of R&D, but in terms of manufacturing and so on. It is important that we monitor how the international community is reacting to all this. It is not a straightforward question of wanting to know. It is also a question of trade protectionism. If you were a big country like the US and 50% of the crops, soya beans or corns are from these sources, and your scientists have already done all they can to make sure that they are safe and if you compare that the qualities are the same and so on, then you are fearful that if you start labelling, you put people off the crop. That is why there is this big battle between the Europeans and the US over whether they should label. The Europeans on their part have not had a good record. They have handled badly many instances of the mad cow disease and dioxin and so on, that the public has lost confidence in the European governments. Therefore, under pressure from the NGOs, they are now very forceful, and also pressure from their farmers who are affected by all these crops. They are asking for labelling, they want to have their right to ban imports and so on. The US says, "Okay, you can do all that, but is it WTO consistent? Is it a trade barrier?" That is why in Singapore we have to monitor all this. At the same time, we want to be a centre for this area. We want to protect our citizens against some unknown health hazards. We want to make sure that it does not pollute the environment through introducing genes that would lead to unknown results. Whether it is time to label, I think this is a question we have to consider very carefully. There is a committee set up known as the Genetic Modification Advisory Committee. This is chaired by Prof. Lim Pin and it consists of all the relevant Ministries, including my Ministry, PPD and so on. MTI is, of course, represented. So we will have to follow what is happening in other areas in the international scene and then decide for ourselves what is best for Singapore. The assessment has got to be rational. It must not be coloured by all these hue and cry and posturings overseas. Look at the basics. Assess for ourselves, is it really safe, what you want to do about it. At the moment, it is still premature for us to start labelling. The cost of labelling, if you want to be very stringent about it, can be prohibitive. Take soya sauce, if you trace all the way back to the producers and whether the producers are using gene-modified crops, it is going to be a tremendous effort, and I am not sure whether it is really practical. Recently, they had a meeting in Montreal where they reached an agreement known as the Cartagena Protocol. This was really a conference on biodiversity, but somehow the 130 countries which were represented managed to talk about this area as well, what they call living modified organisms. Some countries seem to have got the point that countries should be allowed to have the control, should be allowed to stop the imports of LMOs, or they should be in a position to ask for labelling, and so on. But, to my mind, there is no consensus yet, and we are monitoring the situation. I think Members should be careful not to stir up a lot of irrational fears because this is an area of the unknown and where it is unknown people tend to be very fearful. This is an area which is going to have so much impact on mankind that so much attention is being focused on it. When you eat an ordinary food product, you do not know what goes into it. You look at the label, so many chemical components. Have you asked yourself: Are these components safe, and how safe is the world anyway? So we have to be careful, but at the same time we must be rational. 5.30 pm There is quite a bit of interest in clean toilets. I agree fully that the measure of the culture of a country is the cleanliness of its toilets, putting on both my hats (MITA and Environment). Mr Ang Mong Seng mentioned some places in Korea where they are so proud of their toilets that they even have tourists visit the toilets. And they say that you can have tea in the toilets. Whether we can reach that standard, I am not sure. If you go to some hotels, they are very clean and beautifully done up, and you have flowers, paintings and, of course, you have regular cleaning. And it is very important for hotels to have clean toilets, because the first thing that turns away the guests is to see an untidy toilet. So we hope to do the same thing in the other sectors. Where it concerns the Government toilets, that is an easy matter. The Environment Ministry is already doing it. We will be upgrading the public toilets in all 34 hawker stalls which are managed by Environment. So far, three have been completed at a cost of about half a million dollars. We hope to complete the rest by 2004 at an estimated cost of $4 million. HDB, on its part, has also upgraded 23 of its hawker centres. Mr Ang asked how many public toilets are there. Speaking from memory here, I think there are something like 30,000 public toilets, in coffee shops, hawker centres, bus stops, cinemas, and the rest. Those are the difficult ones. I think for the hotels, the 4- and 5-star hotels, they are generally very good. The shopping centres are generally good too, but there is room for improvement. And there are these small places where sometimes the facilities are somewhat old and lacking and upkeep is below expectation. Our surveys have shown that there has been an improvement overall, but there is still room for improvement. Last year, the Ministry, together with the experts, consultants and others came up with this guide book, "Better Public Toilets, Design and Maintenance" [indicating]. Hopefully, one day, all our public toilets will look like this [indicating]. This will be a desirable goal. But if it is a toilet belonging to a coffeeshop owner, I am not sure whether you can use the force of law to say it must spend $100,000 to upgrade its toilet. I think there we have to use persuasion and maybe incentives. So this is an area where we will be looking into and the Environment Ministry is chairing a committee, involving several other Ministries (HDB, NParks and so on), to try and give this a special push. Something as mundane as the toilet actually plays a very important part in our lives. When people renovate their houses nowadays, they pay a lot of attention to the toilets, and I think rightly so. Several questions were asked about vehicle emissions, the use of the video camera to catch the heavy vehicles and motorcycles which emit smoke. This was done up to August last year by the Traffic Police. We decided that we should do it ourselves because pollution is more our problem and they have other priorities. When we took over, we decided that the best way is actually to use a video camera, because you have a record of the black smoke or the blue-and-white smoke that comes from the motorcycles. For the two-stroke motorcycles, if the owner adds too much lubricant to the engine, the result is pollution - blue-and-white smoke. And this smoke cannot be tested by the normal machine, which is HSU-based. Under the regulations, if there is visible smoke, then it is an offence. There is no doubt about that. The limit for this HSU test, or the Hartridge Smoke Unit test, is 50 HSU, that corresponds to visible smoke. So what we do is we have CISCO police shoot the exhaust of these vehicles, and based on these records, there will be a panel of officers within the Ministry who will decide which cases are bad. For those cases, they will be issued with summonses to pay up a fine as well as to send their vehicles for testing. In the past, the Traffic Police have to actually test on the spot. And basically the HSU tests the same thing, whether there is visible smoke. The problem with the past was that you have to stop traffic, and it was very troublesome. Many vehicle owners just depended on the Government to catch them. It was a cat-and-mouse effort. If I were caught, I would go and maintain my machine, clean it up, and then send for testing, and when I pass, everything would be fine. Now, we say that if you are caught on this video camera, you will be fined, and after that, you must still get your vehicle properly maintained and re-tested. If the person affected is not happy, he is invited to come to my Ministry to view the record. So far, the cases that come, the lawyers tell them that there is no case, that they better pay up. Because it is very clear, it is all on record. My officers will give the benefit of the doubt to those who are borderline cases. If it is clearly very black smoke, you cannot run away from it. But if it is slightly smoky, you just tell the person, go and maintain and clean up, and go for a test, and there is no fine. Recently, because of the appeals from MPs and others, we have reconsidered the level of the compound fines, especially for motorcycles. The previous fine level of $150 for the first offence was rather heavy for some of these low-income people. So I decided to lower it to $70. And it is not correct to say that the first offence would incur a penalty of $500, as one Member has mentioned. The actual level is $150 for heavy vehicles for the first offence. For motorcycles, it used to be $150, but I have lowered it to $70. Dr Tan Boon Wan asked how is it that they were fined, and when they went for a test they passed the test. It is a fact that it is possible to arrange the engines such that you can pass the test, because the testing is under idling conditions. So if you rev up your engine, you do certain things to it, you will pass the test. But when it is running, it is under load, you will get smoke. We are planning to counter this problem by introducing what is known as the chassis dynamometer test. This is a test, CDST, which has already been introduced in Hong Kong, Canada and the US. This allows you to set the load level and then test the machine. So there is no running away from this system. There will be no dispute. We intend to start doing this from September this year. As for the Malaysian vehicles, and they used to be very bad polluters, all the motorcycles coming in with their two-stroke cycle engines, and the heavy trucks, we catch them at the location near the Causeway when they come in. For them, we have to test them and fine them on the spot, because you cannot go and take record, send them letters and hope they will respond. So for motorcycles and vehicles from Malaysia, our teams will spot them, stop them and test them. And if they fail the test, they will be fined on the spot. In fact, if the HSU limit exceeds 50, they will be fined. If it is above 80, their vehicles will be turned back to Malaysia. And this is, of course, a very heavy penalty for the goods vehicles which are carrying all the goods down from Malaysia. I propose to leave the other questions to be answered by my Senior Minister of State, Mr Sidek Saniff.

Sir, Mr Kenneth Chen asked about recycling. I agree with Mr Chen that we must learn to reduce wastes and, wherever possible, reuse things rather than throw them away. The principle of "polluters pay principle", suggested by Mr Chen, is a good principle which my Ministry has adopted. We have implemented a programme to remove the subsidy in waste disposal. Disposal fees will increase to $87 per tonne over the next few years, as announced by the Ministry. Sir, there are problems on the proposal to charge fees for the increasing amount of waste thrown by residents. In our HDB estates, common refuse chutes make it impossible to identify the resident and the amount of refuse he generated for charging purposes. In our landed property estates, we have considered the use of pre-paid bags, but realised that unidentified bags would create collection problems, and we have these problems. Nonetheless, we will continue to work with our public waste collection contractors on schemes to encourage the minimisation of waste generation. Due to our tropical weather, refuse has to be disposed of daily to prevent public health problems, rather than what the Member suggested, about three days once as in Canada. Sir, Encik Harun Ghani asked about flood prone areas. There are now 250 hectares of flood prone areas as compared to some 3,200 hectares in the 1970s. These flood prone areas are located in some 117 locations across the island. The permanent ones are the Chinatown area, Alexandra Road area, including Jervois Road and Margaret Drive, Opera Estate, Lorong 101, Changi and the Farrer Park area. Some roads which are prone to flash floods include Balestier Road, Killiney Road and Selegie Road. At the moment, we are improving the Alexandra canal between Tanglin Road and Kim Seng Road to reduce flooding in Alexandra Road, including Jervois Road and Margaret Drive. We are also building a new drainage pumping station cum storage pond to keep the Opera Estate flood-free. Construction work for many other drainage projects is in progress. These projects, when completed, will help to bring down the number of flood prone areas. However, Sir, it is not feasible to completely rid Singapore of all floods. Firstly, some of the areas, such as those in Chinatown, Boat Quay and Dakota Crescent are very low-lying and are barely above the high tide level. The only economically feasible method at present to resolve the flooding in these areas is to fill up the land upon redevelopment. Secondly, there is a limit to which we can widen drains because land is a constraint. Very intense rainfall which may occur once in every five years or so would overwhelm the capacity of the drains and cause temporary flash floods. Such floods, however, would be minor and of a short-term duration. Encik Harun also asked whether in 10 years' time Singapore would be free from flood. Out of these 250 hectares, we are left only with about 70 hectares at Chinatown. If there is redevelopment, there is a possibility, whether it is five years or 10 years. So it depends on the redevelopment. Encik Harun also asked about dengue fever and malaria. Sir, the dengue fever and malaria situation in 1999 was a huge improvement over 1998. Dengue cases came down more than 70%, from 5,258 cases in 1998 to only 1,355 cases in 1999. There were two deaths though. One was a foreign construction worker and the other was a permanent resident. We believe they sought medical attention too late. Malaria cases have dropped from 36 in 1998 to 10 in 1999. The number of imported malaria cases, that is infected outside of Singapore but was treated in Singapore, has also dropped from 396 in 1998 to 306 in 1999. There was one death which is an imported case. 5.45 pm Sir, we will remain vigilant against these communicable diseases to ensure that our population continues to enjoy high standards of public health. My Ministry has also given more focus on research, especially on dengue, and also working closely with the tertiary institutions on a number of projects. Sir, Mr Harun Ghani also asked about waste collection. We are satisfied with the services rendered by our three licensed public waste collectors that we have appointed so far. All of them are performing in accordance with the service standard required. One of them encountered difficulties during the first week of operation. Their workers found the work too strenuous and could not complete their route on time. This resulted in a backlog and the situation of course snowballed. The company remedied the problem by shortening the length of some of the routes and that meant having to bring extra vehicles and of course extra manpower. During this period, some residents experienced irregular service, with no collection on certain days. The teething problem lasted 10 days. The company was fined $25,500 for the lapse in service standard. Sir, my Ministry is currently reviewing the tender specifications and plans to call the third sector in the first half of this year. Details of the sector will be announced later. Sir, Mr Chiam See Tong asked about refuse collection from residential properties. If residents use proper refuse bins with a cover and deposit their refuse inside these bins, then it will be difficult for strays to get at it. It would help further if residents do not bring out their refuse at night. However, I agree that waste collectors should communicate with residents about when their truck will arrive so that the refuse need not be put out too early. If Mr Chiam can give me more details, I will ask my officers to look into this matter, whether it is at Carmichael Road, Sennett Estate, or Woodleigh. As for 5 am, we have never asked any resident to put out their refuse at that hour because the truck will come around 9 o'clock. Unless of course one is an early riser like a Muslim, one loves one's wife and one does not want her to put the rubbish outside so early in the morning. One can put it out oneself when one goes to the mosque. But I can assure you, Sir, that they start their collection at about 9 o'clock and finish around noon. On the use of gloves, we do not make it compulsory. We leave it to the discretion of the companies. If they want to, they can ask, at their own discretion, their workers to use gloves. Mr Sin Boon Ann asked about the allocation of market and eating stalls. Sir, the decision to tender out vacant hawker stalls to the general public instead of allocating them to hardship cases was taken in 1990 for several reasons. Operating a hawker stall is a business that requires a financial investment and good culinary skills. Many hardship cases who were allotted stalls in the past were unable to operate their stalls profitably and their businesses failed, leading to more financial hardship. Some resorted to subletting their stalls illegally. It was felt that the hawker business is best left to the people with culinary skills, while hardship cases should seek other forms of employment. The present method of renting out vacant stalls through public tender allows everyone with culinary skills to venture into the food retail trade. He will operate the stall under market conditions and will strive to work hard and to do well, and this will benefit not only him but also his customers. Sir, in the case of market produce stalls, there are many vacant stalls available and it would not be difficult to get one at a very reasonable rent. In fact, in two wet markets, that is, in Commonwealth Avenue and Balestier Road, you can just walk in and apply on the spot. Sir, Prof. Toh See Kiat asked about solar energy. Sir, products that harness solar energy to supply heated water are well commercialised, and they are already being used in some commercial facilities and private homes in Singapore. It is left to the building industry to decide on their cost effectiveness. On its part, the Government encourages the use of such products. My Ministry administers an accelerated depreciation scheme which allows the capital investment for solar heating or cooling system and solar energy collection system to be expensed off in one year. One notable application is the solar heating system of the flight kitchen building of the Changi International Airport Services (CIAS). The system provides hot water for the preparation of food, cooking, washing and bathing facilities. CIAS has achieved substantial cost saving through the use of this system. MINDEF has also installed a solar power system at the Tuas Naval Base as a pilot study and is looking into larger scale applications when the technology to convert solar energy into electricity has achieved further breakthroughs. Sir, while products to harness our solar energy to supply heated water are readily available in the market place, the application of technology to collect solar energy on a large scale to produce electricity still faces a number of major constraints. Given the state of the art, electricity production from solar energy is far more costly than conventional form of electricity generation. The growth in the use of solar energy will have to depend upon technology breakthroughs to harvest it in a cost effective manner and minimum space utilisation. That is another constraint - space utilisation. Sir, in Singapore, research in large scale collection of solar energy is limited. I would like to encourage local researchers and private sector companies to be involved in this area of research. They can apply to the National Science and Technology Board for R&D funding for their research projects. Sir, Prof. Low Seow Chay talked about foul smell. Sir, our refuse will smell, with the warm and humid climate we have. For this reason, special attention must be given to it, starting from the person who generates the refuse to the person who collects the refuse for disposal. Refuse must be bagged before they are thrown down the chute and cleansing workers must cover the refuse when they convey the refuse from the chute chambers to the bin centres and do so without spillage. At the bin centre, the refuse must be stored in covered bulk bins. It is the duty of the town council to ensure all this. The refuse from the bin centres are removed daily by appointed contractors in covered trucks. Town councils should report to the Ministry if the refuse collection contractors spill refuse after emptying the bulk bins, or if they do not perform. When everyone cooperates in this way, then the smell nuisance can be minimised. Sir, there are of course engineering solutions such as the use of mechanised refuse handling equipment like dust screw conveyors and compactors in bin centres which will minimise manual handling and consequently spillage. All new HDB flats built after 1990 have such equipment. Refuse is also collected daily to reduce smell problem. As for refuse trucks, they should not be leaking sludge water because these are specially designed vehicles, unless of course if the operator is careless, otherwise it would not leak. Refuse trucks have internal compaction units and upon compacting the refuse in the truck, they are required to drain off the surplus water into sewers provided for at the bin centres. This will prevent sludge water from spilling out when the vehicle is driven. Licensed public waste collectors are penalised if this happens. Sir, town councils should report cases of refuse truck leaking waste water in their estate. The problem of smell at Sungei Tengah Agro-technology Park arose from the chicken dung generated by four chicken farms in the park. Last year, one of the four farms operated a composting plant which will convert the chicken dung into fertiliser and this aggravated the smell nuisance. My Ministry, together with PPD, the licensing authority of the farm, intervened and the farm installed odour treatment measures. The number of complaints dropped after that. My Ministry will work with the Primary Production Department to see how best the problem can be further minimised.

Sir, may I have your permission to clarify?

Can you give Mr Sin the floor first?

Thank you, Sir. Just some points of clarification for the Senior Minister of State. The Senior Minister of State said that, some years ago, the Environment Ministry allocated the hawker stalls to the poor and needy and from past experience, many of these stalls had failed in their businesses. I would like to ask the SMS whether or not in those cases guidance had been given to these people to operate these stalls and to help them along, or were they just given a stall and were expected to make a success of these stalls. Secondly, I am not saying that the policy should be changed in its entirety. What I am saying is that perhaps some stalls could be set aside to be allocated to those poor and needy families who can be trained to run these businesses properly. And my last point is that yes, SMS has said that there are stalls available for rental to the poorer families if they tender for it. Could I also ask the Ministry to make this information readily available at least to the Members of Parliament so that they can inform the residents of such vacancies as and when these cases come to them?

Sir, in my reply just now, the second part of the question is taken care of. As for the former, times have changed and the society has also changed. Because of that, as I mentioned earlier, there are people who are in need of help. By giving them the stalls, it somehow makes them suffer even further. And the number is increasing. And because of that, the Government came to the conclusion and made a decision. As of now, the position stands. 6.00 pm

Sir, I am not going to withdraw my amendment yet. While the Minister and the Senior Minister of State have given replies to a lot of questions, I still would like to hear the Minister's comments on my idea of a comprehensive masterplan, including the total approach to resolving some of the issues that affect us and, environmentally-wise, are we using the business community, the people and all resources available, including, for example, financial measures such as the stick and the carrot? Secondly, since we still have time, I would like to ask the Minister for his views and comments on what his Ministry would do in view of the many reported forest fires in Sumatra and the possibility that it might affect us in terms of the haze. And should the wind direction change and bring the smoke from these fires to Singapore shores, whether the quality of the air that we breathe in will be as bad as the last time, about 11/2 years ago, when we experienced the haze. I think his comments on this would be very useful to us.

Sir, I take Mr Heng's comments about the masterplan. We will have further discussions with him about exactly what he has in mind. Of course, we already have a green plan which we are updating and some of the ideas could be incorporated into that plan. And as I mentioned in my reply, we have already involved various community groups and others and it is our intention to continue to involve as many people as possible in this community effort. In terms of the incentives, we already have green awards, we have incentives for people to conserve energy, reduce pollution and so on. I take it that we should take stock and think of whether we can do more in a total plan. On the haze situation, we had a respite last year because of the wet weather, wetter-than-usual weather. Unfortunately, we are coming to the tail end of this wet weather phenomenon and now, we find that whenever it is dry over in Sumatra or Kalimantan, they will start to burn and these are not only the small-scale farmers but also the big plantations. The satellite pictures show very clearly that these are plantation owners. The Malaysian Minister and I myself have written to the Indonesian Environment Minister, expressing our concern. He had a meeting with the President and the Cabinet and I believe that they are doing the best they can to try and resolve this problem. It is a very difficult issue because there are so many fires. They must have the political will and really punish a few of these plantation owners. So far, they have threatened to suspend or cancel the licence of these plantation owners. And it is obvious from this satellite, you pinpoint the location, which is the particular place. But I am not sure, at this point in time, to what extent the laws are watertight, whether they can catch these people, unless they have actual on-the-spot evidence. So far, they have been able to blame it on the small farmers clearing the land and causing the fire. We have to work with them. I will be meeting my counterparts within ASEAN in Brunei in early April, and we will have to do our best on the Government side, as well as the NGOs, to see how we can resolve this problem. My fear is that we are going to enter into another dry spell very soon. The expectation is that the next El Nino phenomenon may occur this year or early next year, and if this situation continues, we will have a haze like 1997 and, in that case, if you are asthmatic, you had better put some filters on your air-conditioner. There is really no escape from the haze. The particles are so fine, they go into your house, they go everywhere. I dread to think we have to tolerate a few more months of such conditions.

Clarification, Sir. The Minister agrees with Kenneth Chen that people who live in private condominiums are more civic-minded than people who live in HDB estates. That is what he said. I would like to ask ---

Order. "Guillotine" time.

I have never said that they are more civic-minded. Read my speech before you say anything.

Sir, I thank the Minister and the Senior Minister of State for their replies. I am sure that most of us are quite satisfied with the replies and I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The sum of $392,143,270 for Head M ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. The sum of $579,366,700 for Head M ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. Head I -

Head I - Ministry of Communications and Information Technology. Mr Chay.

Sir, I beg to move, That the total sum to be allocated for Head I of the Main Estimates be reduced by $100. Sir, the recent announcement by the Ministry on the accelerated pace of liberalisation of the telecommunications sector by April 2000, and the lifting of foreign equity limit in this sector immediately, are policies to be applauded. It will facilitate the build-up of our city state into an info-communication hub. However, this means that the Government has to make compensation to the two operators, SingTel and StarHub, for the loss of the so-called duopoly status. It is of interest to the public and to the investors how the Government intends to compensate them. Do the compensation criteria for the two need to be the same, and on what basis of real sunk investments? I hope that whatever the basis of compensation, it must also reflect the state of dynamic change in this sector of business, with the attendant risk being a factor which has to be discounted. Otherwise, public funds may not be put to good use. Will the Minister tell the House what has been the interest by foreign investors since the liberalisation? Is there still a national strategic role for a major national telecommunication player in Singapore in view of the fact that ready and appropriate access to telecommunications technology is of critical importance to Singapore? Sir, we have also heard recently of the telecommunications services development in Singapore and Hong Kong. In many surveys and reports done internationally, Singapore usually comes across as a more regulated economy and Hong Kong a more laissez-faire one. In the telecommunications services sector, this seems to work in the favour of Hong Kong in the perception of business investors who have the capital or those owners of proprietary technologies intending to make their presence in Asia or the region. Can the Minister give us some benchmark indicators of how we stack against Hong Kong especially in terms of infrastructures, pricing, inter-connectivity and the range and quality of our services? This will also put in perspective to the public how and where we stand in order for us to mount the next step forward. And have we really done enough to market ourselves and to the right audience? May I take the third topic, Sir?

Yes, carry on.

The next item I want to talk about and ask the Minister is on the licensing fee structure. In view of the liberalisation measures taken for the telecommunications sector, almost anyone can come and join in the fun. In order to attract interest, it is necessary to see that the existing structure of licensing fees for operators and service providers is appropriate under the liberalised regime. Also, we have to make the business competitive and the consumers get value for their money. Hence, I feel it is important that substantial revision in the licensing fees be done, so as not to negate the benefit of liberalisation. Will the Minister be able to give his views on this?

Sir, first let me thank Mr Chay for his comments. He has raised a few points on the liberalisation of the telecommunications sector. Firstly, the compensation to the two operators, SingTel and StarHub, that is, what is the basis and the criteria, and how much. The compensation issue is being undertaken by a consultant that we have engaged from the United States who undertook the first assignment when we first compensated SingTel in 1996. The criteria are being worked out together with the consultant and the companies, and we will have to make sure that we are fair to all parties. We do not want to over-compensate them and, at the same time, we also have to be sure that we are fair to ourselves and the people because we are dealing with public money. He has also asked about the interest of the foreign investors with the liberalisation. Since I made the announcement, IDA and EDB have been aggressively marketing and promoting ourselves to companies in the United States and Hong Kong. In fact, shortly after I made the announcement, a few days later, the first team left for the United States. Altogether, they have made three trips and they are planning a fourth very shortly to Europe. The response has been very positive from the companies that they met, both in the United States and in Hong Kong. At the same time in Singapore, the Info-communications Development Authority has received over 80 enquiries from interested parties. These companies range from companies that have an interest in investing in infrastructure or facilities, as well as companies that are interested in providing services. There are also companies that have seen the IDA and have expressed an interest in coming to Singapore for the first time, and using Singapore, not just providing services in Singapore, but by using Singapore as a base for their business in the region. We expect the service-based competition to be fairly keen and because the services-based operators can begin operation very quickly, they do not require much equipment. We expect them to start operation around April or shortly after. But for facilities-based competition, that would only be developed towards the later part of this year or early next year because, for the facilities-based companies, they require time to roll out their infrastructure. In terms of whether there is still a strategic role for a national telecommunications company, I think SingTel will continue to play a very important role. The experience in all countries has shown that the dominant original telecommunications company, even after liberalisation, tends to play a very important role because they have the advantage of having all the facilities and infrastructure in place, and they have the advantage of having developed the market and it is very difficult to take market share from an entrenched provider. I would expect that SingTel will still play a very important role in Singapore but I hope that would not deter the new companies from coming in because the new companies should bring with them new technology, new value-added services and, hopefully, a new approach which will allow them to win customers away from SingTel. Mr Chay asked about our competitiveness versus Hong Kong, whether we have any benchmark indicators. It is difficult to draw a definitive and objective conclusion between different countries because there are many factors to take into consideration. Mr Chay himself has mentioned quite a fair bit - infrastructure, quality of service, range of service, pricing. There is a whole range. Overall, we can say that Singapore compares fairly well versus Hong Kong and other telecommunications hubs in the Asia Pacific. 6.15 pm I would just quote two recent surveys that were undertaken by different bodies. One was conducted by NUS and in both these surveys, it shows that Singapore scored higher in certain aspects while Hong Kong scored higher in other aspects. For example, Singapore tended to come out very well in terms of competitiveness of pricing, quality of service, reliability. On the other hand, Hong Kong fared better in terms of consumer choice and the regulatory indicators, and that is because Hong Kong has a more open market than Singapore. I think with full liberalisation from 1st April onwards, we should be able to see keener competition in Singapore, in terms of both pricing and service innovations. And I would expect that in this multi-operator environment, our telecoms sector should not just become more competitive, but in the surveys, I think, we should come out even better too in the future. Mr Chay asked about the licensing fee structure, that it is important to have an appropriate fee structure and that we should ensure that we have a substantial reduction in fees to ensure that we are competitive and we do not lose the opportunity to make ourselves more competitive. As part of the effort to attract the key telecoms players from all over the world, in preparing for the liberalisation, we had, in fact, reviewed our regulatory framework, including the fee structure. We realise that it is important to ensure that the fee structure is appropriate, because that forms the first hurdle that companies have to overcome. In drawing up the new fee structure, IDA removed the initial upfront licence fee which can be quite substantial, and we only retained the annual licence fee of 1% of gross annual turnover. The reaction from the industry, so far, has been quite encouraging and positive. So far, in our promotion work in the US and Hong Kong, the reaction from the 80 companies who have approached IDA, there has been no negative reaction at all with regard to the new fee structure. However, in the fully competitive environment, we can expect the telephone companies to enjoy a much smaller profit margin, and we will therefore have to correspondingly reduce the annual licence fee to ensure that our fees are competitive and attractive vis-a-vis the other telecom hubs. I have therefore asked my staff to review the various options for reducing the annual licence fee. The study should be completed very shortly and we will be making an announcement thereafter. I expect the fees to go down further and I hope that the telecoms companies would then pass on these savings to the consumers. It is a win-win approach, because when they pass on the savings to the consumers, this should generate higher demand, increase market size and in the end, the telecoms companies would benefit. So it is a win-win approach and we hope that they will make the effort to pass on the savings to their customers.

Mr Yeo, I suggest that we hear Mr Iswaran and the other Members. Mr Iswaran.

Much obliged, Sir. Sir, the digital divide is already upon us. We have high profile technopreneurs who are making millions from esoteric IT ventures; yet there are many amongst us who remain intimidated by the mere sight of a computer. We have a younger generation of Singaporeans for whom techno-lingo is second nature; yet there are others amongst us who think we are referring to a rodent problem when we talk about a mouse. I welcome the recent announcement by the Minister for Communications and Information Technology that the Ministry will allocate $25 million to bring the IT revolution closer to the heartlands. My concern is how this money will be spent. Because a variety of purposes have been mentioned like training, computer ownership and even Internet access, I think they are important and laudable objectives. But the key challenge, in my view, is psychological. Our task is really to reach out to a large group of predominantly older Singaporeans and to persuade them that they too are a part of this new world of info-communications and it is not just for young techies. Sir, I have three specific proposals for the Minister to consider. The first is on the organisational element. I am glad that IDA will be working closely with community groups and grassroots organisations on this initiative to bring IT and "e" closer to the people. But why not go all the way and let the People's Association drive the project. I say this because the IDA is a new agency with expert domain knowledge, but we do not really need very high-tech knowledge for this effort. Neither can we reasonably expect IDA's young, jeans-clad computer experts to effectively reach out to older, more conservatively dressed Singaporeans. The People's Association and its grassroots are old hats at communicating sometimes quite complex Government policies to the average Singaporean. And I think they know the tricks of the trade. So, why not let them take the lead? Secondly, Sir, icons. I think we need e-icons, not the type we click on a screen, but the type who can touch our hearts and click our minds, individuals whom we can relate to and who might face the same fears as us when venturing into the e-world. To me, Sir, Liang Po Po and Tan Ah Tek of Under One Roof would be fantastic e-ambassadors. They are well known, they strike a chord with many Singaporeans and, most important of all, they could inspire an attitude of "if they can do it, so can I", amongst the average Singaporeans. And I would urge the Minister to consider this form of mass publicity and sort of attitude-changing effort through e-icons. Thirdly, Sir, I would urge the agencies involved to tread the path of least resistance. It is important because when delivering the e-message, we should do it in bite sizes and in an entertaining manner. There is no point diving into the deep end talking about word processing, web browsing, Windows 2000, Office 2000 and so on. Rather, we should start with what appeals, perhaps with games, Solitaire and the like, just get people comfortable with the mouse and the computer screen, and then graduate from there into other forms of entertainment before going into e-mail for more social purposes, and then web browsing and so on. My point in saying all of this is that these incremental steps will imbue confidence and comfort with what would otherwise be a very alien medium to many Singaporeans. And I urge the Minister to re-examine the process through which this IT revolution will be brought to the heartlands of Singapore.

Sir, the Internet revolution will be one of the major milestones of this century. It will have a major impact on business and also on the life of the ordinary person. The emerging importance of the Internet cannot be ignored, and Internet companies are now able to buy over established brick-and-mortar companies with traditional business models. A major trend in the horizon is the emergence of e-commerce communities. The rise of the Internet will lead to the inevitable strengthening of e-commerce as a challenge to conventional businesses. The exponential growth of e-commerce procurement and supply chain, management systems will increase efficiency in the system and reduce cost to businesses. The end-to-end situation of the entire procurement and supply chain will also mean reduction of product and process costs. E-commerce business can make traditional companies obsolete within a few years. The rise of the Internet has also created yet another trend. Increasingly, traditional companies will lose top quality staff to Internet companies. The migration of top quality talent to the virtual world will only strengthen the world of e-commerce. This is a trend that is already happening in the USA and we are beginning to see this in Singapore. The success of e-commerce is not only dependent on business concepts but also on strong management skills. Being an entrepreneur is only one of the ingredients for success. It does not substitute for strong management skills. Internet companies grow rapidly and can become globalised within a short period of time. The speed and pace at which Internet companies move far outpaces conventional businesses. If traditional businesses do not evolve, they will be overtaken. Singapore is uniquely positioned to become an e-commerce virtual global hub. However, we must recognise these trends and prepare ourselves to meet the challenges of an interconnected world. We must change our mindset and adjust to the speed of the Internet world. Hence, we must groom and train people constantly to meet these new demands. We must also adjust our policies to position ourselves to meet these challenges. Liberalisation of the telecoms sector is a move in the right direction. With full liberalisation of the telecoms market in New Zealand, Australia and Hong Kong, Singapore must speed up its liberalisation process to remain competitive. And I support the Ministry's plan on this. We have seen how the introduction of competition in the form of M1 has made the entire handphone market more competitive. It has resulted in better quality services and more affordable prices and also the introduction of new services such as wireless applications (WAP). Increasingly, the Internet world will move from the narrow to broadband applications. Although Singapore has Singapore One and 98% of all homes are already connected, only 14% are subscribers. If Singapore wants to become a serious broadband application provider in the region, we will need to increase broadband access and reduce the cost of broadband access. To encourage the industry and Singaporeans to increasingly move into the broadband applications area, I think it is imperative that the cost be reduced. Current ADSL prices of SingTel Magix are significantly higher than that of Hong Kong Telecoms. Current cable prices of SCV are about three times higher than that of Hong Kong. It is time for the Ministry to put pressure on service providers to lower the pricing of broadband access. We should reduce prices to the level that will be competitive to places like Hong Kong. Current wholesale prices for broadband access by service providers such as SingTel to other ISPs are high, and make it commercially non-viable for other ISPs. The Ministry must mandate open access to broadband infrastructure currently owned by SCV and SingTel and reduce the pricing for these services, so that they can be offered to ISPs. With more competition through lower wholesale prices, more ISPs can offer these services to the public at more affordable prices. The provision of good policies and excellent infrastructure by themselves cannot propel us to be first movers in the Internet revolution. We must create the right mindsets and an understanding of the fast moving world of the Internet. For senior and middle management staff in the civil service and statutory boards, yes, there are many who are already in tune like those in the MinCom, MCIT and IDA, but there are also many who are not in tune. The Ministry should take the lead to organise Internet and e-commerce seminars for senior and middle management to help them keep up with the Internet revolution. Experts and technopreneurs from the virtual world of Internet can bring virtual reality to the real world management. One of the key areas that one must look at is administrative procedures and legislation. They must be able to keep up with the pace of the Internet. As these span across different Ministries, there will still be a need for a coordinating body. Perhaps MCIT may be the best body to coordinate this. The Ministry must be congratulated for several initiatives to help Singaporeans join the Internet revolution. We must do more if we are serious in being a global player, and we must move fast and we must move now. Only then can Singapore be a global player in the virtual world.

Sir, may I take my two cuts together?

Yes.

Sir, first, let me declare my interest as a lawyer practising in intellectual property and informational technology law with clients who will benefit from some of these changes that I will be proposing in my speech. Sir, we have been sitting in this Committee looking at the Budget for the year 2000-2001 and it would be expected that we should be talking of the "f" word - finances. Instead, we are, not surprisingly, I think, talking a lot about the "e" word, considering the ecstasy that is going now in NASDAQ and the rest of the stock markets of Hong Kong, Singapore, London and so on. The "e" word, ie, e-commerce, e-business, is something that is in flavour. I am rising to speak not just because it is the flavour of the day but I do feel that we have to consider many things as we go helter skelter into these new challenges we face in the new e-economy. Firstly, we have to reform some of the ancient and obsolete laws we have. A comprehensive study will need to be done. As an example, I have had occasions to look at the Auctioneers Act and I find that, in the physical world, to protect the consumers you need the auctioneer to have a licence and you need a specific person to pin down, if any offence is created, if there are any offences. But in an e-auction scenario, an auctioneer on the Internet, it would be difficult to find this person even if you were to license him. Perhaps there are some rules that may not be enforceable or not effective or not necessary in an e-economy. A second example would be to look at the Telecommunications Act and the MAS regulations. In particular, we have had recent rules dealing with stock trading. The old Telecoms regulations dealt also with this issue of e-trading, using the networks to trade in stocks and shares. There were some rather onerous provisions which I have actually informed the former Director-General of TAS, and now the Deputy Executive of IDA. The rules may actually be onerous such that our e-stock traders would have to follow these rules, but nobody else in the world does. We would effectively be shooting ourselves in the foot because other people do not have to follow these rules, and therefore they will get more business. It might be necessary if we have to have these rules that perhaps we should sell it as a kind of particular Singapore brand that we are very trusted and therefore there is some value in our being regulated more than other people. The third point that I want to raise is with regard to changing the laws, for example, in intellectual property, copyright, for example. We have had some changes recently in our Copyright law, but we still have a very big piracy problem. It used to be that Singapore and Hong Kong were known as the piracy capitals of the world. We have no longer that unfortunate image and reputation. But I think we still have massive piracy problems and almost every day we find newspaper articles about so and so being fined and so and so being raided. Unfortunately, we have got a particular problem here, ie, many of these guys that we arrest and fined, are what we call "fall guys". These are the students, the retirees, the housewives, who are earning a little extra income. They are given incentives and very high profit margins, and their fines would be paid by the kingpins or syndicate who run the shows. They are quite happy to pay the fine because they earn good money. If we do not crush this piracy problem, we will not be able to attract content providers to come to Singapore to provide content and to help in our e-economy. I dare not suggest, but perhaps we could look at some more penalties that would be felt by these "fall guys" so that they would never do it again. Imprisonment comes quickly to mind. If a person has to be in prison, no matter how much other people compensate him, the kingpin compensates him, he may not want to do it or perhaps kill him, but it may be too heavy a penalty. Perhaps the ones who rent out the shops could be imposed some kind of landlord occupier's liability. He knows these guys are doing piracy. He knows this is not a legitimate business. He should not lend them legitimacy by allowing him to use his legitimate shop. Perhaps the Ministry might consider this way of closing down the den of thieves, so to speak. Fourthly, Sir, when we talk of tax law reform, we need to follow the trends in the rest of the world. We cannot tax when others do not tax, or we cannot be too liberal about tax if everybody else is taxing. But the more important issue here is that we should again look at our Approved Cyber Trader Scheme. It is meant to be a tax incentive for e-commerce. But to my knowledge, there are only two that have been approved so far and it does not seem to be a very highly sought after status among some of our traders. Maybe something is not quite right and we should look at how we can improve tax incentives. ESOPs have been talked about. I know the Minister for Finance has said that he would be looking into this issue and I hope that he would consider that. Taxing a person who exercises an option is a bit unfair because he has not got the money yet. He has not realised it. Perhaps the tax should come when he realises the profit. Perhaps tax reliefs, and some of my colleagues in this House have mentioned about tax reliefs for business angels, individuals who are throwing in the money to help push the e-economy. We could also be looking at other rules like electronic contracting rules. It is right now a bit difficult to decide whether the postal rules apply to a contractual situation on the Internet. We should perhaps abolish the postal rule and allow contracts to be formed in the normal way upon the receipt of the offer and acceptance. We could also be looking at the Electronic Transactions Act (ETA). It is a new Act, but we should be reviewing it. When we introduced it, we have this provision that the Electronic Transactions Act applies to commercial parties and they can opt out of it. But where Government is concerned, the ETA does not apply to Government unless the Government department opts in. This caution is not necessary because our Government departments are all very proactive and if there is any particular department that is not yet ready for the e-economy, they should jolly well declare themselves and they should say, "We are not in the ETA scenario". Perhaps then the pressure will be for them to change. I think if we want to have e-economy, we must have e-payment and our laws on payment could be changed. We have a Bills of Exchange Act which is based on the English Act of 1832. It is really ancient. We could perhaps be looking at how we could electronify the bills of exchange, perhaps even to introduce laws of truncation to permit the truncation of cheques and this would make the e-economy a better fluid situation. In terms of regulating e-economy, I would feel that the regulations on certification authorities, for example, are too onerous and too uncertain. It is based on a draft of the X.509 standards and it is so difficult to comply with that I believe there is no licensee yet. I think if we do not have any licensee, it might be difficult for us to create trust. In terms of regulation, it would be important for us too to think of the protection of the consumer in a different way now. It is easier for somebody to con a consumer and to con him faster and to get the results even faster. For example, we had the S888dot.com situation where within a month a party could actually amass a lot of money from the public and I believe this is to the tune of $6 million. This is something which we have to carefully watch. If it is so possible to quickly amass so much money, we must have some kind of legislation in place which would prevent Internet companies from promoting and advertising themselves in unconscionable and unethical ways. This situation is something like the Fair Trading Act which would be very useful. We should also be joining efforts with the rest of the world to create a global situation of trust in e-commerce. Perhaps we should join in efforts to pursue computer criminals and what I would call dot.cons - the con men who con the consumer and investor of his money. Light and easy regulation is what the Ministry goes for now. Self-regulation is what it advocates. These are fine but we must not reach a stage of laissez faire - you do anything you like, we are not going to bat an eye. Therefore, if IDA were to spend money to preach the digital divide, they should also be spending money to promote awareness of the inherent unreliability of perhaps some Internet sites. Information on the Internet is not always accurate and true and education of consumers, so that they would not fall for dot.cons. Money has to be used because education and awareness programme costs money. To expect a poor organisation like the Consumers Association to do all this without help is not quite easy. I would quickly close, Sir, by saying that there are many other areas which we should be looking into. The list is endless. Domain name registration, perhaps grants for research into e-commerce solutions and ultimately, if we have an environment that promotes the e-economy and regulates e-commerce in a careful way, we should be on to a good thing.

Sir, I would like to thank the three Members who have spoken up. I will reply only to Dr Toh on his call for law reform. Dr Michael Lim has spoken on the promotion of broadband. There are three other cuts that are coming up. So I will reply to him at that stage. Sir, Dr Toh has argued very strongly for the need to reform our various laws in order to bring them up to date to the Internet age. He has raised plenty of examples and, as he said, the list can go on and on. I am glad he stopped, otherwise we would run out of time. Sir, I can assure him that I totally agree with him that as we enter the Internet Age, we will need to actively review and update our various legislation. I would like to assure him also that the problem that we face is not one that is unique to Singapore. That is because the Internet revolution has resulted in such a huge flood of new businesses and services that many of these businesses and services were not even in the realm of imagination when the existing laws were first promulgated. I would like to inform Prof. Toh that the Attorney-General has set up a Law Reform Coordinating Committee. He chairs it. This Committee will identify those areas of law that should be considered for law reform. However, the actual recommendations for legislative changes will continue to be made by the respective Ministries and specialist agencies that are knowledgeable in their own technical areas. I have taken note of Prof. Toh's suggestions. I will definitely pass them on to the Committee for their review. I will ask my Minister of State to reply to the other questions.

I will not reply to the subject of digital divide now because later on there will be three cuts relating to this topic. So I will respond to that tomorrow. I will now respond to Prof. Toh on his comments regarding regulating the e-commerce. Sir, e-commerce is a relatively new concept, a fast growing one. As a result, the regulation of e-commerce is still evolving. Basically, when we talk about e-commerce, we talk about electronic transactions between businesses, B2B, businesses and consumers, B2C, as well as those between consumers, so it is C2C. In the case of Singapore, our interest is to position ourselves as a leading hub in e-commerce in the Asia-Pacific. In this regard, I want to assure Prof. Toh that the Government will not adopt a laissez faire attitude because we recognise that to succeed in this fast moving world of e-commerce, businesses will need to come out with creative ideas and be able to implement them very quickly. In other words, dot.com companies will need to be innovative and move with fast speed if they want to succeed. So our challenge as a Government will be to create an environment in Singapore which is conducive for e-commerce companies, dot.com companies, to succeed. This means, on the one hand, we want to create an environment that has sufficient safeguards, to create trust among businesses and consumers and yet at the same time provide sufficient space for companies to innovate with new ideas, to compete with new ideas. In fact, this is the reason why we have decided to become one of the first countries in the world to put in place the Electronic Transactions Act (ETA) way back in 1998 so as to provide enough safeguards in the business world for companies to conduct e-commerce. Under the ETA, public certification authorities can apply for licence to issue and to verify digital signature under the Act. Prof. Toh commented that the application for CA licence is too onerous and uncertain. I wish to point out that for Singapore to become an e-commerce hub, we need to ensure that these licensees are trustworthy. We also need to ensure that the digital certifications issued by these Certification Authorities are recognised in other countries, otherwise we cannot be an e-commerce hub. For these reasons, we want to make sure that our Certification Authorities are evaluated based on a well-recognised set of criteria. This would include their financial standing, operating policies and procedures. So even though the two CAs today have yet to apply to IDA for licence, my understanding is that they intend to do so when they are ready to satisfy these criteria, and it is likely to be in a few months' time. In terms of consumer protection, there are already existing laws, such as the multi-level marketing and pyramid selling prohibition Act and so on. We recognise that with the emergence of e-commerce and the new Internet-based retailing, we need to review the existing consumer protection legislation to ensure that they continue to be effective in the new operating environment. And yet at the same time, we are mindful that we should not over-regulate the industry, because it may stifle innovation in the market place. We will therefore adopt a combination of industry self-regulation, Government regulation and consumer education in the protection of consumer interests. On the issue of international pursuit of computer criminals, my understanding is that the Ministry of Home Affairs and Police have already been using Interpol and other inter-agency arrangement to pursue these cyber criminals. Prof. Toh also asked whether we can spend money to help to promote awareness of the inherent unreliability of some Internet sites. We feel that this is best done through a consumer interest group, like CASE and so on. What IDA would do would be to cooperate with such agency and see what we can do to make sure that the message gets across. Prof. Toh also mentioned about the need to review our ground rules on the domain naming registration. I believe procedures are already in place. So if there are any specific suggestions from Prof. Toh, we would be more than happy to receive them. Prof. Toh asked whether we would consider giving grants for research into e-commerce, such as e-payment, etc. Prof. Toh may be happy to hear that, in fact, the research institutions and research centres have come together to discuss and they have jointly identified some areas of joint research, and e-commerce will be one of them. In fact, their research efforts will be supported by grants through the NSTB and eventually if need be, through the Innovation Development Scheme managed by EDB and IDA. Lastly, Prof. Toh mentioned about allowing professionals to accept payment in kind in the form of shares and options. I believe various professions in Singapore do have their code of conduct, code of practice. I think we will leave it to the respective authorities to decide whether this is appropriate to do so, because conflict of interest may come into play. With that, I believe I have answered the questions raised by Prof. Toh.

Sir, the GPC made its report on COE review last year. One of the recommendations was to smoothen out the peaks in COE replacement over the next two-year period. Can the Minister give us some feedback on whether this step has given some stability to the COE bidding? And will the Minister also give us the new quota for COE for this quota year, bearing in mind the time is quite near for the May quota to be revealed? While the ERP system has been fully introduced and extended, will the Minister tell us whether in the main, the Government has collected more or less in revenue as compared to the previous system of CBD ticket system? I wish to urge the Minister to always provide more alternatives for public transport facilities, be they bus routes or by-passes, beyond just monitoring the traffic flow rate, before deciding on raising ERP charges to price congestion. A lot of members of the public are keen to know about this, because many of them are quite prepared to switch to alternative transport modes if they are available.

The ERP has been in existence for some time and it has been used to optimise road usage and control traffic usage. Since its initial success in the CBD, it has been extended to various other areas in Phase 2. I remember, of course, that when Phase 2A was actually imposed in CTE, it took a bit of adjustment before the traffic improved. Initially, even though you paid the charges, you had long jams. But after they tweaked the charges, traffic flow is very much better. I think there is no doubt that the ERP has served its purpose. However, Phase 2B is on the horizon and I think what we want to be assured is that, firstly, like what my colleague has just said, there are viable alternatives and that MCIT will not be too ready to place up the new gantries even though they have already placed the footings, and that there should be adequate buses and other alternative modes of transport before we do that. One of the problems is that if you start putting gantries up in the new cordons in Phase 2B, one needs to be reassured that you are not just shifting traffic to other possible gantry areas where you have not put the gantries. Because if you do that, and if you keep on shifting traffic from one place to another place, eventually you will be able to justify that Phase 2B should be fully implemented. I am not affected in Phase 2B; it is not within my constituency. But I am sure many other MPs are also concerned that Phase 2B will not be implemented in a hurry. So perhaps the Minister would like to enlighten us.

Sir, in answering my question on 25th February this year, the Parliamentary Secretary MCIT said that LTA would study the possibility of adjusting ERP charges for different seasons of the year. I fully support such a move. I would like to know when we can expect the study to be completed. Sir, ERP is to optimise the use of public roads, through regulating traffic flow by way of pricing mechanism. Therefore, it has to be made more responsive to varied road situations. It is not difficult to notice that during the June and December long school holidays, vehicles on the roads are significantly less than usual. This is because many Singapore families go overseas for holiday. During such seasons, ERP charges for certain roads can certainly be adjusted downwards, especially during off-peak hours. Secondly, for the CBD, currently the off-peak hours charge is $1 per entry for cars. I notice that many of the roads leading to CBD are not well utilised, even during lunch time. So this means there is also room for adjustment or fine-tuning of the charges, instead of just the current two-tier charges. Can the Minister comment?

Sir, my basic question is this. How does the LTA internalise the social costs of the projects that it plans and implements in the planning process before execution? The LTA is a large organisation. It undertakes major projects. These are not just large projects in terms of the scale, cost or size, but also in terms of the impact it has on the general public. We have large amenities that arise from them in facilities for road users, commuters and the like. But these amenities are also caused by LTA projects - noise pollution. We have instances where inconvenience has caused to some residents because they have to divert the mode of travel and in the extreme, it leads to acquisition of property. So the question then is: How does LTA consult or get feedback or input from residents who are potentially or actually affected by such projects? I know the LTA has extensive consultation with many agencies of Government in planning its projects. But what about the public or the sentiments and interests of the general public? How is that internalised? It seems to me that typically, consultation occurs at a rather late stage when designs have already been drawn, specifications have been made and tenders are about to be called. That is obviously too advance a stage at which to incorporate feedback meaningfully. Is there not a stage between the strategic planning level and the detailed design planning level where some views can be sought and incorporated? The idea here, Sir, is not to fuel not-in-my-backyard kind of sentiments, and accommodate that. I think we recognise that in public policy, we must give priority to the national interests. Neither is it to shackle legitimate pursuit of national interests through large public projects. But the purpose of my raising this question is really to ask: Can we not accommodate some of the public concerns in a visible and tangible way in the process of LTA's activities?

Sir, on 27th February this year, the LTA made an announcement which I think passed with too little fanfare. And I believe that it deserves praise because it is one of the most progressive transport administrations in the whole world. The new measures for road safety include making road dividers brighter and expressway exits clearly, and so on. I think these measures are all very good. The promise of this programme, however, is that these changes will be made to major roads eventually and not just to expressways. The LTA staff have reassured the community that they are constantly looking at changes that need to be made, and they have in fact engaged a New Zealand consultant as a "fresh" pair of expert eyes to see what can be improved. Sir, I know that this is not the first time that the LTA has introduced good changes without fanfare and I think they deserve much more praise. For example, I know that they introduced road surfacing material, new material, in the KJE which I have travelled on, and I find it very good because the water is absorbed and drained out by the sides. It gives cars better road holding and it allows for the markings to be seen better because there is no sheen from the road, especially at night and when the roads are wet. And I just hope that the Ministry would look at this and see whether they could be expanded to other roads in Singapore. If they cannot be expanded to other roads, perhaps highways where speeds are very high, should have cats' eyes so that the markings on the roads are particularly clear when we have night driving or driving in adverse weather conditions. Sir, I would like to congratulate the LTA for its proactivity, but I would like to also suggest that the review that it does should not just be on the expressways and major roads. Some minor roads too have got potential problems - the dangerous spots. I could give the Ministry a list of some of these. I hope that these situations can also be addressed. Finally, for better feedback, perhaps LTA could institute some kind of easily used system so that the million of eyes on the road could be your eyes too, they may not necessarily be the experts, but everybody who drives thinks he is an expert anyway. Perhaps they could just call a hotline to report their observations.

It is 7.00 pm. Moment of interruption. Thereupon, Mr Deputy Speaker left the Chair of the Committee and took the Chair of the House.

Mr Deputy Speaker, I beg to report that the Committee of Supply has made further progress on the Estimates of Expenditure for the financial year 2000/2001, and ask leave to sit again tomorrow.

So be it.

Resolved, "That Parliament do now adjourn." - [Mr Yeo Cheow Tong]. Adjourned accordingly at Seven o'clock pm.