UPGRADING OF HDB ESTATES IN POTONG PASIR

Column: 791

UPGRADING OF HDB ESTATES IN POTONG PASIR: 12.

Mr Chiam See Tong asked the Minister for National Development whether the Government is willing to release 45% of the $80 million promised by the Government for upgrading of HDB estates in Potong Pasir in the last election, since 45% of the voters in Potong Pasir voted for the ruling party's candidate.

Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien (for the Minister for National Development): Sir, the $80 million upgrading package proposed for Potong Pasir estate was part of the PAP's plans for the constituency, offered by the PAP candidate. The majority of the voters in Potong Pasir did not support this plan, so the upgrading package has been shelved.

But I must add that I am quite puzzled by Mr Chiam's question. He is requesting for 45% of the funds on the basis that 45% of the electorate voted for the PAP candidate, Mr Sitoh Yih Pin. Does it imply that he represents only 55% of the electorate in Potong Pasir? And if we go by that logic, does it mean that he should share his chair with Mr Sitoh, ie, 55:45 in this Parliament? And if we take the logic further, does it mean that he should also share his MP allowance with Mr Sitoh?

Mr Chiam See Tong (Potong Pasir): Sir, I am a bit puzzled by the answer given by the MOS. She says that the $80 million is offered by a PAP candidate and the Government is willing to offer that $80 million to him to upgrade Potong Pasir if he should win the election. It is a very puzzling thing. Can I also ask the Government to release money on my

Column: 792

behalf to make me win the elections? How does the mechanism work? How can a candidate ask the Government to release money so that he can win the elections? Can she please explain? This is very puzzling.

Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: Sir, the package that the PAP candidate has offered was offered as an entire package of the policies that the PAP Government would adopt. So this was put forward to the electorate in Potong Pasir at that time. If the entire suite of Government initiatives were adopted and thereby enabling the Government to produce the kind of surpluses that it has, then the surpluses can be shared with the residents through a programme such as LUP plus the other facilities that the candidate has offered.

The electorate in Potong Pasir has obviously not supported that and, therefore, they should not stand to benefit from any surpluses that were generated from that suite of policies.

Mr Chiam See Tong: Sir, when a candidate makes a request to the Government for money to be released to his constituency he is standing in, who gives the right for this money to be released? Who sets aside this money as a budgeted amount? These all seem very irregular to me. It sounds completely irregular.

Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: Sir, if I recall, the MP for Potong Pasir has promised his residents and his electorate that should he win the election, he will provide upgrading without cost. I think that is the promise that he has made. Perhaps, he should also embark on that.

Mr Chiam See Tong: I think the Minister of State should not divert the debate now. We are concentrating on a huge sum of money in the coffers of the Government which can be released to an

Column: 793

individual candidate. I wonder at whose authority. The taxpayers' money is taken out from Government funds and he said, "You give it to me so that I can win the elections." That sounds very irregular. I thought at least the money should come from a motion in Parliament or approval from some authority. So who gives the approval for this sum of $80 million to be released to Mr Sitoh so that he can win his election?

Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: Sir, I would just reiterate that if the MP for Potong Pasir feels that he has the ability to persuade the Government to appropriate a certain amount of funds, he should similarly do so. And we look forward to any proposal from him.

Mr Chiam See Tong: I am still not satisfied with the answer given by the Minister of State because it seems all very irregular, especially concerning the PAP Government. But anyway, can I ask a second question?

Mr Speaker: Yes.

Mr Chiam See Tong: Sir, does not the ruling Party have the interest of the 45% voters who voted for them at heart, or they just leave them to sink or swim themselves?

Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: Mr Speaker, in this constitution and in democratic Singapore, we respect the majority. The majority has spoken in Potong Pasir. The minority has to respect that. We care for all Singaporeans. That is the reason why we are continuing with LUP in the estate, we are continuing with the barrier-free access (BFA). We have made the commitment that by 2011, Singapore will have BFA facilities. That shows that we care for the residents in Potong Pasir.

Mr Chiam See Tong: Sir, this particular election that we are talking about, the PAP has made a specific promise to

Column: 794

upgrade the constituency at Potong Pasir. Yes, they said that if the candidate wins. But there must be an implication in the spirit of the promise made. There must be an implication that the Government is willing to help Potong Pasir residents. Is it not in that spirit that the $80 million was promised?

Sir, can I ask the Minister of State whether or not the $80 million promised was purely an election strategy, no more, no less, just to get the people in Potong Pasir to abide to them so that they can vote the PAP candidate? In fact, they have got no interests of the residents in Potong Pasir at heart at all.

Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: Sir, I believe I have answered the question before. But as I have said, this is a package that was offered by the PAP candidate. As much as the package counts, I think the votes of the Potong Pasir residents equally count as well and they have turned that down. I think Mr Chiam See Tong, MP for Potong Pasir, should not forget and should respect the wishes of the majority of his constituents.

Mr Speaker: Mr Chiam, I will allow you one last question, otherwise we will be here this whole afternoon discussing this.

Mr Chiam See Tong: Sir, I am interested to know how Hougang was offered $100 million for upgrading and Potong Pasir was offered $80 million. How did the Government arrive at these figures?

Mr Speaker: Mr Chiam, I think Hougang is out of the question.

Mr Low Thia Khiang: The answer from the MOS seems to me that the logic and justification of the PAP to offer a package during the elections to their candidates are that the PAP Government has produced surpluses. You justify it because

Column: 795

you have produced surpluses and your candidates will be entitled to spend the surpluses by offering a package of upgrading programmes.

My question is: are the surpluses generated by the PAP, and the people have no part in it? Do not forget that the people in Potong Pasir and Hougang pay taxes and GST. So your justification and logic are a selfish one, a partisan basis.

Secondly, Sir, I am quite pleased that the MOS has said that, if there is any need, Mr Chiam is welcome to put up a proposal for funds.

That was what the MOS said just now. I am pleased to inform the MOS that Hougang Town Council has put up a proposal to the Ministry of National Development to request for funds. We calculated that $100 million is not enough. The estimated cost of the upgrading proposal is $140 million, and I am still waiting for a reply from MND based on the promise by the Senior Minister Mr Goh Chok Tong - he is not here today - that Hougang will get $100 million. I suppose it has been budgeted under the Ministry of National Development.

The Minister for National Development (Mr Mah Bow Tan): Sir, I think Mr Chiam and Mr Low have selective hearing.

In the elections, what the PAP candidate said was, "I will approach the Government, specifically the Minister for National Development, with a certain package for my residents. And if I am elected, I will fulfil that promise." So, Mr Chiam heard the $80 million part but he forgot about the second part. The first part says, "Yes, we are going to have a $80 million package for Potong Pasir." The second part says, "if the PAP candidate is elected." But the PAP candidate was not elected. So, how is he going to get that package?

Column: 796

We now have Mr Chiam saying to the Government, "Here is a bill for $80 million." Mr Low is even better, instead of asking for $100 million, now he says his bill is actually $140 million. He has a bill, but he forgets that there are other parts to it - that the bill comes with a cost, that it involves the Government having to undertake certain policies. If we undertake all those policies, we generate surpluses, then we are able to distribute some of these surpluses in the form of upgrading programmes, for example.

What if we were to follow the Workers' Party's policies and, say, instead of having a social security system based on CPF, housing and the 3Ms, we go for the "unconditional permanent needs-based social security net"? That is what the Opposition is advocating, is it not? That is the Workers' Party's platform. That is the Opposition's platform, and, if we go for that, then that is where the money is going to. We are not going to have enough money for upgrading. We are not going to have enough money for education, healthcare and so on.

This was what my Minister of State was putting across just now that, when the constituents vote for the PAP candidate, they are not just voting for the goodies, they are not just voting for that part of the package, they are also voting for all the other policies that come together with the package - the prudent fiscal policies, the taxation policy, the low direct taxes, low GST. That is what they are voting for.

When Mr Chiam and Mr Low come to the House with a bill and say, "Why don't you give me this money since you have promised it?", surely, that is being very naive, is it not? They are saying to the Government, "Here is my bill for the upgrading, but I don't support all your other policies. You go and deal with the people. You go and sell your other

Column: 797

policies, difficult though that may be. I am only going for the good part. I am going to advocate "unconditional permanent needs-based welfare", because that is popular. And I also want upgrading, because that is also popular."

Sir, my message to the Opposition Members is that they should put up their policies. We put up our policies in the elections. We go to the people and we say, "Please decide." The Member for Potong Pasir says, "I do not need the Government's package. I can do it on my own." Is that not what the Member for Potong Pasir said? I heard him say very clearly, "I do not need the package", and that was before the election. After the election, he now says, "Please give me the package."

I think the Member for Potong Pasir should tell us how he is going to implement his policies, how he is going to implement his promise to the people of Potong Pasir, and not just to the 55% who voted for him but also to the rest. Because, after all, I presume he is the Member for Potong Pasir, and not just the Member for 55% of the people of Potong Pasir.

Mr Speaker: I will stop this debate. Mr Liang Eng Hwa, your question, please.