HEAVY DEFENCE EXPENDITURE (Rationale)

Mr Chiam See Tong asked the First Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Defence what is the rationale, taking into account the current economic situation in Singapore, for spending so heavily on defence when Vietnam is not in a position to launch any attack on any other country in the next decade and China has abandoned its policy of exporting revolutions abroad.

BG Lee Hsien Loong (for the Minister for Defence): Mr Speaker, Sir, the Mindef budget for financial year 1986 was thoroughly discussed in this House in the Committee of Supply during the Budget debates. Both the amount to be spent and the need to maintain our defence expenditure in a recession were explicitly covered. There were no dissenting views. It is a long-standing policy of the Government to put aside 6% of the GDP each year for Mindef. As the economy has grown over the years, the amount we can afford has gone up. This has enabled us to build up the SAF and equip our national servicemen with better modern equipment. Last year, because of the recession, the economy contracted. This year again, growth was expected to be negative. 6% of the estimated 1986 GDP therefore represents a smaller absolute amount than 6% of the estimated 1985 GDP. As a result, there is a reduction of $172 million in the Mindef budget this year. The Services will have to strive hard to maintain their readiness and accomplish their missions with fewer resources.

The Member for Potong Pasir has mentioned what he considers to be two possible threats to our security. He has dismissed them as being inconsequential. He implies that no other mishaps need to be prepared for. A responsible government must take a more cautious view.

The Government does not publicly discuss possible threats to Singapore because to name a possible threat is to make a definite enemy. But it is no secret that Singapore is situated in an unsettled part of the world. No matter how carefully we may try to predict trends in the region, surprises are bound to happen. Tumultuous dramatic events, whose outcome cannot possibly be foreseen, may unfold at any time, without warning. But while dire threats can materialize suddenly, the SAF takes years, if not decades, to build up. We ignore these facts and lower our guard at our peril.

Mr Chiam See Tong (Potong Pasir): Sir, may I refer to the Acting Minister to the $2 billion spent on the surveillance aeroplanes. Why is there a need for that large amount when the two possible threats mentioned in my question are not foreseeable in the near future? These surveillance planes apparently can go beyond our neighbours. So what is the purpose? Is that not over-reacting?

BG Lee Hsien Loong: Mr Speaker, Sir, I would make three points. (1) The aeroplanes do not cost $2 billion. They cost less than $1 billion and the amount has been discussed in this House. (2) The need for these aeroplanes has also been discussed in this House. Perhaps it was before the Member for Potong Pasir became a Member. (3) The Member asked me if the aeroplanes are not needed to deal with what he feels to be threats. To quote him, "Vietnam is not in a position to launch any attack" and "China has abandoned its policy of exporting revolutions abroad", therefore why do we need the aeroplanes at all?

Mr Speaker, Sir, I think there are other threats which perhaps have not been encompassed in the Member for Potong Pasir's formulation. I would remind him of another threat which was discussed in this House and which was pointed out by the Member for Anson, again before the last General Elections, and that is, the possibility of aircraft carriers sailing into our harbour and "what can we do about it", in the words of the Member for Anson. I am not saying that that is a plausible threat. I am merely reminding the Member for Potong Pasir that there are more possibilities than those that he has considered.

Dr Lau Teik Soon (Serangoon Gardens): Sir, can I ask the Acting Minister, in view of the reduced amount available to the Ministry of Defence this year, can he assure us that our defence capability has not diminished in any way?

BG Lee Hsien Loong: Mr Speaker, Sir, our defence capability has to be built up over many years, and each year that we are able to afford to, we add to our strength and our preparedness. Having $172 million less, inevitably means that preparations which we would like to do now have to be postponed. However, within those constraints, the Member for Serangoon Gardens can rest assured that Mindef is doing everything possible, and our defence as of today is not seriously compromised.

Mr Jeyaretnam: What about the pirates?

Mr Chiam See Tong: Sir, I am no military man. The Acting Minister is a General.

Mr Jeyaretnam: Brigadier-General.

Mr Chiam See Tong: Now he says something which astonishes me. He sees the possibility of an aircraft carrier sailing towards Singapore.

Mr Speaker: Mr Chiam, can I have your supplementary question?

Mr Chiam See Tong: Yes. The supplementary question is, from which country would this aircraft carrier be coming from? China? Vietnam? Russia? He cannot just put something and frighten us out of the blue.

BG Lee Hsien Loong: Mr Speaker, Sir, if I may respond to that question. First of all, I am not the Acting Minister for Defence. Secondly, it is not my aircraft carrier. Thirdly, the possibility of such an aircraft carrier was raised not by the Government Members of Parliament, but by the Member for Anson. And if he wants to know which country the ship sails from, he should look up the Hansard.

Mr Chiam See Tong: Sir, defence I would imagine is a serious topic, but the Acting Minister for Trade and Industry takes this whole thing like a joke. There is a large sum of money spent on defence of Singapore.

Mr Speaker: Can I have your supplementary question, Mr Chiam?

Mr Chiam See Tong: Yes, but he has not answered my question. Which country does he foresee this aircraft carrier coming from? If there is no such country, then do not put it up in this House.

BG Lee Hsien Loong: Mr Speaker, Sir, I commend the Member for Potong Pasir to have some private conversation with his neighbour. I do not put forward the aircraft carrier as a serious threat. I put it forward as an illustration that there are many possibilities which may threaten our security. There are many developments which may be totally unexpected, which may result ---

Mr Chiam See Tong: Do you really see the possibility of an aircraft carrier steaming into Singapore? Do you really seriously think that?

BG Lee Hsien Loong: I put forward an example deliberately frivolous as an illustration that there are other possibilities, perhaps as yet unbeknown to the Member, and I commend to him that he consider all possible threats seriously and in such a way as will not compromise the security and the well-being of this nation.

Mr Teo Chong Tee (Changi): Mr Speaker, Sir, in asking Question No. 4, I would like to declare that I have no pecuniary interest.