ESTIMATES OF EXPENDITURE FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR 1ST APRIL, 1995 TO 31ST MARCH, 1996

Order read for consideration in Committee of Supply [3rd Allotted Day].

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

Head W (cont.) -

Resumption of Debate on Question [16th March, 1995],

"That the total sum to be allocated for Head W of the Main Estimates be reduced by $100." - [Dr Ow Chin Hock].

Question again proposed.

Mr Yeo Cheow Tong: Sir, yesterday, Mr Koo Tsai Kee mentioned that Mr Alan Greenspan had stated that the CPI for the USA was overstated and asked whether the same applies to Singapore. The situation in the US is different from that in Singapore. First, real incomes in the US have risen very slowly over the last 15 years and, in fact, for many occupations incomes have actually fallen. As a result, US consumers have had to switch to cheaper goods or to buy from discount stores. This is not the case in Singapore where real incomes have risen by 5.2% per year in the last five years.

Second, the basket of the US CPI is revised only once every 10 years. The last revision was in 1982-84, more than 10 years ago. Hence, recent changes in consumer habits, as described above, are not captured in the US CPI. The basket for the Singapore CPI, on the other hand, is revised once every five years. This allows us to capture changes in lifestyles and expenditure. I would therefore like to assure Members that the Singapore CPI is kept accurate through five-yearly revisions of its basket and by reviewing our price collection and compilation procedures.

Dr Ow asked about the new investments which have been received by the manufacturing sector last year. He has asked about the benefits in terms of employment, value-added, etc. Most of the investments involved mainly high value-added activities. These investments will help to broaden as well as to deepen our existing industry clusters. The investments will generate a gross value-added of S$4.4 billion over the next 2-3 years. They will create about 14,000 jobs, most of which will involve highly skilled jobs for technicians, engineers and other professionals.

Dr Ow asked whether we are over-dependent on the chemical and electronics sectors since these two sectors make up a major part of the investments. The chemical sector makes up 47% of the investment received and the electronics sector about 27%. These two sectors form key industry clusters in our manufacturing sector and they contribute significantly to our value-added, GDP and our employment. In addition, they have big multiplier effects for the rest of the economy. The question here is whether we can afford to ignore these two sectors.

First, electronics is the fastest growing industry in the world. Electronics is involved in almost everything that we use nowadays. We have the capabilities, we have the technologies here, we have the skilled workforce, the engineers and programmers, we have the supporting infrastructure and supporting industries to ensure that we are capable of manufacturing world-class products on a global scale.

We possess the critical mass to develop the electronics cluster into a very competitive and well-integrated industry. We need to capitalise on this strength because if we do not promote and attract such investments, the investment will simply go to another country. The impact would be slower growth for the last few years but what is more important is that this industry is very dynamic in terms of technology changes. Once we miss out on all these new investments in the high value-added area, we would also have fallen behind in the technological developments in the process engineering side as well as developments in the product changes. The long-term impact on our economic growth and our role as a manufacturing centre would be significant.

The chemical industry is very similar as well. By the very nature of the industry, being a process industry where big volumes are generated in every project, the investments tend to be cyclical and lumpy. However, the industry is very desirable because it is a very capital-intensive industry and the investors invest for the long term. They cannot just pack up and go. Being non labour-intensive it is very attractive for Singapore in the context of our limited labour supply. The other attraction is that the industry tends to employ a large proportion of technical personnel. For example, the new petrochemical complex, PCS II, would involve an investment of about $2 billion and yet it would generate only about 600 new jobs, most of which will be engineering jobs and technician jobs.

In terms of the value-added output ratio, Dr Ow is correct. The petroleum industry has a very low value-added to output ratio of about 17%. But this is because of the nature of the refining industry. Many refiners refine on a contract basis. There is a service charge for refining the crude which is being supplied by the client. They refine it and deliver the refined product back to the client. While the value-added per output is low, the value-added per worker is in fact the highest in Singapore. The value-added is about $460,000 per worker. This is about six times higher than the average of $80,000 per worker in 1993. In the petrochemical sector, the value-added per worker is also very high at about $200,000 per worker. We should therefore continue to promote this sector.

However, having said that, we need also to promote other manufacturing sectors. The EDB has identified several clusters for further development and these are the aerospace cluster, marine engineering, precision engineering and light industries. These are competitive and viable in Singapore and the EDB will continue to promote them strongly.

Dr Ow has also asked whether our overseas investment figures are accurate as we seem to have vastly understated the investments in China. The data on overseas investment are compiled by the Department of Statistics (DOS) and they are obtained from an annual survey of all companies, except financial institutions which are known to have foreign investments abroad. This information is obtained from DOS' establishment hub and surveys. The definition of "investment" covers equity investment which includes reserves attributable to the Singaporean investors and loans granted to their overseas subsidiaries and associates. The $13.1 billion for 1991 refers only to the paid-up share capita. With an expanded coverage which includes reserves, the amount of Singapore investments overseas amounted to S$21.2 billion. If we take into account loans granted overseas, total direct investments abroad amounted to S$28.2 billion as at the end of 1993. 12.45 pm

Sir, the DOS' data are based on audited accounts of companies where available, and to expedite the reporting of primary data, companies are requested to provide estimates when audited accounts are not available.

The investment data are also reported by the investment boards of the respective countries, and these usually show a higher level of Singaporean investments. The main reason for the difference is that the data reported by the investment boards are usually commitments or approvals. Commitments or approvals tend to be higher than the actual investments in any one year for various reasons. First, because the projects may take some time to start up and, typically, it would take a few years to complete. And also, in many cases, approved projects are not eventually realised or realised to the extent that were originally committed.

As for China, Singapore's and China's data differ, because Singapore-based companies could also invest through their Hong Kong subsidiaries. Our DOS' record shows such investments as investments in Hong Kong. And Singapore's investment in Hong Kong accounted for 19% of our total overseas investments. So a large part of the 19% could possibly be investments in China.

DOS is constantly working to improve the accuracy and timeliness of our data on our overseas investments, and it will work closely with EDB and TDB to see how its data collection procedures can be further refined.

Mr Chew Heng Ching asked for a status report on our regionalisation programme, whether we are happy with the programme and whether we have further plans to expand. The results of our regionalisation programme have been quite impressive. The total investment commitments for the first nine months of 1994 came to S$5.9 billion. These figures are compiled from investment results released by the investment boards of the various countries. We are the biggest investor in Myanmar and Vietnam, and we are amongst the top in China, Malaysia, Indonesia, Cambodia and the Philippines. The number of companies which have set up operations overseas has increased significantly, from about 2,400 in 1990 to over 3,000 by the end of 1994. Our companies have gone into the entire region, from New Zealand to the south, to India/Pakistan in the west, and to China in the north.

In terms of investments, they have been fairly broad based, covering manufacturing, light engineering, food processing, hotel and resort development, as well as commercial and residential property developments. In 1994, we also began to see companies venturing into more infrastructural developments, for example, the information technology park and the international airport in Bangalore, India, a mega beach resort in Bintan island, Indonesia, as well as an inland container depot in Cambodia.

Sir, we are also getting more involved in the service sectors, eg, in the financial services and banking, information technology and communications, in shipping and logistics, and in tourism related services. These are areas with high growth potential and, therefore, they offer to our investors tremendous scope for future growth as the region develops further.

Sir, at the government-to-government level, ties continue to strengthen. Such ties will greatly help our private sector because they will help to open doors and our private sector will find access into the various countries probably less difficult.

We have also formed country business clubs involving businessmen with business interests in particular countries, eg, Myanmar, Vietnam and India. We have also formed bilateral business councils, eg, with Shandong, Philippines, Thailand, and we have several more in the pipeline.

These clubs and councils are all spearheaded by private sector businessmen and they offer a very useful platform for networking, for information sharing and for the formation of strategic alliances in order to undertake joint ventures and various other projects.

What about our future plans? The regionalisation efforts have already got a lot of momentum in them. Many companies already have regional operations and others are actively exploring the possibility of going regional. We have laid a strong foundation for future growth. The Government will continue to encourage companies with the capabilities and the resources to explore regional opportunities. On our part, we will continue to strengthen bilateral ties and to promote greater cooperation that is mutually beneficial. We will continue to review and, where necessary, fine-tune the incentives and assistance programmes down the road.

Dr Wong Kwei Cheong asked why Government is only allocating $369 million to assist companies compared to the private sector venture funds of $3.5 billion, and he suggested that Government allocate some of our budget surpluses to help companies to regionalise. While there are plenty of business opportunities in the region, the risks are also higher. High returns normally carry high risks. Many of the countries in the region have less transparent laws and regulations, and our businessmen sometimes may not be familiar with the business procedures as well. There are also weak supporting infrastructures to be overcome. Therefore, it is important that only those with the capabilities and the resources are encouraged to go abroad. Those companies that are going abroad also need to be very resourceful to overcome all those challenges.

Sir, companies with commercially viable projects so far have been able to obtain funding. They can obtain funding from the commercial banks. They have been able to obtain funding also from the private venture funds that are available, as mentioned by Dr Wong. And others who have found that the projects are a bit too large for them to swallow have managed to get joint venture partners to help share the risks and to also help to finance the projects.

On our part, the Government has numerous assistance programmes and incentives. Under the EDB Local Enterprise Finance Scheme (Overseas), 48 projects have been assisted over the last two years involving $56 million in loans. The Government also gave out grants and incentives worth over $7 million. I would like to refer Members to the package on their seats which contains all the information of the assistance programmes that are available.

I think the key is for companies to remember three points when going overseas. First, they need to do their sums carefully. The gains are potentially very high but so are the risks. Second, they should not over-stretch themselves. They should work within their own capabilities and resources. Third, if indeed they come across a project that is commercially viable but which is much too big for them to undertake, I would encourage them to bring in joint venture partners to help share the risks and to help provide the financing. The existing system has worked well, as can be seen by the $5.9 billion worth of overseas investments in the first nine months last year. In fact, this figure exceeds the total commitments in the manufacturing sector for the entire year for Singapore.

Dr Lee gave a very comprehensive analysis of the situation in Singapore with regard to the economic growth and the impact on the different companies. While the growth has been strong and fairly broad based, it is also true that even within a particular sector, not all companies would have enjoyed similar growth. It is also true that with two years of strong economic growth, labour costs have started to increase after a respite in 1992. And while strong productivity growth has helped to keep unit labour cost down, these benefits accrue mainly to companies that are able to automate and to upgrade. So they have been able to benefit from that process, but others that have not been able to upgrade and to automate have felt the impact of the higher labour cost.

It is also true that product cycles are getting shorter and competition is definitely getting keener. For example, in the electronics sector which grew by 22%, all the PC manufacturers face tremendous price pressures, and many have had to reduce their profit margins. Similarly, severe competition and declining margins were also experienced by our disk drive manufacturers and all these are giants on the global manufacturing market.

Sir, the shorter product cycles, the growing competition, these are factors which will remain with us. There is no way that we can avoid them. We will have to meet them head on. The approach that we must take is to continue to invest in R&D and to move into higher value added activities - activities where because of the skills or the capabilities available here, Singapore companies will have a competitive advantage.

The Government will continue to work with our private sector to help them to upgrade. We will help them to improve on the capability factors and to help them to develop core competency. This will be done through the NPB, EDB, SISIR as well as through the National Science and Technology Board.

Mr Chay has touched on R&D spending and has asked whether the Government could provide information as to how effectively are the R&D funds spent. The total R&D expenditure as reported comprises expenditures by the private sector directly, by our research institutions, by our universities and by various Government departments. For 1993, about $600 million or 60% was actually provided by the companies themselves. This is something which we welcome very much because the Government's intention has always been for the private sector to drive the R&D in Singapore and the Government only acts as a catalyst and a facilitator. By having the private sector drive R&D and fund it mainly, this will ensure that the R&D spendings are spent in areas which are economically relevant.

Sir, we will continue to monitor the R&D spendings and we are now in the process of working out some measurement indicators which will give us an indication of how well the R&D expenditures are being made. But I would like to just give one example of the R&D project which the Government is working with the private sector, and this is with Siemens. The Institute of Micro Electronics and Siemens are collaborating on a manufacturing process project, ie, a project to upgrade the manufacturing processes in Siemens. Siemens has estimated that the cost benefits of this project are potentially very significant and it has the potential of helping Siemens to achieve cost savings of up to 50% in certain areas. 1.00 pm

Mr Chew Heng Ching touched on the retail area. He has highlighted the relevant problems faced by the retail sector. So I will not go over them again. But I will elaborate on a few key points. One key factor is the increase in retail space. Retail space increased by 12% in 1993 compared to a retail turnover increase of only 2.7%. So in 1993 there was a tremendous supply of space compared to the increase in volume of retail sales. In 1994, retail space increased by 4.3%, again higher than the increase in retail sales of 3.5% last year. What is also significant is that the new complexes tend to be more popular with the shoppers. They end up drawing business from the older establishments. Therefore, the older establishments tend to feel the impact even more.

Also, there are now new suburban centres. They are within the HDB estates and nearer to the homes and, in many cases, they are near the MRT stations. So the new suburban shopping centres have been very attractive and very convenient. They have been able to draw away business from not just the other older establishments but also from the urban shopping centres.

Another impact is that the tourist spendings have gone down. In 1990, the average tourist spent $760 while staying in Singapore. In 1993, this declined to $523. In 1994, we have seen a slight upturn to $531, an increase of $8 per tourist. This trend in tourist spending reflects a few developments. Firstly, the slow economic growth in the developed countries and the tourists from the developed countries do make up a significant portion of the tourists coming into Singapore. Secondly, in our key tourist markets of Taiwan, Japan and various other countries, the import tariffs have been reduced in recent years. So that has closed the price gap between what is available in Singapore and what is available in their country. Thirdly, the ASEAN countries which again comprise a key tourism market for us. The ASEAN countries have in recent years also been developing their own very modern shopping complexes with a wide range of products available. This has also reduced the need for our ASEAN visitors to do as much shopping here as they did before.

Sir, the problem, as Mr Chew had mentioned, is no longer a cyclical one. It is a structural one. However, most of the problems have already been identified and therefore I do not see the need to set up a task force. What my Ministry would do would be to liaise closely with the relevant retailers association that Mr Chew has mentioned. We will work with them to get their feedback and, more importantly, to get from them their suggestions as to how we can assist them. We will then look into how we can assist them further.

Sir, Mr Koo Tsai Kee touched on direct sales. He mentioned the recent case of Kirby vacuum cleaners and the instances where home-owners and their families have been harassed by sales persons. Sir, I would like to highlight that measures actually do exist now that will allow consumers to deal with persistent direct sellers. At the most basic level, as a property owner, a consumer has the absolute legal right to turn away a salesman from his home. If the consumer encounters persistent harassment by a particular salesman and he is under no obligation to purchase a product from him or from the company, the consumer can always seek the assistance of the police to have the salesman removed from his home. If the salesman resorts to abusive language and to harassment and threats in the course of the discussion, the consumer should always call the police to intervene. In extreme cases, the salesman can be charged in court for public disorder and nuisance.

Sir, if the direct seller makes a sale on the basis of a misrepresentation, our law still provides the consumer with a recourse in the event that the product purchased does not match the representation promised in the sales agreement. The consumer can pursue his case before the Small Claims Tribunal. I understand there are plans underway to raise the limit for the Small Claims Tribunal to $5,000.

Sir, he has asked whether we would back a cooling-off period. I believe the introduction of a cooling-off period would actually create more problems than it solves. The experience of many other countries has shown that this frequently leads to abuse by unscrupulous consumers who are known to use the cooling-off period to utilise the item to the full extent and, just before the expiry of the cooling-off period, return the item back. Many companies are now faced with tremendous inventory of such returned products. This ends up incurring a tremendous cost for the retailers. Eventually, such costs must be passed back to the consumers. So I do not think it would benefit consumers generally.

My preference is to avoid over regulation in the area of consumer protection as such legislation often ends up adding costs rather than benefits. We should only intervene in areas where the general interest of the population is at stake, namely, in the area of safety and health. I believe that the key to this problem is education. We need to educate the consumers so that they know what is their right. In this respect, the recent newspaper reports have played a role in helping the consumers to be aware that their final right is to say no to the direct salesman.

Mr Chay has touched on the Total Factor Productivity (TFP) index and Dr Ow Chin Hock has asked what are some of the components of our productivity increase. Sir, labour productivity is measured as value-added per worker. This is the usual measurement that MTI uses and it is a practice that is adopted by most countries. The TFP, as mentioned by Mr Chay, is another measurement of productivity. TFP measures the increase in output which cannot be attributed to increases in the amount of labour and capital used. It is therefore a more stringent measure of productivity than the conventional labour productivity measure, as it prevents heavy capital investments from masking our inefficiency or inability to absorb new technology.

Dr Ow asked for the sources of the 5.3% labour productivity growth in 1994. Sir, of the 5.3% growth, 3.3% came from TFP improvements while the remaining 2% came from an increase in the capital/labour ratio.

Dr Ow has also asked if the efficiency of using capital has improved. I am happy to state that the efficiency of using both labour and capital has indeed improved. This is shown by the improving TFP performance over the recent years. I will give some data. The average TFP growth rates for the period 1974 to 1980 was minus 2.1%. For 1980 to 1986, it improved to minus 0.8%. From 1986 to 1994, the TFP improved to 2.6%. I agree with Mr Chay that it is important for us to monitor TFP. He may be pleased to know that since 1990 the NPB has been publishing TFP growth rates in its annual productivity and quality statements.

As for his suggestion to construct TFP indices at the sectoral and industry level, we currently do not have the detailed data on the sectoral distribution of our capital stock to do so. However, as TFP is meant to be a macro-economic indicator to assess productivity performance over the medium to long term, an aggregate index should be sufficient. This is the practice in most countries.

Sir, as our economy develops, it is critical for us to seek greater qualitative improvements as opposed to sheer expansion in inputs. Such qualitative improvements have to come from coordinated efforts by all relevant Government agencies. I would like to take this opportunity to announce to the House that I have set up a multi-agency task force to look into the strategic reorganisation of productivity and quality efforts currently undertaken by the National Productivity Board, SISIR and the EDB. Mr Goh Chee Wee, Minister of State for Trade and Industry, will head the task force and he expects to complete this review by the end of July this year.

Let me move on to the last item, which is water. My Minister of State would answer all the other items. Dr Ow asked whether water consumption varies with price, income level and supply. The empirical data from the PUB suggest that water consumption is price elastic only when the tariff increase is substantial. For instance, when the water tariffs were increased by a hefty 36% in February 1973, the water consumption growth rate dropped from 7.9% in 1972 to minus 0.7% in 1973, ie, the total consumption actually shrank. It shrank further in 1974 by 0.4%. In 1975, the effect wore off and water consumption growth rate jumped to 7.8%. But this was brought down 2.5% in 1976 when a 40% tariff increase was imposed in September 1975.

Sir, recent tariff increases which have been much smaller in quantum have been less effective in lowering the growth rate of water consumption. Last year, despite the water tariff increase of about 6% in 1993, the water consumption growth rate increased by 6.5% in 1994. Water consumption also appears to vary with size and the income of the household. The average water consumption per account is about 12-15 cubic metres for 1-and 2-room HDB flats. It is about 20-21 cubic metres for the 3-, 4- and 5-room flats and about 22-54 cubic metres for private housing. I suppose it is hardly surprising, as water consumption rises with incomes. Because with rising incomes come a higher standard of living, which means washing machines, cars, bigger flats to look after and all these tend to consume more water. 1.15 pm

Sir, as to the Member's point on supply, we do not have any empirical information on this. But I would guess that if supply were to be abundant, then demand would rise provided the price remains low. This is because if supply is unlimited, then consumers will be less inclined to treat water as a precious item and to be more careful about the use of water.

Let me move on to Mr Chiam See Tong's remarks about the increase in the water conservation tax. Mr Chiam has stated that the water conservation tax increase was not warranted because there is no shortage of water at the present moment. I was really amazed to hear him say that. Our two water treaties with Malaysia provide for a total of 336 million gallons of water per day until the year 2011. So based on that, since this exceeds our present consumption, Mr Chiam says there is no need for us to worry. There is an over-supply. There is no need to sound the alarm bells.

Sir, I suppose he is suggesting that we wait until the year 2011. And even then he said the Linggiu Dam contains enough water to last two years of our usage. So why should we worry, because we can increase the water supply from the Linggiu Dam? Sir, he is wrong in both respects. Firstly, Linggiu reservoir's storage capacity is large, no doubt. But the reservoir is meant to regulate the flow of water in the Johor River from where we extract our water. We do not draw our water directly from Linggiu reservoir. Secondly, the amount of water supplied to us is governed by the two treaties, ie, 86 mgd for the first treaty, 250 mgd for the second treaty, and even though there may be greater supply available, that is our limit.

Sir, he is also wrong that we can afford to wait. We cannot afford to wait. At the consumption growth rate of 6.5%, we will run out of water very quickly. In fact, at 6% we will run out of water by the year 2001, six years' time. And I can tell you six years will go by without you even noticing it.

Sir, a long lead time is involved in sourcing for water. Even if our neighbours agree to supply us with more water, it will take time to negotiate the terms and it will take time, many years, to build the reservoirs, to build the treatment plants and to install the needed water pipelines, and this is not something which you accomplish in one, two, even three years. And building a desalting plant, this is within our own prerogative and within our own capability. Even that will take many years, because we need to study carefully all the different alternatives that are available, whether it be desalination, whether it be reverse osmosis, or any other alternative process. We need to see what is the experience of the countries that are actually operating those processes. After that, once we have decided on which process to use, we need to get the consultants to design the plants, to tender for the manufacture and supply. All these again would take many years. So if we do not sound the alarm bells now when potentially water will run out in six years' time, when do we sound the alarm? Six years' time when water rationing is being introduced?

Sir, we must quickly get Singaporeans to treat water seriously. We have got to persuade them, cajole them to use water carefully, to conserve water, and not to waste it. We have got to get them to change their personal habits at home, at work, at the family level, and we also need to get companies to conserve water more aggressively. Our aim is to get the overall consumption reduced to a growth rate of 3% a year. And even then if we succeed at doing that, the water supply will run short by the year 2009 before the expiry of the first treaty.

Sir, but I am glad that in the midst of all that, he did make a sensible point, and that is, to be effective in getting Singaporeans to conserve water, we need the combination of both education and penalties, and that is what the Government is doing.

Mr Chiam See Tong (Potong Pasir): Can I have a clarification?

Mr Yeo Cheow Tong: Time is running short. Let me reply to Mr Chew Heng Ching on the PUB privatisation because it is quite important.

Sir, the PUB privatisation is part of the Government's plan to enhance the assets of Singaporeans by giving Singaporeans a share in the country's wealth. Like in the Singapore Telecom flotation, we will have a scheme for Singaporeans to buy shares in the PUB successor company. With the privatisation, PUB can then also become more flexible in its management and they will be free to participate in overseas ventures.

Sir, the PUB's Electricity and Gas Departments are scheduled to be corporatised by September this year, as the Singapore Power and Gas (SPG) company. We expect to list SPG around the middle of 1996, ie, next year. SPG will be a holding company, with five operating companies under it, namely, two power generating companies, a transmission and distribution company, an electricity supply company, and a gas company.

Sir, this structure will allow the Government to introduce competition in electricity generation and supply progressively over the next few years while at the same time enable SPG to tap the combined resources of its subsidiaries for going overseas. There is no need to introduce competition for PUB's piped gas operations as there is already competition from bottled LPG.

With the restructuring, the two SPG power generation subsidiaries will operate independently of each other. They will compete by introducing innovative processes and becoming even more efficient. The transmission and distribution business is a natural monopoly. Separating this business from SPG's power generating and supply businesses will enable competition to be introduced and to develop in the coming years when more power generating capacity will be needed.

However, as there will always be limited players in the electricity industry, we will also need to ensure that the interests of consumers with regard to pricing, performance standards, security and reliability of supply are safeguarded. This will be achieved by having the remaining PUB assume the role of the regulator responsible for licensing and regulating the electricity industry.

The regulator will set the performance and service standards to ensure that the electricity companies provide an adequate quality of supply and service to its customers. The regulator will also ensure that our present electricity needs are met and that future capacity is planned ahead of demand and installed in a timely manner.

He has asked what lessons we have learnt from the Singapore Telecom (ST) flotation. Sir, a key lesson we have learnt is that it is important for the Government to have clear rules and policies to allow competition in the industry before privatising a public monopoly. Once statutory boards are privatised as companies, they have additional responsibilities to their shareholders and it is natural for them to compete like any other companies. Wherever the nature of the industry permits, we should allow other companies entry into the industry on clear rules to provide competition as the means of ensuring efficiency in the industry. Having clear rules worked out well before privatisation will ensure that there is no uncertainty in the minds of potential entrants into the market or investors in SPG or other companies. SPG will therefore not have any monopolistic powers when it is listed.

Members will also recall that when the ST flotation was launched, that was the first time that such a massive number of investors were involved. With that experience behind us, we should be able to handle the administrative aspects of the SPG flotation and avoid many of the problems encountered by the public during the ST flotation.

I would now like to ask my Minister of State to reply to the other questions.

The Minister of State for Trade and Industry (Mr Goh Chee Wee): Sir, Mr Chay Wai Chuen spoke about the small and medium enterprises and asked whether we are running down the programmes for local enterprises. The answer to this question is a definitive no. Let me explain.

The Economic Development Assistance Scheme (EDAS) is the umbrella scheme comprising all financial assistance schemes administered by EDB. Funds are made available by the Government to EDAS on a five-year basis. The sums referred to by Mr Chay represent a drawdown on approved loans or grants made previously. These sums are not indicative of the total assistance expended to SMEs by the Government.

Mr Chay may be reassured to hear that over the period 1991 to 1994, the total number of loans approved for SMEs was 6,403 amounting to nearly $1.6 billion. In 1994, the value of these loans increased by some 16% over 1993.

As for more user-friendly ways to reach the users, the point made by Mr Chay, the Government is already working directly with the private sector to tap on the manpower and expertise that are available there. Let me give some examples.

The Enterprise Promotion Centre (EPC) was set up in 1990 by seven Chambers of Commerce and Industry associations with the support of EDB. It specialises in promoting Government assistance schemes and providing business guidance and consultancy advice to local SMEs. The Retail Promotion Centre (RPC) was set up by EDB and NPB together with the Singapore Retailers Association and the Federation of Merchants Association. RPC helps retailers upgrade and increase productivity by providing business guidance, retail consultancy and promoting the use of Government assistance.

Furthermore, schemes such as the Local Enterprise Finance Scheme are administered through all branches of some 30 participating financial institutions. There is an efficient and cost effective system of administering Government assistance schemes to local enterprises in a practical and timely manner. We welcome suggestions and will continually look at more ways to reach more local enterprises without straining the resources of our agencies.

Mr Chay also commented on the Government assistance schemes like Local Enterprise Finance Scheme (LEFS) and the Capital Assistance Scheme. The Local Enterprise Finance Scheme is intended to provide low cost fixed rate loans to SMEs. The Capital Assistance Scheme provides long-term financing to skill-intensive and technologically desirable projects. The preferential rates given under these two schemes are based on the prime rates of the major local banks and are revised from time to time.

Mr Chay has referred to the figure of $855 million in the EDB's Annual Report. I must explain that this figure only reflects the amount of loans outstanding. It does not include those loans which have been paid. As I had mentioned earlier, in the last four years alone, we have given out loans totalling $1.6 billion to SMEs.

Unlike the LEFS, which is positioned to allow easy access to all SMEs, loans under the Capital Assistance Scheme are for larger projects. In the last 10 years, there were only 12 applications approved. As the number of applications received for this Capital Assistance Scheme is significantly smaller, it is more practical for EDB to administer each loan directly instead of operating through other agencies, as suggested by Mr Chay.

1.30 pm

Dr Ow Chin Hock asked about the profile of the retrenched workers and the new jobs created. In 1994, 9,444 workers were retrenched. The Ministry of Labour keeps track of statistics on retrenched workers according to sectors and occupational groups and also on unemployed workers who cited retrenchment as their reason for unemployment. Based on the Ministry of Labour's survey, 74% of the retrenched workers were from the manufacturing sector and 69% were production, transport and other related employees. The labour force survey also shows that 51% of the unemployed retrenched workers were above 40 years old and 49% have less than secondary qualification.

In 1994, there was a net creation of 71,200 jobs. All key sectors recorded increases in employment. The major sectors were manufacturing, 11,500 new jobs; construction, 12,700; commerce, 11,800; financial and business service, 15,800. However, we do not have the details with regard to the age and educational qualification requirements for these new jobs.

Mr Sinnakaruppan talked about the need for an accreditation or certification scheme for workers who have undergone On-the-Job Training (OJT) programme. Sir, certification of OJT-trained workers helps to motivate the workers to upgrade themselves and also ensure that skills acquired would be useful to and recognised by future employers. At the same time, a certification system would enable employers to plan their skills training and upgrading more effectively and help to reduce wastage that results from duplicating training efforts. In view of the benefits, the NPB, together with other agencies and organisations, like NTUC, EDB, ITE, will study into the possibility of certifying skills acquired by workers through OJT.

Mr Koo Tsai Kee made a number of comments on the Skills Training and Retraining (START) programme. He asked whether retrenched workers could be considered for the START scheme for up to a month after they have been retrenched. Sir, the START programme was introduced in July 1994 to help retrenched workers adjust and find new jobs. It is fully funded by SDF. Within the programme, apart from undergoing training skills and confidence building, the retrenched workers are also job-matched to potential employers. Contrary to what Mr Koo believes, the START programme is actually open to all retrenched workers regardless of when they are retrenched. There is, therefore, no time limit on the eligibility, neither is there any requirement that they must still be in employment to qualify for participation.

As to his other suggestion that we expand the pool of companies in the scheme, I would like to inform the Member that the 11 companies which are participating in the programme were chosen as they already have in-house skills training programmes from which the START participants can benefit. Other companies are also welcomed to participate in the programme as long as these companies have suitable training programmes for their workers. This is to ensure that the workers are job-matched to responsible companies that are committed to providing training for their workers.

Mr Chng Hee Kok (Tampines GRC): Sir, thank you very much for giving me the opportunity to speak on the topic which I have raised under the same cut, ie, the question of economic forecasting. Since 1985, when we went into recession, we were told that a new econometric model has been implemented in MTI. But year in year out, we find that we have been under-forecasting the actual performance of our economy. This may come as a pleasant surprise to the population but, for planning purposes, I think it is obvious that accurate forecasting is necessary, both for Government as well as industry.

Last year, we forecasted the growth to be around 6% to 8%. At the end of the year we had 10.1%, and that is 40% to 50% off the mark. I wonder if the econometric model is accurate, but the Ministry is moderating the numbers. Or is it that the numbers are not accurate at all, in which event, we should not spend money and waste our time having a Statistics Department and spend money on personnel? Maybe, the Minister can enlighten us on why is it that the econometric model is so way out of line, or is it that the Government is overly cautious in presenting the forecast?

Mr Yeo Cheow Tong: Sir, forecasting is more an art than a science, and that is why there are so many econometric models as there are economists. My apologies to all the economists here. There are so many economic variables affecting the economy that no model can adequately capture all of them. The other complication facing Singapore is that we are such a small and open economy that we are very vulnerable to changes in the external environment which are outside our control.

Sir, MTI recognises these problems. We also recognise the need to provide as much information as possible to the business sector to help them to plan ahead. We therefore try to combine inputs from as many sources as possible, including the feedback from industrialists and businessmen. Our forecasts at any one time represent the result of all available information and assessment up to that time. As we get more information, we do refine our forecasts and narrow the range. We cannot do better than that except with the benefit of hindsight.

Sir, our forecast has also been borne out because comparison with forecast by other research organisations in Singapore shows that their range is very similar to the range that we came up with.

Mr Chiam See Tong: Can I clarify with the Minister, Sir? I agree with the Minister that water resource is a very important factor to Singapore. We are dependent on our water from another country. We are not self-sufficient in water. I agree that we must also have water conservation. But my point is: has the Minister attempted to find other ways to conserve water? Has the Minister embarked on campaigns in the schools, families, or over TV? As far as I know, there are none at the moment.

Mr Yeo Cheow Tong: Sir, the save water message has always been a regular message. You look at the literature you get with the PUB bills. The Save Water campaign on a national level has been periodically introduced. So the water situation is not one which is unfamiliar to Singaporeans.

Sir, the problem here is how do we bring down the very high rate of consumption growth, from 6.5% to 3%, in as short a period of time as possible. If we have the luxury of time, if water is going to run out in 20 years' time, I think we can embark on a 5-year education programme. But when you have a six-year time-frame staring at you in the face, I think it is best that we act as quickly as possible, by bringing the message home to Singaporeans as strongly as possible so that we can all cooperate together to conserve water and to ensure that we are able to succeed in pushing back the time when we will be short of water.

Mr Stephen Lee Ching Yen (Nominated Member): May I seek clarification, Sir? The Minister mentioned there are two power generating companies. Are we compromising economy of scale and will these two companies effectively compete with each other?

Mr Yeo Cheow Tong: Sir, before embarking on the exercise, we have consulted professionals in this area and they have assured us that a two-gigawatt power generation company would be very commercially viable. In fact, a lot of the new power stations are a lot smaller than that. His second question is ---

Mr Stephen Lee Ching Yen: How do they compete?

Mr Yeo Cheow Tong: Sir, because they are going to be structured as separate independent companies with the managements measured by how they perform, I am sure there will be some rivalry and they will then compete to show that one is better than the other. But in any case, we will have the regulator sitting at the back, making sure that the tariff increases in the coming years will continue to be reasonable.

Dr Ow Chin Hock: Sir, allow me to make two points of clarification. First, on the CPI for different income groups. I know the Household Expenditure Survey was completed in September 1993. I was referring to the delay of 18 months after the survey data were collected, and not the time period needed for the survey.

Second, I support both the petrochemical and electronics clusters, otherwise I would not have helped MTI to officiate at some trade exhibitions and other functions. But the point is that, with 39% of our manufacturing value-added in electronics, what happens if there is a worldwide industrial downturn or restructuring? Our manufacturing sector and even our economy will be affected. I was asking for diversification of manufacturing activities so as to reduce the relative weight of the electronics industry and not to reduce the absolute scale of the industry.

Finally, I would like to persuade Mr Chiam to look at the water consumption with a long-term perspective. Sir, I am sure that you will be around by the year 2011 but some of us may not be around in this world. But we owe it to our children, our grandchildren and Singaporeans of future generations to ensure that they have adequate water supply then. This can only be done by taking action now. No responsible government should allow its people to go thirsty.

Sir, with that, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The Chairman: Amendment No. (2), Dr Wong Kwei Cheong. 1.45 pm

Dr Wong Kwei Cheong (Kampong Glam GRC): Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head W of the Main Estimates be reduced by $10 in respect of Code WE 3100.

Sir, according to the Economic Survey of Singapore 1994, local small and medium enterprises, or SMEs, have made good progress in their development. The value added grew from $5.3 billion in 1992 to $5.4 billion in 1993. Their productivity, as measured by the census value added per worker, increased by 6% from $41,600 in 1992 to $44,100 in 1993. However, no matter how hard our local entrepreneurs work, their productivity increases are eroded away by the increasing strength of the Singapore dollar. Last year, the Singapore dollar appreciated by 10% against the US dollar. For this year alone, the Singapore dollar has appreciated from $1.46 to $1.41 per US dollar, an increase of about 3.5% in just a matter of two and a half months. At this rate of appreciation, if nothing is done to slow down its strength, the Singapore dollar would have appreciated by another 10% against the US dollar for this year. And this, I must say, will be very bad for our export industries.

Many of our SMEs have to sell their products to the MNCs in Singapore in US dollars, and buy their products from local suppliers in Singapore dollars. Their profit margins are constantly reduced. Their future prospects are indeed bleak.

The Minister for Finance has strongly defended the strong Singapore dollar as it neutralised imported inflation and alleviated over-heating in the economy and the labour market. However, if the Government continues to ignore the strong appreciation of the Singapore dollar, it is a matter of time before our MNCs have to drastically reduce their operations and Singapore will suffer the same fate that Japan is now going through. The strong Japanese Yen has forced many Japanese manufacturers to move their factories out of Japan, thus creating unemployment and economic recession.

May I suggest that the Government make an urgent study of the impact that the strengthening Singapore dollar has on our MNCs and SMEs, and take appropriate action to reduce the effect that the strengthening Singapore dollar has on our exports.

Mr Stephen Lee Ching Yen: Sir, the Finance Minister in his Budget Statement announced that funds will be allocated to the Economic Development Board for venture capital funds to assist local SMEs to take advantage of regional opportunities. The Minister also said that funds will be made available for the EDB to make strategic investments and to assist local SMEs through various economic development schemes. I hope that the Minister can provide more information on these schemes and whether any new types of assistance will be offered in the new fiscal year.

Many SMEs are also members of the employer groups. For example, of the 1,200 companies who are members of the Singapore National Employers Federation, more than 400 companies or about 35% employ less than 50 people. Will the Government consider giving grants to employer organisations if they can come up with specific assistance schemes for their members? These employer organisations might be in a better position to help their members if they were supported in their efforts by the Government. Moreover, the Government need not be burdened with more people to carry out these schemes.

Mr Goh Chee Wee: Sir, in answer to the question by Mr Stephen Lee, we have a wide spectrum of programmes to help our local SMEs. These programmes are administered by the various agencies like the EDB, TDB, NSTB, SISIR and NPB. These programmes benefit local enterprises at different stages of development, from start-up to the growth and expansion stages, and to going regional. It includes low-cost financing, tax incentives, business development, technology upgrading, formation of economic grouping, standards upgrading and overseas expansion programmes.

In 1994, 1,453 loans amounting to $451 million were approved. Another $110 million in grants were given out to more than 72,000 projects. The amount of loans and grants approved in 1994 represented an increase of 17% and 12% respectively over the amounts approved in 1993. The details of these schemes can be found in the brochure which has been circulated to Members of the House. Some specific details which Mr Stephen Lee asked for can actually be found in the brochure.

Mr Stephen Lee asked whether there are new types of schemes to be offered. I would say that the range of assistance schemes which are available today is already comprehensive. I would like to assure him that our assistance schemes are constantly reviewed and updated to keep them relevant. For example, the Product Development Assistance Scheme is aimed at encouraging local companies to undertake product design and development activities. Last year, this was extended to include process development. So if Mr Lee has any suggestions with regard to the existing or new schemes to help SMEs, I will be glad to ask the relevant agency to study it.

Mr Lee also asked if Government would give grants to employer organisations with special assistance schemes for members who are local SMEs. I do not believe there is any need for such an arrangement, because our existing schemes are not only broad based but they are actually open to all local SMEs. Again, if the Member has any specific proposal, I will be very glad to study it.

Dr Wong Kwei Cheong expressed his concern about the impact of the strengthening Singapore dollar on our MNCs and SMEs. The Minister for Finance has spoken extensively on this issue in this House earlier, and I do not propose to go into this further.

Dr Wong Kwei Cheong: Sir, is the Government prepared to make a study of the impact of the strengthening Singapore dollar on our MNCs and SMEs?

Mr Goh Chee Wee: Sir, I believe this issue has been debated quite extensively. I think people know the pros and cons of a strong Singapore dollar. The Minister for Finance has put up a very convincing argument. I do not see the need to make a special study on this subject again.

Dr Wong Kwei Cheong: Sir, although I am not very happy with the reply, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The Chairman: Amendment No. (3), Mrs Yu-Foo.

Mrs Yu-Foo Yee Shoon (Yuhua): ( In Mandarin): Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head W of the Main Estimates be reduced by $10 in respect of Code WI 3100.

Sir, I would like to speak on the Skills Development Fund. From the views expressed by employers and union representatives at a recent dialogue session of the Feedback Unit, and the debate in this House, we can see that training and retraining of present workers is a very important issue. I personally feel that it is not only important by itself, but it will also affect the further economic development of Singapore in our regionalisation, globalisation and our competitive status.

Furthermore, the income gap between the highly-skilled labour and the unskilled labour is widening. This will increase social pressure and older workers will be phased out.

I am glad that issues like public transport and water resources had received due attention, but the training of our human resource, which is our only resource, is also very important, especially when we are trying to build a more cohesive society. We must not let the unskilled workers feel that they are lagging behind and are being discarded by society. The only way to build up their confidence is to train them up so that they can do their fair share of contribution to society. To achieve this national objective of overall training, I think we can deal with this from the structural and the resource angles.

Structurally speaking, our students have been receiving a lot of care and support, more than a fair share of it. They have a very good and comprehensive education system from primary school, secondary school, up to the Institute of Technical Education, polytechnic and university. They have the Ministry of Education and other quasi-government bodies to carry out the programmes for them.

From the resource point of view, they are allotted a lot of funds from the Government, private endowment funds, scholarships, bursaries and the Edusave scheme. On the other hand, what does the labour force in Singapore receive in terms of training or education? I will not say there is none, but I think whatever they have is very negligible.

The present labour force covers a very wide spectrum of people, including civil servants, management staff, middle-management personnel, technicians, professionals, businessmen and all the workers in Singapore. Some Members of this House mentioned that the SDF had been used to train management staff. The question now is whether we should review our structure of training. Do we want to train all our labour force as well as those who are making a return to the labour market? Secondly, at the moment, under our present system, have we achieved our desired effect?

I believe, over the past 10 years, we have discussed the issue on many, many occasions. We can look it up in the Hansard of the House. Yes, we have been talking over and over again about this. Yet, the question now is: Have we achieved our desired effect?

I suggest that we use the National Productivity Board and other Government agencies and private training agencies to set up a national committee to work out some comprehensive training schemes for our workers, and to oversee the implementation of such schemes. The National Wages Council should also include the training of workers as one of the important ingredients in their deliberation on wage adjustment.

The next point I would like to deal with is the system of training. In formulating the system of training, we must take into consideration the fact that our workers must earn to support their families. Very often, they have to work overtime or even take on additional jobs to earn money for the family. They have very limited time to spare. Educational level, language problem, age problem, and a host of other problems hamper their wish to be trained or retrained.

I am glad that the National Productivity Board has already put in place some on-the-job training (OJT) schemes. But one problem remains to be resolved, that is, what is the link between OJT and national certification and recognition. We must issue some form of certificate to the workers who have completed their training programme, so that they can get a piece of paper which can be recognised.

Next, I would like to deal with resources for our training. We know that every year, the Government grants some $300 million to subsidize the education of the 20,000-odd students at the National University of Singapore. But according to the SDF Annual Report of 1993, we spent only about $50 million for the training of our 1.6 million workers. If we take the income cut-off point at $1,500, we have some 400,000-500,000 workers. So only $50 million was used for their training. On the one hand, we have 20,000 students getting $300 million in subsidies, and on the other hand, 1.6 million workers have to share $50 million in grants for their training. I am not saying the university students do not deserve the grant, but why the great disparity?

We spent about $300 million just for one university for about 20,000 students a year.

The Skills Development Fund used up $50 million in expenditure last year, but its revenue over the same period was only $13 million. So the Fund is running at a loss. The SDF has to dip into its reserves or the interest earned by its reserves each year. As time goes on, by the year 2001, or six years later, the SDF will not be able to finance any more new training programmes. Where is the SDF going to get the funds for the training of our workers? The Government should allow more flexibility in this aspect.

Now, we know that 18% of the fund has been spent on the training of managerial staff, and 80% for ordinary workers. The labour MPs in the House have already expressed their concern on the matter, that is, the use of SDF for the training of managerial staff. The employers are spending the money due to the workers. If they want to use 20% of the SDF on the managerial staff, the employers should contribute a certain percentage of the overall payroll to the SDF for this purpose.

We are often very forgetful. I have just managed to obtain these figures. We started the SDF with a contribution of 4% of the payroll right until 1980. In 1985, it was reduced to 2%, and in 1986 it was further reduced to 1%. It is now very difficult to raise the contribution rate. In the past, we talked about recession. Now, with the economy growing by 9% to 10% in the past two years, I hope the Government would consider adjusting the SDF contribution rate from year to year.

The next point is the upper limit for contribution. This year, we are raising the ceiling from $750 to $1,000. I hope that every year, a review would be made so that the $1,000 limit could be raised to $1,500 in keeping with the average pay of our workers. The Government may feel that training is the responsibility of the employers or the workers. Of course, we do not advocate that the Government practises welfarism in Singapore, but I feel that investment in human resource is certainly worth the while. I will appeal to the Government to allocate funds for the training of the present workforce and those who are retrenched, housewives or women who are making a return to the labour market.

We have the Edusave scheme for students. Employers often forget the importance of training and its long term benefit. 92% of our employers are small and medium enterprises. What they are concerned with is the day-to-day production. I would like to appeal to the Government to set up a SDF savings account for every worker, just like the Edusave accounts for our students. We want to step up the training and retraining of our workers so that we can enhance the productivity of our workers which will, in turn, improve the quality of life of our workers so that they can cope with the challenges ahead, and there will be more social cohesion in Singapore.

Mr Chay Wai Chuen (Brickworks GRC): Sir, I urge the Government to work out a new scheme of retraining of skills for our workers. I believe we are still running the BEST and WISE schemes. These skills programmes basically train our workers in language and numerate skills for them to be able to undergo training. As our economy restructures, our workers need to be able to move into the new areas of industries without being rendered obsolete with new skills required. For example, more skills at handling automated processes or handling computer-aided processes are important. Many of these workers that we have now may well be in their 30s and 40s.

I urge the Government to work out a new retraining of new core skills programme for our workers. They may be working at a job presently not related to the workplace environment of the 21st century, but it is best to use our SDF money to prepare them. Yesterday, we have heard from the Member for Tanjong Pagar GRC why the START programme is a non-starter for practical reasons. We do not have to wait until the retrenchment time for money to be spent for retraining of our workers. We should realise that our workforce is not as literate and numerate compared with the other NIEs, especially at the older cohort level. So this makes it all the more important for us to develop this retraining of core skills programme for them.

The Chairman: Mr Sinnakaruppan is not here. Mr Koo.

Mr Koo Tsai Kee: Sir, every year the SDF is collecting less money than it is spending. My question to the Minister is what is the Ministry going to do about it. If I may use this opportunity to ask the Minister of State a question on START. He said that a retrenched worker can still enrol himself or herself in START. My understanding is that he might be able to do that but he cannot claim the SDF subsidy. So it is a non-starter.

The Chairman: Mr Zulkifli is not here. Mr Stephen Lee.

Mr Stephen Lee Ching Yen: Many Members of this House who have spoken have expressed their concern about the training and retraining of our workers. I am particularly concerned about the training and retraining of our older workers, especially when the Government intends to further raise the retirement age beyond 60 to 67.

According to the 1994 Labour Force Survey, there are about 136,000 workers who are aged 50 and over with only primary education and below. This group of workers forms about 8% of our workforce. Employers will face difficulties in training these workers. I fully agree with the Member for Leng Kee that the Government, employers, trade unions and employees should put up a concerted effort in training to help Singapore maintain its competitive edge.

On the part of employers, they should be willing to invest in the training of workers both young and old. On the part of the workers, they may need to make some sacrifice to attend training provided by employers and trade unions and workers should be prepared to work closely with the employers and respond to training. They may have to sacrifice some of their evening hours to attend training courses.

The Government needs to be more responsive to the training needs of older workers and on-the-job training. There is a need to be flexible when it comes to certifying their skills. Such workers cannot follow the full off-the-job curriculum on training institutes. They should be encouraged to continue to acquire higher skills through the national OJT skill certification system.

The SDF could also examine how to better finance OJT. Employers need to invest a lot of their resources to embark on a structured OJT and a refinement of the present funding for OJT may be needed.

I hope the Minister can inform the House of any specific effort and incentives by Government to further encourage the training of older workers.

Mr Koo Tsai Kee: Sir, the Government, as well as the NTUC, has been talking about placing the training of workers, young and old, at the top of the agenda. Unfortunately, exhortations to increase in-house training grants to over 2% of the company's payroll has fallen on nearly deaf ears. Certainly, the results are discouraging. Why is this so? The answer is not surprising. Employers have little incentives to invest in training. Employers will always try to capture increases in productivity through one solution, ie, to pump in money to increase capital investment. Why? Because there are incentives. What are these incentives? First, capital investments increase the productivity immediately. This is important to companies because their shareholders, looking at the stock market everyday, are all short termers! Second, depreciation on capital equipment makes capital investments attractive. Third, machines are less quarrelsome than people. Machines obey orders, humans try to defy you. So even as we are talking about training and putting training at the top of the NWC agenda, I would like to ask the Ministry of Trade and Industry to lobby the Ministry of Finance to give tax incentives to companies for training. So basically I am enlisting the Minister's help.

The Ministry of Trade and Industry's job is to make the GDP grow year after year with low inflation and that we have an even spread of the money across the population of Singapore. They have been doing a good job so far. The Ministry of Finance's job is to make sure that surpluses grow to the sky. Both are commendable, but until our workers have what Mr Chay Wai Chuen talked about yesterday, ie, high Total Factor Productivity, we will not be able to achieve either. This is because the productivity level of our workers today is low.

If we want to have the Swiss standard of living, it is not enough to have the Swiss GDP per capita. On a per capita basis, our income is higher than Britain, Australia and many developed countries. We can be an OECD country, but I do not think we are developed and we can only be called developed when we have two things; when we have technology and high TFP. Therefore, I want to ask the Minister for Trade and Industry if he would join hands with NTUC and all workers in Singapore to ask the Minister for Finance, to badger him, to look at tax incentives for companies which are committed to training.

Dr John Chen Seow Phun (Hong Kah GRC): Sir, the Skills Development Fund was set up to encourage employers to train their workers. 15 years have passed since its inception but the results have not been entirely satisfactory. We have no problem with the MNCs and the bigger companies. They spend about 5% of their payroll in training. What worries me is that smaller companies which collectively employ more than 50% of the workforce are spending an average of only about 1% of their payroll in training. Furthermore, the value-added per worker of these companies is much lower compared to the bigger companies. This means that the smaller companies and their workers are likely to suffer the brunt of intense competition from the region unless they upgrade their operations and their skills.

Sir, smaller companies are not paying enough attention to training mainly because they do not know how to upgrade their business to a higher value-added one. If they do, they will naturally start to worry about how to train their existing workers or to recruit new workers to do the higher value-added job. So the key to solving the problem of smaller companies not training is not just to keep on saying that they must spend up to 4% of their payroll in training. The key really is to help them to upgrade their business and create the higher value-added jobs. Then automatically they will send their workers for training.

An excellent example is the franchise scheme to help local retailers. Experience has shown that shops which participated in this scheme are sending their employees for training so that they can meet the new job requirements.

I am happy to see that the Ministry is now focusing on industry clusters development. I wish to ask the Minister whether smaller companies will be included in the scheme to help them upgrade and strengthen their core competency.

Sir, besides targeting at employers, there is also a need for the Government to target at individuals and provide them the opportunity to be retrained to meet the shortage of particular skills in the country. MTI knows the industry well and it knows, for example, that there is a shortage of skilled workers in precision engineering at the moment. What should the Government do in this case? Should we depend on foreign workers to meet the shortfall? Or should we train more Singaporeans? I think the Government should get training agencies, either private or public, to set up training programmes for such skills. It should then subsidise Singaporeans who can meet a certain prerequisite to attend the programme. In this way, we help to upgrade the skills of Singaporeans who want to upgrade themselves but are not given the chance by their employers.

Sir, I would like to ask whether the Minister would agree to my comments. 2.15 pm

Mr John De Payva (Nominated Member): Sir, my colleagues from the labour movement have touched very thoroughly on this issue, but I think it bears repeating.

Sir, I have briefly touched on this issue a few days ago. There are basically two kinds of problems that workers face in so far as training and retraining are concerned. Employers by and large are not willing to support courses that are not related to the employees' job and workers have financial family commitments too important for them to give it a miss in order to go for training.

Sir, $1 billion has been set aside for Edusave. Whilst this is a commendable amount, what has the Government done in so far as financial aid for workers training in Singapore is concerned. What kind of amount are we talking about in the name of the SDF for that matter?

Employers are encouraged to set aside a sum of money for training and re-training. But how many are actually doing it? We have identified that the bigger companies do so; small companies do not. But the majority of workers come from small and medium-sized companies. So it is very rare to find an employer who will support an employee financially or otherwise, if that employee wants to take up a course not related to his job. Yet we are talking about multi-skilling our workforce. And we are talking about meeting the challenges of globalisation.

On the problem of family or financial commitments, in my dealings with workers, a key reason for them not going for training is that they need that time to take on additional jobs or put in more hours of work to earn the extra money to meet family commitments. Some of them even need to rush home immediately after work to tutor their schooling kids. Tuition fees are no longer cheap.

The question that begs an answer is whether the Ministry can find a way to assist these financially hard-pressed workers - the majority of the working population if I might add - so that they can avail themselves for training or re-training and improve their economic worth and, more importantly, stay relevant to the changing economy.

Sir, if nothing much is done to correct this situation, these workers will forever be left behind whilst the rest move forward. The gap will further widen and the Swiss standard of living for these workers will be a dream that will never come true.

Mr Goh Chee Wee: Sir, many Members of the House have raised concern about the training of workers, in particular older workers. I shall address their queries together.

We do appreciate the special needs and the problems of the older workers, and some of these problems have been highlighted by Members who spoke on this subject. I would like to inform Members that SDF has in fact taken these into consideration in formulating the various programmes to train the mature workers.

I will give some examples. We have a training leave scheme which encourages employers to release mature workers for training during working hours. Another example is the development of training programmes that are tailored to the learning needs and the profile of mature workers. For instance, we have this Fast Forward programme. We also broaden the training framework by the development of alliances with training providers to offer training programmes specially targeted at older workers.

So through all these efforts, the number of training places for older workers supported by SDF has increased from 28,000 in FY92 to 64,000 in FY93. This represented 13% of all the training places, up from 8% in FY92. The various schemes can only help to overcome the obstacle to training like the lack of time and the lack of opportunities. But these schemes will do little to increase training amongst those who are reluctant or do not see the need to undergo training. So there is a limit to what the Government can do here and we do hope that with the help of the employers and unions and greater awareness, the reluctance of such workers can be overcome.

Mr Chay Wai Chuen urged the Government to work out re-training programmes to enable our workers to acquire new core skills. I would like to inform Members that the Government has taken a number of measures to encourage the development of such core skills, and these include the launching of a Core Skills Training Scheme in July 1994, some 200 courses covering six broad areas, and these include advanced manufacturing technology, system design and development, and so on. All these come within the scheme. Many employers are expected to re-train their workers in these skills courses to ensure that their workers are equipped with skills to match the advances in technology and new work processes.

The Workers' Training Plan Scheme is another scheme where the SDF provides grants to companies to encourage them to plan in advance their future skills requirement and embark on systematic skills upgrading of their workers.

The SDF is now exploring the possibility of a scheme with the polytechnics to encourage workers with technical qualifications to further upgrade their skills to meet the higher demands of industry. So we take a long-term perspective on training and we will continue to review and improve our efforts in this area.

Dr John Chen commented that the small companies are not paying attention to training and he asked whether we are taking measures to help the small companies to upgrade and to train their employees. Several schemes are already in place to help the SMEs implement the workers' training programme with the support of SDF.

With the increased efforts made by SDF, 76% of the more than 35,000 SMEs have now benefited from SDF funds. In financial year 1993, out of a total SDF grant commitment of about $89 million for the support of 506,000 training places, SMEs accounted for about 18% of the total grant commitment and 10% of the training places.

To overcome the problem often faced by the SMEs in releasing workers for training due to their small staff strength, again this is a common complaint. The small companies claim that they have a small staff strength and they cannot release their workers for training. So to overcome this problem, we have placed particular emphasis on the On-the-Job Training (OJT) programme which many Members have spoken about.

The On-the-Job Training scheme was introduced in July 1994 with the aim of helping the SMEs to implement cost-effective OJT in-house, and we will continue to promote this OJT programme.

Let me also answer some specific questions raised by Members. Mr Koo Tsai Kee mentioned the question of retrenched workers not being able to join the START programme and he said that without SDF funding, they would not be able to participate in the START programme. I would say that for those retrenched workers who are not eligible for SDF funding, the NPB is prepared to support such training programmes. The START programme is formulated to help retrenched workers. So either SDF or NPB will support such programmes.

Mrs Yu-Foo made a couple of points about the use of SDF and she also commented on the use of SDF fund for training of managers. The SDF was set up in 1979 to encourage and provide financial support for companies to train their employees. Owing to the need to upgrade the skills of our workers as our industries restructure, the focus of the SDF has been primarily on skills training of workers. However, the SDF does support to a limited extent management and supervisory-related training. Very often these are integrated into company-wide training plans which cover all levels of employees. So there is a company-wide training plan and the plan covers all employees -management, supervisory and the rank-and-file workers.

The Management Development Grant Scheme, for instance, is targeted primarily at managers and supervisors of local companies, in particular the SMEs. In fact, one of the most difficult tasks of NPB is to convince the management of the SMEs the benefits of workers training. So NPB and SDF have to take a total approach in helping to upgrade the skills of both management and workers of these companies. But I will assure Members that the focus of SDF has been, and will continue to be, on upgrading the skills of the workers.

Mr Stephen Lee talked about the problems of lowly-educated workers. He also mentioned about the problem of older workers and of course he supports the OJT programme. I think I have responded to most of the points mentioned by him. Yes, we support the OJT programme. I will look into the certification of the skills acquired through OJT.

Mr John De Payva mentioned a few points, including a suggestion that the Government considers helping workers who attend courses after working hours because many of them have got to earn extra income and they had to work overtime. I can understand the plight of workers who need to work overtime to earn extra income. I think it would be difficult to justify a scheme which requires the Government to pay the workers to attend courses. So we try to find other solutions and one of the ways which we are trying to do is really to encourage companies to participate in this training leave scheme and to embark on this training leave scheme where training is conducted during working hours. This is supported by SDF and we want to encourage more companies to participate in this scheme.

The other issue which has been raised by many Members concerns the SDF contribution rate. Mrs Yu-Foo and other Members have also touched on this and said that we have to review or revise the SDF contribution rate periodically or yearly. Although currently the amount of money collected by SDF is less than what it disburses, that means, you pay out more than you collect, the training effort supported by SDF is not, I repeat, is not constrained by the amount of funds available in the SDF, which means the SDF will support all worthwhile projects. Of course, then we have to draw down from the balance of the SDF.

With effect from 1st April 1995, the salary ceiling for the Skills Development Levy will be raised from $750 to $1,000. The SDF plays a key role in upgrading the skills of our workforce which must be adequately funded. My Ministry will continue to review the levy collection and funding requirements periodically and make further revision when necessary.

So these are my responses to some of the key points raised by Members. 2.30 pm

Mr Koo Tsai Kee: The Minister of State did not answer whether he will lobby the Minister for Finance to provide tax incentives for training.

Mr Goh Chee Wee: We will try to deal with the funding of the SDF specifically. As I have answered the Member previously, we still have funds in the SDF to support the company's training programme. As to whether there should be other incentives to encourage the company to embark on training programmes, I think we are open to suggestions. We can always explore all avenues of encouraging the company to invest in training. Tax incentive is one of them, but I think we should explore other possibilities.

Dr John Chen Seow Phun: Sir, there are two questions that the Minister of State has not answered. The first question is about helping local companies to upgrade. I know that the Government is trying to promote the industry cluster development and I thought it is a good idea. I am asking whether small companies would be included to help them upgrade and strengthen their core competency. I see this as one way where you can help them to upgrade so as to provide higher value-added jobs. The other question is: does the Ministry know that there is a shortage of particular skills at the moment and whether they will look into setting up training programmes for such skills and allow individual Singaporeans who can meet certain prerequisites to enrol in this programme and be helped by the Government?

Mr Goh Chee Wee: Sir, we do have various assistance schemes for local industries. I refer to the brochure which we have distributed. In the brochure, for instance, we have listed the Local Industries Upgrading Programmes and others. We can consider expanding the scope of the schemes to see how we can help these local companies along the line that the Member has mentioned. We can think of expanding the scope of the existing schemes so that we can achieve our objective of upgrading, and not only upgrading but of course the training of the workers as well.

Mrs Yu-Foo Yee Shoon: I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $232,897,700 for Head W ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates.

The sum of $1,181,120,000 for Head W ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.

Head R -

The Chairman: Head R - Ministry of Information and the Arts. Amendment No. (1), Mr Peter Sung.

Mr Peter Sung (Buona Vista): Sir, I beg to move,

That the total sum to be allocated for Head R of the Main Estimates be reduced by $100. Last Year's Debate

When I opened the debate on MITA last year, I said that Members will tell the Minister of their views on censorship. And tell the Minister they did, in full measure. The Minister then gave a spirited and passionate response. He painted the picture in the long term where the flood waters are supposed to overwhelm us. But Members were not convinced. And in withdrawing my amendment last year, I said that the problem of control will not go away. And it has not gone away as the Minister will see in the course of today's debate.

Why are Backbenchers concerned?

For two years now, this House has heard pleas, passionate pleas by Backbenchers, for MITA to exercise control and regulation over SBC, now TCS, and the media. We do so for a number of reasons.

(a) We ourselves have heard our grassroots leaders, our community leaders, our friends make comments about the quality and type of programmes we see on SBC and in other media.

(b) Many of us felt that these comments were justified and fair.

(c) We felt that timely action must be taken in order not to erode the moral standing, moral behaviour of our children.

(d) And we made these comments not because we want to criticize the media for the sake of criticism. We do not want SBC, now TCS, or other parts of the media to sell the morality of the future generations down the tube.

International Channels

It is true that advancement in technology would make c control and censorship of international TV more complex and more difficult. Satellite dishes become smaller and more elusive. That technological developments will make information more difficult to manage, more difficult to control, that is not in doubt. But are we helpless? Are we not able to do something about it? I think that we are, and that too should not be in doubt. MITA has thought of using Cable TV as a counter measure, a means to exercise some form of control. This was brought before this House and this House supported MITA in the introduction of Cable TV. If MITA has other counter measures, I am sure this House will listen to them carefully because we are on the side of MITA on this issue.

Sir, please let me make three points about international TV received in Singapore. Firstly, we should give credit to our law enforcement officers. They are able to do many things here in Singapore which their counterparts elsewhere cannot achieve. And however small and elusive these satellite dishes are, our law enforcement officers will be able to find them, maybe not immediately, but at some stage, they will be found.

Secondly, there is technology to block out international TV if you want to. Here is an article in the Straits Times. The heading "Technology to block out TV violence available." Let me read one small paragraph. It says here:

`Over the air broadcasters and television producers are hostile to the idea fearing that it would cost them viewers and frighten away advertisers.'

Singapore is not short of creativity. Singaporeans will come up, when they are encouraged to do so, with devices that can sieve and filter out undesirable programmes. I think when these devices are developed, not only Singaporeans, but I am sure many other countries, will be pleased to use some of these devices because they too are concerned with the adverse influence of international broadcasting.

Thirdly, even if excessive sex and violence are portrayed on international TV programmes, they depict foreigners. When Singaporeans see these programmes, they will say, "Those do not refer to Singaporeans. They are a foreign lifestyle. They may be representative of decadent communities. We are Singaporeans. We are different. We are not like that. Our lifestyle is not like that. Our culture is not like that." Drama must be real

Sir, that was what the Minister said last year when Members pointed out the excessive violence and sex scenes in programmes produced by SBC itself. Last year, the Minister defended SBC by arguing that it needed to portray the real world. He said and I quote: [Hansard, Vol. 62, No. 13, col. 1096]

`But you cannot blinker your eyes and pretend that these things do not happen in society.

And good dramas, if they are to drive moral points home, have to reflect some of these goings-on. Otherwise they are too plastic, too polished for people to be able to enjoy ...'

Even if the Minister is right, do these scenes have to be erotic, explicit and crude? The challenge for Singapore producers is to portray these things in a tasteful manner using the power of imagination rather than to give details of the obvious.

Improvements have been made

Sir, I am glad to say that after two years of nagging, if you like, SBC, now TCS, has improved. I have been told by my family members, my friends, my community leaders, my grassroots leaders that they have actually found significant improvements in the programmes produced by SBC. SBC is to be commended on this and I congratulate them on the progress they have made.

Indeed, TCS has not just done bad things. They have done many good things. This is not the place to sing their praises. Members in this House must, of course, speak on areas where TCS can improve further. Backbenchers speak out, not just to be critical of the media. After all, we are on the same side as the Frontbench. We say these things out of concern. We say these things because we are concerned for the children, for the future of our children. There are residual concerns and the Minister shall hear more about them in the course of this debate. The Opposition, Where Are They?

Let us look at the debate on this issue over the last two years. In 1993, there were 10 speakers, 1994, 21 speakers. This year, 13 speeches are on the book. In 1993, not one Opposition Member made any statement on this issue, not Mr Ling, not Mr Cheo, not Mr Low Thia Khiang. In 1994, again none of them spoke. The only person who spoke on SBC was, in fact, Mr Chiam. And what did he want? A bit more time for party political broadcast.

Are they concerned with the future of our children? This year, out of the 13 cuts, Sir, I do not see any on the list by any MP from the Opposition.

The Chairman: Order. Mr Sung, you have exceeded your time. 2.45 pm

Mr Peh Chin Hua: ( In Mandarin): Sir, censorship on movies, TV programmes and publications should be tightened. It should not be too lenient, in order to prevent unhealthy influences on the people in the long run.

Until today, I am still not very comfortable with the screening of R(A) films. If you observe the advertisements in the newspapers on R(A) films, you will realise that they are prominent and eye-catching. These advertisements play a very influential role in luring our youngsters. I believe that there are many youngsters who often queue up for tickets. I also believe that the business of operating R(A) films is very profitable.

I have recently received some complaints on the gradual relaxation in censorship of films. Even PG films like "Nell" are similar to R(A) films. There are topless and completely nude scenes. I can hardly believe it! After reviewing the show with my family members, I do believe that the complaints are true. I wonder whether the Minister is aware that this is an R(A) film and not a PG film. PG film is applicable to the young and the old, but there should not be half bare or completely nude scenes. Would the Minister agree with me?

I am worried that "over-relaxation" of censorship will gradually cause social deterioration. A recent survey report made by the medical faculty of NUS, which included questions on sex experience of tertiary students, revealed that some of our male and female tertiary students have experienced sex about two to three times per month. Our Chief Justice, Justice Yong Pung How, pointed out that "though there is a decrease in crime, the figures on molest cases are gradually on the rise". I believe it might be because of the relaxation of our censorship.

As regards censorship on publications, there is a greeting card with a political cartoon of PM Goh Chok Tong. This is indeed a disrespect to our Prime Minister. This card was also published in the Straits Times. In future, can Christmas cards, birthday cards and commercial advertisements use the Prime Minister as a cartoon figure?

I hope that the Minister for Information and the Arts would realise that the above two cases can be a "small fire that can spread like wild fire".

The Chairman: Order. I propose to take the tea break now.

Thereupon Mr Speaker left the Chair of the Committee and took the Chair of the House.

Mr Speaker: Order. I suspend the Sitting and will take the Chair again at 3.20 pm.

Sitting accordingly suspended at 2.50 pm to 3.20 pm. Sitting resumed at 3.20 pm

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

Debate in Committee of Supply resumed.

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

Head R (cont.) -

Dr S. Vasoo (Tanjong Pagar GRC): Sir, I have two amendments. Can I take one amendment after the other?

The Chairman: Yes.

Dr Vasoo: Thank you, Sir. Under the area of censorship I have three matters which are of public concern and hope that they would be addressed by the Minister.

The first matter is on the maintenance of wholesome TV and media programmes. The basic question that I would like to ask is whether our TV and media programmes are wholesome. According to the Censorship Feedback Panel report, the panel is said to be satisfied and I quote:

`Overall, the Panel is satisfied with SBC/TCS and TV12's management and application of standards on TV programmes and commercials telecast in 1994. In its view, censorship-related issues which were first highlighted in 1992, have mostly been resolved.'

Sir, I do not think it is all resolved. It is a running battle and there are nagging problems. We will have to keep a watch and not open the floodgates so widely that we will not be able to withstand the tide of flow in terms of issues relating to problems which will erode our social values and moral codes.

Sir, in my opinion, TCS and the Singapore Broadcasting Authority are trying hard to bring in wholesome programmes but there are a number of grey areas of concern. So I would like to ask whether the Minister can assure us that the quality of TV programmes is still wholesome and will continue to be so. I am sure he would not want to guarantee that this would be the case, but he would say that he would try hard to do so.

Sir, we have seen that many privatised TV stations the world over have slipped down the road and have gone into sleazy pathways. In short, they have become soft-porn stations beaming programmes which erode the social and moral fibres of the population, especially the young. One may argue that the rating of our TCS programmes is very high and their ratings are also equally high. But that does not mean that they are wholesome programmes.

In our case, there is a seeming increase in the number of PG and violent shows that were aired. The PG shows can be assigned "R(A)" ratings. Are we now more lax in our censorship? Should we closely examine these PG films which are released because they are films from America and the developed world and they carry a PG label but actually they may be perpetuating soft-porn issues and directed towards the erosion of values. In my own assessment, this is so. Would the Minister assure us that there is adequate quality control on TCS and other stations which are going to be set up in future to ensure that we do not gravitate into the promotion of very soft-porn films and videos through our station.

The second matter that I am concerned about is the proliferation of under-the-counter sales of pornographic materials. I come to understand from my grassroots leaders that there is a proliferation of under-the-counter sales of pornographic videos, laser discs and multi-media programmes. Young children and adults can easily obtain them cheaply through some pirated outlets in housing estates. I am not sure whether our surveillance is as tight. There is a lack of enforcement officers. I know that the enforcement section functions with a very thin number of officers. The present penalties are not heavy. There is a need for heavier penalties for pornography pirates. Would the Minister keep a keen eye on this growing industry?

The third matter which I would like to highlight is related to Government's response to critical opinions and viewpoints. As you are aware, in recent months, there has been disquiet and concern among some educated and informed groups about Government's hardening stand on critics of Government policies and programmes. The sharp and qualified response by Government has in a way generated ripples down the line. This is said to have consequential effects on those who have constructive viewpoints to offer as they are unsure whether they should offer feedback and opinions and useful critical viewpoints for policy making.

Sir, not too long ago the Government, in its national agenda, has encouraged our citizens who have useful viewpoints to contribute their ideas to improve public policies. Is the Government now saying that it does not tolerate critical viewpoints and opinions any more? Has it made a U-turn now and become more hardened in its stand on critical opinions which can contribute to community building and problem solving? Sir, is there a need? I see there is a need for Government to clarify its stand on this issue so that constructive critics, including those in this House, could be reassured.

Sir, the final area is on information flow which I would like to take up. With the move to wire up homes and the active promotion of information network, there will be increasing challenges to monitor and censor negative and pornographic materials that will be relayed through our super information highways. It will be worrying if thousands of our children in future will have access to this mind-distorting and polluting information. True, we can argue for self-regulation. There is no way that we can control this because we need to tap the information world for the young, but are we to thump our chest and say nothing can be done. Therefore, do we let the information flow and be floored in the long run by negative information?

Sir, this is indeed a nagging problem that we should brace ourselves to see how we can tackle this. What I want to ask the Minister is this: are there no ways for the Ministry to alert homes of the non-credit worthiness of certain programmes? How does the Ministry propose to deal with information that could have a negative impact on the moral values of our children? If we do not take early action, we will be over-flowed by various information that will erode our moral values and, in the longer term, have consequential effects on our school children. And the school children's problems will increase and it will have the consequential effect which the Minister for Education has recently highlighted. I would like the Minister to respond to these matters. 3.30 pm

Dr Koh Lip Lin (Nee Soon South): Sir, I share my concern about the proliferation of information flow through the Internet, as expressed by Dr Vasoo.

Internet has opened up a new dimension in worldwide information and exchange. There are already millions of subscribers to the Internet in the world. Many Singaporeans are also linked up to Internet. My questions for the Minister are: what is the estimated growth rate on the number of Internet users in Singapore? Does the Government support the widespread use of Internet? And what will be the impact of Internet on Singapore's society?

By linking up to Internet, one can get access to all kinds of information, from serious academic information to useful technical information, to useless junk information. For example, this morning it took me less than one minute to link up with the global network of Boston University in USA where I can have access to all kinds of news information about the University. I was able to find out, for example, the details about lectures and workshops which are being conducted at Boston University now.

Similarly, one can easily gain access to various other information from different parts of the world. For example, I was told one can easily obtain through the Internet pornographic materials, text, as well as pictures provided by well-known magazines such as Penthouse or Playboy. This information cannot be censored. So my question is: how does the Government plan to control the inflow of such undesirable information - information such as obscenity, pornography, ill-intended rumours, or propaganda?

Dr Ow Chin Hock: ( In Mandarin): Sir, on the 22nd of last month, the Feedback Unit met a group of journalists, professionals and editors to discuss the role of the mass media. I have already submitted the notes of the dialogue to the Minister. Here I would like to give my own personal views on the matter.

We can deal with the role of the media in two dimensions - the external dimension and internal dimension.

Externally, I think our media must uphold the interest of Singapore: (1) They should not allow western journalists to report and interpret Singapore's news events in the light of their own values, their own perspectives, their pride and prejudice. Our local media must rise up to refute and challenge such reports and comments, in order to put things in the right perspective. (2) At international gatherings of journalists and the media, our media must join hands with the media of the Asia-Pacific region in disallowing the western media to monopolise the agenda. We must also try to put our own matters of interest of this region on the agenda.

With the prosperity of the economies in this region, the people here have already formed their own cultural awakening and consciousness. The media in this region must reflect this kind of consciousness. Although the western news agencies are still playing a dominant role, and they cannot be replaced within a short time, the local media must try and establish their due position and status.

Internally, in the process of nation building, our media can play a positive role. For example, politically, media must help the Government to explain and publicise policies, to reflect the views and opinions of the people, and to offer constructive criticism. So the media here must also help to inculcate national consciousness, family values, moral values and to promote racial harmony and social cohesiveness.

Some people feel that with Singaporeans becoming better educated, the Government must give more space for people to air their views on national affairs. Some journalists and professionals also feel that one of the responsibilities of the media is to reflect the views of the people and these views need not necessarily be consistent with those of the Government. Sometimes it can be antagonistic. If the media cannot reflect such views, then they will lose their credibility. But if they reflect such views, they will also be regarded as going out of bounds and thereby offend the Government. They do not know how to follow the OB markers raised by the Government recently such as respect for the political leaders and maintaining hierarchy when criticising the Government.

I personally feel that in an Asian society like Singapore, we should give the political leaders due respect. We should also maintain hierarchy. Very few parents in Singapore would want their children to call them by their names. Another example here is that all Members of Parliament and Ministers, whenever they come into this Chamber, must bow to you, Mr Speaker, Sir. This is respect for the position of the Speaker.

On the other hand, journalists and any citizens of Singapore who are concerned with the affairs of Singapore can criticise Government policies, and they have the right to do so. But their motives must be constructive and not destructive; their attitude must be positive and not confrontational; and their tone must be persuasive and not derisive.

Sir, the Government must also have the magnanimity of listening to views and must also have the sincerity of listening to words which are not pleasant. The Government loses nothing by saying, "Maybe you're right." Their authority is not compromised by saying so! On the other hand, if the journalists and commentators are really concerned about Government policies and national affairs, so long as they do not give rise to racial and religious conflicts, they should not be too concerned about going out of bounds when they make their criticisms and comments. The Government's rebuttal is not retribution. Their skin should not be so thin as to be unable to bear a single rebuttal, and they should not be too sensitive about hierarchy.

In a more open and consultative political style, the media can play a more positive role. The Government and the media must work and cooperate on the basis of mutual trust to establish a more relaxed and affable relation. I raise these points to invite the Minister to give his comments and views on this matter, so that the relationship between the Government and the media can be advanced to a new level which is conducive to the long-term interest of Singapore.

Dr Kanwaljit Soin: Sir, the negative portrayal and depiction of women's role in the mass media is an important area for the Minister to consider if we wish to project positive family values.

A big giant like China is willing to learn from tiny Singapore. We could do well in Singapore if we return the compliment and learn something from China in this area.

According to a recent press report, China is to outlaw all advertisements that abuse women and children by portraying them in a negative light. We also ought to look at our advertisements, TV programmes, etc. to assess whether women are being depicted more as sex objects and not as ordinary citizens preoccupied with work and family responsibilities.

Sir, another area that merits attention is the front covers of leading women's magazines. Some of the blurbs or captions on the front cover are quite shocking.

Sir, I will now reluctantly cite some examples, but it would be appreciated if Members do not laugh at these examples:

(1) Phone sex - It is safe. It is sexy and it's just a phone call away.

(2) How well does he know your body?

(3) Are you obsessed with your breasts?

(4) Six men strip to get your nod.

(5) Girls on top, sex, and the leading man.

I have read some of the articles in the magazines that are written on these titles and the actual articles are fairly innocuous. But the titles that are blazoned on the front cover affront the dignity of women and indirectly the whole of society. Should we condone this, Sir?

The young may not buy these magazines but just reading what is on the front cover, as the magazines are on display in the shops, will give them the wrong message.

One negative message is the obsession with physical sex and another is the depiction of women as sex objects. Does the Minister think that we should have a code of ethics on the depiction of women in the mass media from the point of view of minimising the negative influence on the young and from the point of view of enhancing the value of families?

Mr Peter Sung: Proposed Arts Centre. Sir, I am pleased to note that the local art scene is becoming more and more vibrant. MITA is to be congratulated for the tremendous efforts over the last few years to promote the arts.

The proposed arts centre, when it is ready, will be a monument. But most arts centres in the world are money losing and often they cater to the interest of a very small group of people. I have repeatedly said in this House, Sir, that arrangements should be made for programmes to be shown or conducted in the proposed arts centre that cater to the interests of the masses. Otherwise, two things can happen:

(1) The proposed arts centre can be a white elephant; or

(2) The proposed arts centre will be a structure through which the poor will subsidise the rich.

As it now stands, we have a number of arts facilities. I propose that MITA make arrangements for some of these existing facilities to carry programmes that cater to the interests of the wider community, so that more people can participate in such arts programmes in the existing facilities. From here we can then expand and have bigger activities for the people when the proposed arts centre is finally constructed.

Mr Peh Chin Hua (In Mandarin): Sir, in 1991, we in Singapore experienced the loss of a collection of some valuable treasures to Hong Kong, and a lot of our people were very concerned with the matter. However, now that the authority has been showing more interest on art collections, our Museum is beginning to receive donations from private collectors of some valuable artworks. For example, a calligraphy on a large screen known as Wen Xin Diao Long by a famous Qing Dynasty calligrapher was donated by private art collector Mr He Guohao, and this has been described as a rare and valuable master-piece of calligraphy. Other donations such as those donated by Reverend Song Nian were also very valuable. These collections donated by various private collectors not only enrich the art collection of the Museum, but also arouse the interest and attention of many people. I believe our Museum must have some good facilities and experts to take care of the collections. There should be a series of public exhibitions either on a periodic manner or on a permanent basis for members of the public to appreciate and enjoy. This would be in line with the wishes of the donors. I think they should not be locked up in the strong room of the Museum just to collect dust, as this will be contrary to the wishes of the donors, and will discourage others from making such donations.

I therefore suggest that MITA consider setting up some mini-exhibition halls to be named after the donors, either at the Museum itself or at some suitable place. We can call them He Guohao Hall or Reverend Song Nian Hall, etc. I think this will not only serve as an encouragement to future donors, but also attain the effect of "sharing good treasures with others". If we do this, we can encourage more people to donate their private collections to the Museum. I hope that the Minister would consider this suggestion.

Mr Kenneth Chen Koon Lap (Hong Kah GRC): Sir, I wish to declare my interest as an architect.

Mr Peter Sung has expressed my concern about the new proposed Singapore Arts Centre but in a slightly different perspective. Since the design was opened for exhibition to gather feedback, about 1,600 people have visited the exhibition and it was reported that over 60 written responses were received. But the content was never made known to the public. However, it was apparent that some of the feedback were not that favourable. In fact, many uncomplimentary descriptions, such as marshmallow, styrofoam boxes, or papaya blob were used to describe the design of the concert halls.

It prompted the architect appointed to respond by appealing to the critic not to judge the design by the appearance of the model and that the design would not be like the image shown when completed. To quote the Chairman of the Aesthetic Advisory Group, "We need to have a bit of patience. People should not jump to conclusions that it will look like a blob." But this assurance did little to address the concern of those who took the trouble to provide the feedback and suggestions. By now, the design must have been finalised and I understand that piling will commence soon.

I think it is important that the final design should be made available for public viewing again so that all those who have expressed concern can be assured that their feedback was being considered and appropriate amendments have been made. It can also serve to eliminate all those doubts and scepticism shown by these critics.

The estimated cost of the first phase, I believe, is around $450 million. It is, by no means, a small amount. It is going to be our national pride when completed. We must assure that the Singapore Arts Centre will not only be functional and user-friendly but, more importantly, it should be exciting and inspirational. Because in time to come, it is to be viewed as a monument built by us for the posterity of our future generation. I hope that as Singapore citizens, we can be proud of our new landmark just as the Australians are proud to have the Sydney Opera House and the New Yorker the Lincoln Performing Arts Centre.

The Chairman: Mr Sung is not speaking. Mr Goh Choon Kang.

Mr Goh Choon Kang (Braddell Heights): ( In Mandarin): Sir, last year, the Speak Mandarin Campaign took on a new development. The English-educated members of the Organising Committee, together with a number of English-speaking members of the Chinese community, formed a new working team to help the English-educated Chinese master the use of Mandarin. Well-known personalities, who are known to be predominantly English-speaking, like Prof. Tommy Koh and Prof. Chan Heng Chee, took the lead and made a very rare appearance on stage to speak Mandarin. I believe this will help in the greater development of speaking Mandarin among the Chinese community.

With the opening up of the economy in China and the bountiful opportunities that come with it, the economic value of Mandarin has been enhanced. This will certainly boost our effort to encourage the Chinese to speak and learn Mandarin in Singapore. In the long run, I think the younger Singaporeans will be able to further understand and absorb the Chinese cultural tradition and the essence of Chinese culture, and to dispel the ignorance and prejudice of some people against Chinese and Chinese culture.

To encourage people to learn and speak Mandarin and to stimulate their interest, is no longer a big problem. It is no longer an issue. So what should be the emphasis of the Speak Mandarin Campaign henceforth? I think the emphasis should be on how to systematically provide facilities for the learning of Mandarin and how to help those who are interested in learning Mandarin to learn the language effectively. That will include the provision of more learning facilities and convenience, and the provision of a larger variety of Mandarin learning materials and courses to satisfy the different requirements of the learners. More systematic planning and promotion to assist people in the learning of Mandarin is very important. I think we need to set up a national coordinating body which can be part of the Speak Mandarin Campaign Secretariat, or it can be an independent body by itself. This body will be able to carry out research and studies on how to improve the learning facilities of Mandarin, the environment, the course materials and other things, so as to enable more people to learn and master Mandarin more effectively. I hope that the Minister will agree to this suggestion.

The Chairman: Mr Chin is not speaking. Dr Ahmad Mattar.

Dr Ahmad Mattar (Brickworks GRC): Sir, the tone of my speech this afternoon is very much dictated by my mood which in turn is dictated by whether or not I have been happy with TV programmes on Channels 5 and 12 in the past one year.

Sir, I do not watch Channel 8 for obvious reason. So it is not in my position to comment its programmes. But I believe my Mandarin-speaking colleagues in this House will.

Sir, if you recall, last year, I have labelled the former SBC as the "Same Boring Channel". In fact, I think I am expected to come up with a new name for TCS. Indeed, I have received a number of suggestions from my well-wishers. But, for today, I can assure the Minister that he need not worry, I am not going to do that. But I am sorry to have to tell him that it is still the "Same Boring Channel" as far as Malay programmes on Channel 12 are concerned.

But before I lambast Channel 12, or more appropriately the company, Channel 12 Pte Limited, let me give credit where credit is due. Sir, I must congratulate Television Corporation of Singapore, or TCS, for its local productions of Masters of the Sea and Under One Roof. And I must compliment the cast, especially Nora Samosir, Donald Lee, Tan Keng Wah, Margaret Chan, Moses Lim, Koh Chieng Mun, for their splendid performances, although I must say that Margaret Chan as the matriarch Tan Geok Neo in Masters of the Sea tends to overact at times but, nonetheless, she is good.

Sir, TCS should also be congratulated for some of its good and entertaining mini-series in English. Scarlett, for example, which is a sequel to Gone with the Wind. Chicago Hope -

An hon. Member: Whole day, you are watching TV.

Dr Ahmad Mattar: Yes, to me watching TV is part of my duty. Otherwise, I would not know what is going on. Chicago Hope, the much acclaimed X-Files, Message from Nam, just to name a few.

Sir, TCS's current affairs programmes - Money Mind, Inside Asia, Talking Point - are, by and large, not bad, although I must say that there is room for improvement in the pronunciation and diction of some of the presenters of Talking Point.

Now, I come to AM Singapore. I am sorry to say, Sir, that there is not much substance in this programme, unlike similar programmes like Malaysia TV3's Malaysia Hari Ini, or Malaysia Today, and RTM1's Selamat Pagi Malaysia, or Good Morning Malaysia. Sir, I am sure TCS could put Diana Koh to much better use than to make her sit in the studio every morning from 6.00 to 8.30, Monday to Friday, just to co-host AM Singapore. I am sure viewers of Channel 5 would agree with me if I say that we miss Diana Koh on News 5 at 10.30 pm.

Sir, I am very disappointed with TCS' recent Road Show which was telecast on Sunday, 12th March. I would not bring this matter up if it was just an ordinary Road Show. But this particular Road Show was not an ordinary Road Show. It was a Road Show to celebrate Hari Raya Aidilfitri. And to capture the mood and the spirit of Hari Raya, the location chosen, and quite appropriate too, was Geylang. In fact, a theme, Colours of Hari Raya, was given to this particular Road Show. But what do we get, Sir? The entire show was in English except for three songs in Malay. Even the traditional dikir barat was in English. Sir, whatever the reasons were, I feel that it would have been more appropriate to have the whole Road Show, or at least a good part of it, in Malay. If this could not be done, for whatever reasons, then do not dedicate it, so to speak, to Hari Raya. 4.00 pm

Now I come to Channel 12. Sir, what is the policy of Channel 12 Pte Ltd, if I may ask the Minister? Because, as a viewer, it seems to me that where there is money to be made, through sponsorships, Channel 12 Pte Ltd would grab it. And the programme that immediately comes to mind is the "Japan Hour". What is the purpose of telecasting this weekly current affairs programme in Japanese other than meeting the interest of the small Japanese community here in Singapore? Of course, TCS has now introduced English sub-titles to this programme. Even so, what is the relevance to Singaporeans of this programme which shows daily happenings in Japan?

Sir, this policy of Channel 12 Pte Ltd is not new. In fact, it is a carry over of the policy of the former SBC. I remember tuning into Channel 12 one evening early last year and, lo and behold, what did I find? 44th NHK Anniversary Song Festival or something like that, all in Japanese. And a check with the issue of Radio Times of that week revealed that a three or four-hour slot had been reserved just for that programme. My question is: Is Channel 12 Pte Ltd catering to the interests of foreign minority groups here? The Minister may wish to explain.

But, Sir, my greatest concern is over Malay programmes that Malay viewers get to watch on Channel 12. I remember the Minister saying in this House on 15th March 1994 that we should go for more local productions. By that, I presume good local productions, not of the standard of Ra Ra Show or Gotcha. Sir, to me, Gotcha is downright stupid.

Sir, if the Minister suggests that we should go for more local productions, then why is it that we are still getting Malay programmes from Malaysia, Indonesia and Brunei? And speaking of Brunei, I do not know if the Minister is aware that about a month or so ago, on a Saturday afternoon during the recent fasting month, Channel 12 showed the full text of a speech by Her Majesty, the Raja Isteri Pengiran Anak Hajjah Salleha, wife of the Sultan of Brunei, when she officiated at a handicraft exhibition of some sort in Bandar Seri Begawan. Not only that, Channel 12 also showed the full text of the speech of the chairperson of the exhibition's organising committee. Without being disrespectful to Her Majesty, Sir, may I ask the Minister what is the relevance of this programme to Singaporean Malays watching Channel 12?

What I want to know from the Minister is what has happened to all the Malay producers of the former SBC - names like Mokram Kassim, Amirudin Abbas, Suhaimi Jais, just to name a few? They must have been redeployed somewhere when SBC was chopped into bits and pieces, resulting in TCS, RCS, Channel 12 Pte Ltd and God knows what else. These are Malay producers of calibre. They have good track records based on the programmes that they have produced for SBC. In fact, some of them are now producing English programmes, a testimony to their abilities. If they are around, what I want to know from the Minister is: what are they doing now? If they are on full-time production of English programmes, or if they have left Caldecott Hill for greener pastures elsewhere, have the vacancies they created been filled?

Sir, I would like to urge the Minister, the newly appointed panel chaired by Mr Hsuan Owyang, and certainly the people in charge of Channel 12 Pte Ltd, to look into the quality of Malay programmes on Channel 12. There is not much point in increasing the number of hours of Malay programmes on Channel 12 if quality is not there. And if the people in charge of Channel 12 think that by increasing the number of hours of Malay programmes for Channel 12 Malay Singaporeans are going to be happy, then they are sadly mistaken.

Sir, if we do not take an interest in the way Malay programmes are being planned, then I am afraid, as far as Malay viewers are concerned, Channel 12 will degenerate into a channel that is void of any meaningful viewing. It will degenerate into a channel that even the Malays themselves do not want to watch.

Sir, I hope this time the Minister will give concrete replies to the points raised, and not come out with some general philosophical statements as he did last year.

Dr Ker Sin Tze (Aljunied GRC): Sir, many colleagues spoke on SBC programmes last year in this House and many will speak on TV programmes today. One of last year's comments was the lowering of standards and quality of television programmes, in particular, Channel 8 programmes.

[Mr Deputy Speaker in the Chair]

4.06 pm

Dr Ker Sin Tze (Aljunied GRC): Many changes have taken place since the privatisation of SBC which is now known as TCS. I understand that Channel 8 has been trying to raise standards by adding some new programmes such as jiang shan wan li qing [ ] or ba qian li lu yun he yue [ ] and more weekly documentary and current affairs programmes.

Apart from these changes, TCS has also restructured the daily news programme. There are more neighbourhood news, adding appropriate soft items to the daily news programme. The present local news and reports on major international events are adequately informative. What is still desirable to add perhaps is an appropriate amount of regional news, especially news from Malaysia, Indonesia, Philippines, Thailand, Hong Kong, Taiwan and other neighbouring areas.

Regional events are more directly relevant to us. It is important for our people to know the political and economic conditions in neighbouring areas, so that they can get the correct perspective of their own living conditions. It may also provide more information on the opportunity or pitfall in doing business in the region.

At present, TCS depends on international news agencies to provide regional and international news coverage. It is more desirable to report world events with a Singaporean perspective. While the existing resources and talents may not be able to do international news reporting, TCS should begin to train its journalists to cover regional events. There are, of course, constraints faced by TCS. The talent may not be available and the training for regional reporting is very costly. But it is a worthwhile step to take if Singapore is to develop into a regional news centre. It may also be a reliable and profitable service which Singapore can provide to the rest of the world in future. It is therefore my view that Government should allocate more resources to assist TCS and any other local TV network to embark on the development of a regional news coverage project.

Mr Goh Choon Kang: ( In Mandarin): Sir, since last year, our television programmes have seen significant improvements. Scenes of sex and violence have been considerably reduced on the screen and telecast time has been extended. There are now more current affairs programmes and news time. This is indeed a positive development. But there is still room for further improvement, and I would like to bring up a few points.

First, we should try and cut down the Hong Kong flavour in the programmes and use more Singapore flavour instead. It is good to import foreign talents to Singapore. But there are pros and cons. Therefore, we must identify the bad points and correct them. Perhaps we have too many Hong Kongers in the Drama Section of Television Corporation of Singapore (TCS). As a result, TCS productions of TV serials and dramas contain too much Hong Kong flavour. The so-called Hong Kong flavour or Hong Kong-styled production has certain characteristics. One of them is that they must always have some kind of love triangle, extra-marital affairs, violent actions and technical explosions, etc. These are meant to develop and push the drama into a climax. To them, these are the essential ingredients. The higher the explosion, the greater the entertainment value. Otherwise, they would say it is a very flat programme. This is the way they think.

Too much Hong Kong flavour is not what we want. I think this is a by-product of getting foreign talents. So we must try to rectify this. I have discovered that when our TV station was producing drama serials, they started off with local flavour but later on it was overcome by a massive Hong Kong flavour, that is, when more and more Hong Kong talents were being inducted into Singapore. I think it is time for us to go back to where we started - more local flavour, the Singaporean recipe.

My second point is on variety shows. Some are good and some are bad. However, I feel that the bad ones outnumber the good ones. In my opinion, there are a lot of fuss and a lot of rubbish or junk in the programmes, as described by my colleague, Dr Ahmad Mattar. Of course, there are some good educational and entertaining items. One of them is quite good, like the "Singapore Pursuit". This is a very good programme which is very entertaining as well as educational.

My third point is on the creation of "idols". I think there is too much idolization of our TV stars. This is unnecessary, and it tends to have adverse effect on our young people. They are crazy over their idols. They can wait for hours for their idols to appear at certain functions, and they went into a frenzy over them. They have this kind of vanity created in their psychic. Comperes in the TV programmes seem to be more prominent and better-known than our political leaders and statesmen like the Prime Minister. For example, there was extensive TV coverage on the wedding of certain TV stars and there was so much publicity about it. I do not know whether there is any educational or entertainment value in it. Whether they are Li Nan Xing, Gurmit Singh or whichever singer, when they get married, it is their own personal affair. Why should we spend so much TV time covering the event and waste the viewers' precious time?

Fourthly, the extension of telecast time. TCS plans to telecast its programmes 24 hours a day eventually. Is it necessary? Because the longer the time of telecast, the more programmes you will need to fill up the time. Then the quality of the programmes will be adversely affected. You just cannot maintain the good quality of the programmes. So I would like to urge the Minister to pay more attention to quality rather than quantity.

I understand that more and more TV channels will be offered. Who has so much time to watch 24 hours a day, without working, without reading, without doing something more useful?

Fifthly, I would like the Minister to look into the interest of the senior citizens, people in the age group like my mother. These people are deprived of their previous delight of watching dialect programmes or dialect dramas which they used to enjoy. Most of them are already switching over to the Malaysian channels to enjoy their dialect serials. Over the years, Our Speak Mandarin campaigns have already successfully laid a very strong foundation of Mandarin-speaking in Singapore. So with the extension of telecast time we should try and make up for the needs of the senior citizens the kind of pain and sufferings imposed on them all these years. We must give them some chance to watch dialect programmes and let them enjoy some programmes to make up for what they have lost.

Sixthly, I am talking about the adverse influence of television. The corporatisation of SBC is meant to generate more competition among the stations. However, we must prevent competition which may bring about undesirable influences, especially on our younger people. According to the 27th February report of the Straits Times, in England, according to experts, they have ascertained that violence on television has a direct influence on children. Then on 28th February, the next day, I read a report in the International Herald Tribune that after a study was made, the experts in the United States also came to the conclusion that a lot of youngsters in the United States do imitate and learn from what they see on TV in respect of sex and violence. So the content of television programmes will certainly have some effect on the children. One television programme in UK even praised the young boy who ran away from his home and stowed away to Malaysia using his father's passport, and gave him the "incentive" to go to New York for a tour. This has given rise to some adverse reaction. This is the result of bad competition. I hope TCS or the electronic media will not go to such an extent.

Mr Lau Ping Sum: ( In Mandarin): Last year, a number of my parliamentary colleagues, led by the former Minister, Dr Ahmad Mattar, launched an attack at the then SBC. They had a lot of criticisms on the various programmes by SBC from the pronunciation of the comperes to the content of the drama serials. In fact, nothing appeared good in the programmes then.

In September last year, the television station commissioned a survey. About 500 people were interviewed. From this survey, it appeared that more than 70% of the viewers in Singapore did not seem to be unhappy with the Chinese programmes on television or felt that these programmes were lacking in educational value.

The Feedback Unit conducted a dialogue session on the Chinese programmes on television. The participants had been critical of the TV programmes. Why is there such a phenomenon? I think this is because, firstly, it is a subjective matter. Everyone has a different educational and cultural background. So the expectations are different. While some think that a programme is good, others may find it objectionable. Secondly, the market survey was based on those who watched Chinese programmes at least once a week. Those who had such a poor impression of the television programmes would have switched off and had not even watched the programme. They were excluded from the survey. Thirdly, from March to September last year, some adjustments were made by the television station and the excesses had been corrected.

Last year, I did not participate in the criticism against the television. It was not that I was entirely happy with the programmes. As it is said, "There is always room for improvement!" But in the last few months I was very glad to note that scenes on sex and violence had been more subdued. Moreover, the current affairs programmes are excellent and cater for the demands of a cross-section of the population. Just now, Mr Goh Choon Kang mentioned that there was a lot of Hong Kong flavour in the television programmes because many of the script writers were from Hong Kong. He might be a bit too strong in his criticism. Although many script writers were from Hong Kong, some of them are now already permanent residents or even citizens of Singapore. Of course, they are influenced by their background and perhaps some aspects of their Hong Kong style may not be acceptable to the Singapore audience.

Secondly, in Singapore we have a shortage of talents, particularly people who could write well in Chinese. There is an acute shortage. Therefore TCS is having difficulties in recruiting writers locally. They have to employ staff from outside Singapore.

Thirdly, with keen competition following the opening up of the gigantic market in China, and people like Robert Chua who have started their production of Mandarin programmes and managed to offer a job to Moses Lim, it is not easy to produce the same number of programmes in Singapore. The producers should possess not only a good educational level, but also creativity. Such talents are not easy to come by. I hope that the authorities would do something about the remuneration of the staff and improve their working conditions so that we could attract more talents to come to Singapore. In a multi-racial society like Singapore, it is not easy to write the stories. Apart from sensitive issues like religion and language, there are other institutions like the police, teachers or nurses whose image cannot be portrayed negatively. If every character in the story is good and no one is bad, then the story tends to be very flat and uninteresting. Dr Soin said that we must protect the image of women. If the women in the story were all virtuous characters, then in every story the villains must be male.

Television has a great influence on our people, particularly the moral values of our young people. So as a national television station, TCS has to be very careful. It is not easy to ensure that the programmes provide entertainment, education and information. They have a heavy responsibility. However, under the able leadership of BG George Yeo, I believe TCS will be able to produce more quality programmes with distinct features so that they would shine not only in Singapore but also internationally.

Mr Choo Wee Khiang: Sir, I have two amendments. May I take them together?

The Chairman: Yes.

Mr Choo Wee Khiang: ( In Mandarin): Sir, having heard my learned colleagues in this House just now, I would like to add my own views.

Like Dr Ahmad Mattar, the former Minister of State for Information and the Arts, Dr Ker Sin Tze, must have spent a lot of time watching television. Otherwise, he would not be able to give us so much fair comment and evaluation of our television programmes. Having heard what Mr Lau Ping Sum and other colleagues have said, I feel that the Government officials and elected Members of Parliament have the responsibility to educate the broad masses of people that the results of a so-called market survey are not conclusive on the evaluation of the quality of programmes. When you are talking about the programmes, the results of a survey do not matter. The programmes have improved significantly because of the debate and the pressure that we put on the Minister in this House last year. So credit must be given to us, the MPs in this House.

I must frankly admit that, over the past one year, the quality of our television programmes has indeed improved. Where are the improvements? That is in the hardware aspect, as Mr Goh Choon Kang has said. The angles are very good, the colour is very good, and the music is terrific. All these are the hardware aspect. But in terms of content, apart from one or two programmes, they are far from being ideal. Otherwise, I would not be here speaking and neither would my colleagues be speaking about it here.

I have read the television magazine which published letters from the viewers. I share their views. One Chinese viewer from UK commented on the programmes on Channel 8. He said that the contents were too simplistic and the drama serials were heavy in the head and very light in the tail, in other words, good beginning but poor ending.

The next comment was that the programmes have very few local content. These letters are awarded $100 each. Another letter is about the Chinese programme called Pili Peibei. The writer said, "I did not watch this programme. I do not know what it is about. This programme is good for the old and young alike. If you have so much violence, the people are left with no choice. When the parents watch the programme, the children will follow them. So this kind of programme will have a negative effect on the children. It is very important to inculcate the correct values in our young children. If TCS can telecast more educational programme, it will benefit the children as well as the parents." This letter also won $100.

There is another letter which said that we should not neglect our children. It was a very important letter, and the writer said, "Broadcast can influence our outlook in life and our thinking, especially the young. So the parents must be careful about this." I would also add that as MPs, we too cannot neglect this.

The influence of TV is so powerful that if the content of a TV programme is empty, how are we going to discharge our responsibility to our voters and electorate?

Sir, to a certain extent, I agree with what Mr Goh Choon Kang has said. Over so many years, we have attracted so many Hong Kong talents - technicians, producers, directors - and we have learnt a lot from the technical skills of these people. We have also learnt how to make our TV programmes lively. I think we should encourage our local people to take part in script writing and TV production, because they are the people who understand our lifestyle, culture, customs and habits. In the TV serials, you keep seeing Singaporeans in Singapore walking around in their HDB flats wearing coat and tie. This is a far cry from reality! Who, in his right frame of mind, would do that in Singapore! If they want to take this kind of TV scene, they should set the story at some other place. They can send them overseas, but so long as they are screened here there is no need for the characters to be so formal in their daily lives.

I would like to appeal to the Minister to pay attention to this aspect so that we can localise our TV programmes and make them more acceptable to us. Otherwise, we will find the programmes very strange and unfamiliar. A scene that is supposed to be a Singapore scene becomes a very foreign scene.

I hope that the Minister will examine the report of the committee and I also hope that this report will not be just a report on paper only. We cannot think only of the commercial value. We cannot overlook the strong nation-building consciousness. I hope the Minister will pay attention to this.

Another point I wish to take up is the TV licence fees or broadcasting licence fees. I will first say that I am the Chairman of NTUC Radio Heart. We have 50% of this grant for public service programmes. Over the last three years, Radio Heart has done a lot of public service programmes but was not given a single cent. It should be stated here that the grant is only for TCS and RCS. It must be stated in our Budget book to be so, ie, not for SAFRA and not for Radio Heart. I hope the Minister can give me a definite answer as to when he can grant some of the allocation to Radio Heart or SAFRA.

SAFRA is very rich and they may not need the grant. So, give more money to Radio Heart. We are doing a lot of public service programmes for the workers.

Mr Chin Harn Tong (Aljunied GRC): ( In Mandarin): Sir, I am glad to know that the National Heritage Board has done a lot in the past one year in preserving and conserving the cultural heritage of the various races in Singapore.

The Singapore Federation of Clans Association is now actively working on the setting up of a Chinese Heritage Museum and this museum will be housed in the Administration Block of the former Nanyang University. I am supporting this move and I would like to put forward some of my views.

In the past, Singapore has spared no effort in developing the economy, commerce and industry in order to survive and to succeed as a nation. This is understandable. However, now that we have attained economic success, it is time for us to divert and focus our attention on the development of the various cultures. That Singapore has been able to achieve what it has today is due in no small measure to the hard work of the various communities in the past. Therefore, to praise the various races for what they have done in the past has become a vital link in our cultural development.

In the past, the Chinese immigrants have contributed much to the success of Singapore, and this is beyond dispute. To start a collection of the various cultural artifacts of the Chinese immigrants serves not only as a means for us to reflect on their struggle but also as an appreciation and affirmation of their contributions. At the same time, it is good formal education for our next generation.

To exhibit the historical artifacts of our pioneers will also serve to strengthen our understanding of the Chinese immigrants. Now that we are emphasising on the need to study from our traditions, this is of particular significance. Moreover, this task will be undertaken by the Federation of Clans Association and it will be housed in the Administration Block of the former Nanyang University which is imbued with rich traditions. It was here that the former Nanyang University had trained numerous talented graduates and these graduates are imbued with the ethos of tradition and spirit. They are imbued with a very rich tradition. Moreover, this Chinese Heritage Museum will not only preserve the Chinese historical artifacts but it will also serve as a data centre for the Chinese all over the world and this shows that our Government is farsighted enough in its planning for this museum.

When we recall the former Nanyang University - how it was built up, how the Chinese in South-east Asia contributed and helped to build up this University and how students came from the various countries in South-east Asia to enrol at this University - there are many Nantah graduates who are scattered all over the world now and they have excelled themselves in academia and in the economies of the various countries. Therefore, I believe that this Chinese Heritage Museum will become a data centre for the Chinese all over the world, especially for the Chinese in South-east Asia, and this will reflect the spirit of Nantah and its graduates.

Sir, the launching of any task has to be taken by man. The Chinese have been able to achieve so much today because of the close connection with the struggles of our pioneers. Therefore, I hope the museum will work out suitable programmes to commemorate these Chinese historical figures and give proper recognition to those who had done a lot and contributed a lot to our culture, politics, economy, social and educational development. However, for this undertaking to be successful, it is not enough to rely on the efforts of the voluntary organisations. In addition to the financial assistance, the Government should also provide personnel to help in the undertaking. In addition to the setting up of this museum, I hope the Government will expedite the setting up of similar museums for the other communities.

Mr Goh Choon Kang: Sir, this year marks the 50th anniversary of the end of World War II. If we take 25 years as one generation, then exactly two generations have passed since the Japanese Army that occupied Singapore for three years and eight months surrendered to Lord Mountbatten on 12th September 1945.

Sir, those who had experienced the war, like my parents, can never forget the war - the cruelty of the Japanese soldiers and the sufferings - and they are much more appreciative of the peace and prosperity that we are now enjoying. Some of us belong to the post-war generation. We are fortunate enough to be born after the war but the lessons from history must be learnt.

The Prime Minister had said that schools should ingrain in students national lessons of survival and make them aware of Singapore's constraints and fragility. I feel that it is equally important to teach them these lessons from history lest the younger generation of Singaporeans forget that our island state is vulnerable to foreign aggression.

Sir, I would like to know what would be done to mark the 50th anniversary of the end of World War II. And in this connection, I would also like to know what the National Heritage Board would do to preserve and promote this and other historical heritage. 4.45 pm

The Minister for Information and the Arts (BG George Yong-Boon Yeo): Sir, I would like to thank Members who have spoken for their comments, for their compliments and, more importantly, for their criticisms.

Many MPs, both in this Budget debate and in previous ones, have spoken from their heart about the changes in our society and about the very vexing question of censorship and what we can do against this assault of foreign values, foreign influences.

Our concerns reflect profound changes in our society, in the region, in the whole world. This information revolution is making holes across national borders, making this a very different kind of world. And the basic dilemma we face is, on the one hand, we want to be fully a part of this world, regionalising, globalising our economy, making our port, airport the best in the world, paving the information highway right across our front door steps. So Internet, Singapore CableVision, EDB's good work, a whole range of measures that we are now undertaking from the economic and infrastructural viewpoint to make Singapore a hub so that anyone anywhere in the world who comes to Singapore will feel as much at home in Singapore as he is in Japan, or America, or Europe, or elsewhere. That is one big desire that we have as a nation, as a society.

Then there is the other side which is worrying. We should worry, with each opening up, or as the Chinese say, "When we open the windows, the flies will come in." That with this opening up, we are in peril, foreign influences, the behaviour of young people, the relationship of men and women, of seniors and juniors, of teachers and students, of Government and leaders. We are afraid that in this opening up, we lose our sense of self, that we no longer become distinct as a separate people with our own identity.

We all know the choice is not one or the other. This is a tension that we have to live with, that we have to live with as Government leaders, as Members of Parliament, as teachers, as grandfathers and fathers, as community leaders. It is inescapable. You know we are now embarked on this great move to regionalise the Singapore economy. At one level, it is an economic challenge. But at a much more profound level, it is a cultural challenge, whether as a result of all this opening up, we are still Singaporeans.

You know the problems now with regionalisation. Our menfolk, they go overseas, sometimes they bring their families, the problem of children's education. Sometimes, they do not bring their families, affairs on the side, the family breaks up, problems that Dr Kanwaljit Soin has raised before in this House. Do we therefore say, "No, we don't want CableVision, we don't want Internet, we don't want regionalisation, we don't encourage foreigners in our midst."? We cannot. We want at the same time for the windows to be opened and, at the same time, for the flies to be gotten rid of. I do not think we can get rid of all the flies. But I think if we apply ourselves and if we are assiduous in our efforts, and if we have many fly swatters at hand, I think there are many things we can do to keep the flies off our plates. That we can do.

I like to talk about the different mediums in turn. First, films and videos. Mr Peh Chin Hua talked about R(A) movies and their profitability. In fact, the trend is stable. Today, out of 111 cinemas in Singapore, 38, and none in housing estates, are licensed to screen R(A) movies. 15% of films are rated R(A), approved for first viewing. If we include repeat viewings, which is an indication of viewership level, R(A) movies are 13% of viewership. Yes, I know they get a little more than their share on the advertising pages of the newspapers but it is not that much. It is about 20%. And even those advertisements are severely controlled so that they are no different in standards from PG and G movies.

As for the movie Nell, which Mr Peh Chin Hua talked about, I have not seen it. So I would have to refer his question to the Films Appeals Panel for their opinion. But we do not have a blanket ban on female nudity, even on PG. It depends on the context and whether it is exploitative. I think many of us here would remember that we had the serial Shaka Zulu on television, a very good serial, about the Zulus in South Africa and many serials contained pictures of topless women. But they were in a context which were not at all lewd and not at all exploitative and therefore television at that time, SBC, decided it was something which could be shown. We need a certain flexibility in our judgement. But I do not want to prejudge on Nell and I will refer the matter to the Films Appeals Board.

On videos, we will tighten our laws because it is a recurrent problem in the housing estates. Flyers furtively distributed, quick orders are made, children sometimes are used to distribute them. And then big profits are made and before you know it, pager numbers are changed, they are off to the next housing estate for the next quick haul. But every time you receive such a flyer, and here I would ask MPs to get their grassroots leaders to inform us immediately when they see such flyers, we mount an operation. And we have caught many of them.

But our present laws need to be tightened. We are now looking at increasing the penalties, including making jailing mandatory for repeat offenders, and I think they deserve to go to jail for making money out of such despicable trade in obscene videos and tapes. We will also include a presumptive clause so that anyone caught with five or more items is presumed to be a distributor. Because, otherwise, it is a difficult task for the public prosecutor to prove that someone is not just owning, that he is actually a distributor. But these are just some flies that we are hoping to swat. Today, you can put whole encyclopedias in little CD-ROMs. You put it in your pocket, you walk through Customs, no one is the wiser.

Dr Koh Lip Lin mentioned just now that, today, you can get Penthouse and Playboy on Internet. I am not going to explain how it can be done. But believe you me, it can be done and it is one big headache for us in MITA, for us in the Singapore Broadcasting Authority. But we will think of ways and means to do it. But even if we cannot do it fully, we will continue to censor and to make a point on censorship so that those who are making money cannot thumb their noses in front of us. And if we catch you making money from it, we will send you to jail. It is important to establish the point, to keep surreptitious activities surreptitious, and not allow them to be legitimised.

Now, I would like to talk a little about Internet, a point which was raised by Dr Koh Lip Lin and Dr Vasoo. We have something like 26,000 subscribers now. It is growing very rapidly, I think by over 1,000 a month. And I think within a few years, it will become part of our lives, at least part of our lives for those who are below 25 years old. Of course, for those of us who are a little older, it may be a bit more difficult because our fingers are more arthritic. But for the younger generations, for those in university, it is already a part of their lives, working before the screens. And this is a big problem.

Internet was designed during the Cold War to be proof against nuclear attack. And the great irony of the genius of the design happened during the Gulf War when after neutralising Saddam Hussein's C3 system, his headquarters turned to Internet. And there, you try to block, it is a cat and mouse game. And I do not know whether it is true or not, but there are reports that their orders got through Internet, courtesy of what was once US Department of Defence ArpaNet. What an irony. But it explains why chasing someone through this great city of Internet is such a horrifying problem.

My staff in MITA, NCB and elsewhere, NSTB, other agencies have thought long and hard about this. Do we try to block Internet? Or do we promote it? Let us say we block it, make it difficult. There is nothing to stop Singaporeans from calling up Batam and then you access Internet from Batam. Or calling up Johor Baru, or Hong Kong and accessing Internet from there. So once we accept that we cannot keep out Internet, we might as well turn it around and say, "Look, how can we turn it to our advantage?" In other words, I have got to go to New York, sleaze, crimes, all the other problems, but I am going to make money in New York and I am going to achieve something in New York. So I prepare myself and I move in, in a concerted, careful and responsible manner. And this is the approach that we should take on Internet which is why Mr Philip Yeo is now chairing an inter-agency committee to see how we can hook-up not just our universities and our polytechnics, but also our junior colleges and our schools. And I think, as parents, it is important that we know a little of what Internet is about so that we are not overly surprised by what we sometimes see on the screen on Internet.

Our strategy on Internet is we jump in. We jump in as Government, we jump in as PAP, as Young PAP, we jump in as commercial establishments. And then within the city of Internet, we carve out a neighbourhood for ourselves. And if we spot problems, we alert each other, we alert SBA. And some laws apply in Internet. You defame someone on Internet, well, that is defamation and we can catch you in our courts. You broadcast pornography, if Penthouse and Playboy were in Singapore, I think we will catch them. But, unfortunately, they do not operate in Singapore. But anyone who operates in Singapore, who operates a broadcast facility which Singaporeans can fully access, I think our laws will apply to them.

I made this speech about regulating Internet a couple of weeks ago and I have been flamed and called obscene names. But it means that our presence and our intention are noticed. And if we persist, we will give heart to other communities who are equally concerned and wanting to act. So recently, Senator James Exon, US, Nebraska, has said any inter-state traffic in pornography, they should move laws to prosecute. And in New Zealand now, there is another Bill on the floor against pornography which can effectively kill Internet. I do not think we want to kill Internet but I think those who thumb their noses at us, who want to make money from this, we find ways and means to fix them. There is not very much that we can do but there are some things that we can do, and I assure Members here that we will try our very best.

Mr Peter Sung mentioned about the possibility of technical devices which can be used to sniff out the problems and attack them. We are looking at the possibilities but, as I said, it was designed against nuclear attack and it is not something which can be easily countered against.

On television, the situation this year has changed from the last two years because since 1st October, we have privatised SBC and we now have a regulatory agency, which we did not have in the past, called Singapore Broadcasting Authority. So many comments which are made about how these companies ought to operate, like Dr Ahmad Mattar's proposal for the use of certain producers and not use of certain other people, I will ask SBA to pass on these comments if they are helpful to the companies. But it is really not proper, now that we have privatised the companies, for us to intervene and interfere directly in the operations of the companies. But SBA is a creature of Parliament, and we can tell what SBA should do. 5.00 pm

SBA will, in turn, have committees to advise it. Prof. Eddie Kuo, who is on the Advisory Committee on Chinese SBC shows, is now an advisory committee member of SBA. Equally, Mr Hsuan Owyang has agreed to chair the Programme Advisory Committee of SBA, and this will supersede the Censorship Review Panel that we had for the last three years. I am glad to announce here that Mr Dhanabalan has volunteered to chair an advisory council on Indian programmes, because many Indian MPs are very frustrated by the lack of progress in Indian programming. It is very difficult because the managers, SBA officers, Ministry officials, many of us do not know Tamil and as a result of which, over the years, it has become a kind of a ghetto, and this is not good. They feel that it is a facility with an influence which we should make use of. And as part of it, later in the year, we will move Tamil broadcasts from Channel 8 to Channel 12, so that they will have more prime time and better air time.

At this point in time, I would like to thank the many MPs who have been very helpful to SBA on many of its committees - Madam Yu-Foo Yee Shoon and Mr Lau Ping Sum who are on the Advisory Committee on Chinese SBC shows, and Mr Dhanabalan and Mr Sinnakaruppan who are on the Indian Advisory Committee.

I was concerned by Dr Ahmad Mattar's comments on the quality of Malay broadcasts. I ought to respond to him and say that we will form a committee to see how we can improve Malay broadcasts. [Hon. Members proposed Dr Ahmad Mattar.] Of course, if Dr Ahmad Mattar is prepared to help, then we will be very happy to have his help. This is not a matter to be taken lightly.

An hon. Member: Let him think about it!

BG George Yong Boon Yeo: Yes, let him think about it. We should not rush into such matters. We are not doing it for show. We are doing it as part of a long-term effort to improve the quality of our TV channels.

But television is strange, no two persons will have the same opinion of what is seen. You mix with a group of friends, say, all men, they have certain judgments. You go back home, you talk to your wife, and she has a completely different set of views. So it was quite surprising when the Advisory Committee on Chinese SBC shows did its survey which showed that most Singaporeans were blissfully unaware of the debates that we have been having. I take Mr Choo Wee Khiang's point and the point made by many of the MPs here, "Look, we are MPs, we are parents, we are leaders, we cannot be led. We must lead." Because the mission of TCS and TV12 is not just to entertain, it is also to inform and educate. But we cannot avoid also having to entertain because there are options available for the viewer. Already, the Malaysian TV channels are giving us a hard fight. When they put on a Cantonese broadcast, Channel 8 has got an uphill task to win back audiences.

Indonesian channels are now clearly received if you put boosters on the East Coast. And come June this year, Singapore CableVision is unrolling two to three dozen channels, starting with Tampines New Town. From 1st June, the cables will pass 50,000 households there and after that, every few months it will unroll all over Singapore. Within three or four years, all of us will have access to dozens of channels.

So Channels 5, 8 and 12 face a tremendous task maintaining their position. They are special because they are national broadcasters. Channels 5, 8 and 12 should be like Straits Times, Zaobao and Berita Harian. We can read Time magazine, Newsweek, International Herald Tribune and Asian Wall Street Journal. But the day is not complete until I have read the Straits Times and Zaobao, because that is where the local news is. And we must so contrive it and so push Channels 5, 8 and 12 that even if there are 20-30 channels, Channels 5, 8 and 12 remain home channels. The day is not complete until I find out what is happening on Channels 5, 8 and 12, and which is why the process of localising programming is very important. I know it is not easy. Standards are not always up to expectations. We push them on. Sometimes they make mistakes, they come back. From time to time, they come up with winners like "Under One Roof" and "Masters of the Sea" which some Members have complimented TCS on. But we do not know how long the interest can be sustained. Audiences are fickle.

So SBA has a big task, making sure that it has got the pulse of the whole population, not just us, but men and women, different races, different religions, different age groups, different income groups. They have come up with a proposal to work with the People's Association, so that in every constituency, the grassroots organisations will form special committees to give feedback to SBA. Then SBA has got to balance this against the needs of ratings and to come up with an optimum mix between information, education and entertainment. I think this will help us to get, in a very systematic way, a good feel across the board of public response to local broadcasts.

The difficulty that we face is whom do we speak to. The people who are unhappy tend to speak louder. The people who are happy tend not to talk about it. I think we have got to get information more systematically.

In terms of viewership, there is no problem with the Nielsen meter. In fact, minute by minute, television programmes are being monitored today.

Mr Goh Choon Kang asked why Channel 8 and Channel 5 should push for longer hours. This is a competitive requirement. What we want is audience loyalty. After a while when there are so many channels available, all of us have got preferred channels. It is like radio today. We may have 10 pre-set buttons on our car radio. But after a while, you will go to one or two stations which you have gotten used to. And this is what will happen on television. So for this reason, there is a requirement because of market competition for the different channels to extend their hours of broadcast.

But will this mean that we will all end up being television junkies? SBA has done some research of what is happening in other countries and they found that even when there are more channels, the number of viewing hours per day tend to remain constant. What happens, in fact, is from broadcasting to narrow-casting, and different people with different interests, will tend to see different channels to suit their interests. The consequence of all this will be that instead of the whole family watching one channel, the whole family may be watching different channels. And the latest statistics already show that something like one-third of households in Singapore have two or more television sets.

I believe Dr Ahmad Mattar asked why is it we have "Japan Hour". In fact, "Japan Hour" is a very popular programme, not just among the Japanese but among many local Singaporeans who find some coverage of Japanese society very interesting.

I attended a dinner at the Japanese Ambassador's house the other night. And the Japanese ladies were telling me how they rush home to catch the "Japan Hour", and they are a big community in Singapore and of great importance to us, some 20,000-30,000 of them, with their own school, shopping centres and so on. In fact, once Singapore CableVision starts operations, we will have a full channel dedicated to Japanese broadcasting, as we will have for German, French, American and so on. So that the international communities who live in Singapore will find us a very convenient place to operate from - schools, television, food, restaurants, golf courses and so on.

It is a very good sign that all the international schools in Singapore today are heavily over subscribed and have got waiting lists. It shows that we are succeeding in our national strategy to be a hub city, attracting them to set up operational headquarters here and operating from Singapore to serve the region. But, as I said earlier, the consequence is that the flies come in - foreign influences which we must somehow try to contain and confine.

Mr Choo Wee Khiang asked whether some of SBA's licence fees could go to Radio Heart. I presume he was asking in his capacity as Chairman of Radio Heart. Well, not in the immediate future, not for a few more years, because we have got to assess how well our local national broadcasters, the successor companies of SBC, both television and radio, survive in a multi-channel environment. In other words, until the full effects of cable television (SCV) are assessed, I think we should concentrate precious little public resources on those channels and stations, and then assess the situation. If we, at that time, decide that the position is stable and they can survive on their own and that we can spread out public broadcasting funds to other private stations, then we will consider doing so. So in the meantime, I am afraid that the SAFRA station has got to lean on the Mindef budget, and Radio Heart has got to lean on the NTUC budget.

On the mass media, comments were made by Dr Ow Chin Hock and Dr Vasoo as to how we should manage this debate about OB markers, about the western media's criticism of our media laws. We should be very clear that we are asserting our own model of the media in Singapore, that we do not intend to follow the American m odel as it obtains today or to be like Ren Min Ri Bao [ ] or Xin Hua [ ] news agency in China. We will assert our own model.

If we look at it from the perspective of the last 20-30 years, our newspapers have done a remarkable job. Without them, the tremendous social transformation that affected us could not have taken place with such a minimum of fuss and bother. It is because the newspapers have been accurate and pro-Singapore, very careful to clarify and simplify issues and options for Singaporeans, avoiding sensationalisation, that we have been able to achieve economic growth of 6%, 8% or 10% with a minimum of social dislocation.

I think those of us who have read the history of Europe and America would know that over a comparable period of industrialisation and over a much longer period of time, the social turmoil which resulted was tremendous. And hence we had the stories that we found in Charles Dickens or the tremendous reaction in Karl Marx.

And indeed, even in East Asia, you compare our situation today with the very difficult transition which South Korean and Taiwanese societies had to go through and are still going through. One reason why we have been able to do all this is because our newspapers had played a very important role in helping us to hold the community together. 5.15 pm

On the western media, we should avoid a blanket criticism of them. And even in America today, there is a great reaction against what the media there has become. It was not always like this. In the 50s, whether it was Britain or America, there was a keen sense of looking after the side. We remember FDR, Franklin Roosevelt, polio victim, wheel-chair bound, but never a photograph of him so shown. It was not a secret, people knew about it. But collectively they decided that they had to preserve the image of the White House and the Presidency and everything was done so that that image, that respect for authority, was maintained.

Equally kept quiet, John F. Kennedy's philanderings in the White House. It is only in recent years, with George Bush and Bill Clinton, that it all gets poured out. I was quite taken aback by the interview given by George Stephanopoulos, President Clinton's Special Adviser, which was reported in Business Times this morning. I would like to read certain passages. This is the man who is helping President Clinton run his public relations. This is what he says, apropos changes in the US media :

`The deeper social problem, I agree, is that the adversarial media culture is the enemy of community. You can't build a consensus or coherence in the society around anything if the automatic stance of the media towards any person or movement is that "they are morally corrupt, don't believe anything they say".'

And he continued:

'Obviously, that kind of stance is very important if you are facing fascism or totalitarianism. But, taken too far, it is only corrosive in a free society because it devalues everything.'

Look at the way the British press, the Murdoch press, has devalued the monarchy in Britain and compare it to the way the Japanese have upheld their monarchy, or the Thais. In Thailand, if you insult the monarchy, you are imprisoned. Even Carl Bernstein, who was one of those who reported on Watergate, is very disillusioned. He says:

`The monster that ate the media - a ravenous sensation-and-scandal machine - is consuming decent journalism and relegating real reporting and respect for context to an adjunct of the new porn-journalism.'

So even in America, there is a revulsion against the excesses of the media. So when they criticise us, I do not think we should get too upset. In fact, the balance that we strike between the American free model and the totalitarian model, which used to be the old Pravda and the Xinhua News agency today, the kind of balance that we strike may well turn up to be a superior model. In the long term, the Western liberal journalist will come to the conclusion that of all the cities in Asia, we are the closest to them in our cultures, instincts and sympathies, because of our geography, our history and the fact that we use the English language.

Mr Peh Chin Hua suggested that we keep a tighter control on cartoons and caricatures of political leaders. Here, we should not take a blanket approach and say all cartoons are bad. We should require cartoons and caricatures of national leaders to be done in good taste and allow a certain flexibility and a certain sense of humour. It makes for more effective communication anyway. What we want are cartoonists who are like Lat. Lat is a genius and his ability to capture the essence of a situation in a humorous way is remarkable. Once I was with Mohammed Rahmat, my counterpart in Malaysia, and the wife came in to show him the latest cartoon Lat did of him. He looked at it, he smiled and I think he was flattered, even though Lat in a nice way was poking fun at him. That really is the kind of cartooning and caricaturing which we want, not just mindless lampooning intended to drag down the dignity of people and institutions.

On the Speak Mandarin Campaign, comments made by Mr Goh Choon Kang, it is part of our preservation of self, it is part of culture. It is not just learning Mandarin to be able to make money in China. It was a refusal to accept that we would be deculturalised and that Chinese Singaporeans would lose their sense of being Chineseness. In a sense, it was a continuation of the old Nantah spirit when a group of people decided, "Look, whatever it is, whatever the colonial Government may want, I will be myself." This is the kind of spirit that we should have as we regionalise our economy, as we trade all over the world and as foreigners come into our midst. The thing which would sustain us as Singaporeans and preserve our sense of self is our culture, our language, our spirit, and these are very important.

The campaign went through dark days when there was much scepticism. I think we should record our thanks to Dr Ow Chin Hock and Ho Kah Leong for chairing the Committee during those dark days. It is really heart warming that from last year we were able to get the ying xiao sheng, ( ) the English-educated themselves, to lead the charge. It represented a major change in our society that now the English-educated themselves have decided that they would hold up the banner.

In a related way, it is like the present leadership of NTU deciding that they should associate themselves with the old Nantah. These are English-educated Singaporeans who have now decided that the determination to maintain the sense of self in the past is something which they should continue to retain.

Mr Ho Kwon Ping was telling me when I asked him to take the chairmanship, he consulted his mother, Madam Li Lienfung, and the mother laughed and told him, "All my life I have asked you to learn your Mandarin and now you are the one who has to push it." I think we are out of the woods. It is easier now. But it does not mean, as Mr Goh Choon Kang has proposed, that we should now completely relax on dialects. I do not think we should completely relax on dialects on television yet. Certainly, not on Channel 8 TCS. Channel 8 TCS has made an application in order to be better able to compete against Malaysian Cantonese programming, but we decided to hold back for a few more years.

In the meantime, when Singapore Cable Vision comes on, it will contain one or two international Mandarin channels which will carry some hours of dialect broadcasting in Cantonese for the Hong Kong market and in Hokkien for the Taiwanese market. I think we allow them a little leeway there and we assess the situation in a few years' time.

Comments were made about the Chinese Heritage Centre by Mr Chin Harn Tong and the 50th anniversary by Mr Goh Choon Kang. We got to keep doing it and hope that the younger generation will not lose their sense of self, that they will always remember where they came from, because that collective memory of where they came from, will hold them together in times of crisis. In fact, the 50th Anniversary Commemoration started on 15th February this year, and I was delighted when I attended it, that the organisers for the first time got school students to also lay a wreath. It used to be that the people who attended got older and older and now it is so heart warming to see that the younger people have also decided that they too will not forget, and that the lessons, so painfully learnt in the past, will not be forgotten and will be burned into our collective memory.

This Chinese Heritage Centre in NTU, in the old Nantah xingzheng lou ( ), is symbolically very important. Their first project is to compile an encyclopedia of the Chinese outside China, Chinese anywhere in the world, their wanderings, their fortunes, their tragedies over the years across time and space. Literatures are already available about the Chinese in Peru, the Chinese in the Maldives, the Chinese in South Africa, and the Chinese in Southeast Asia. But this will be the first time that anyone is pulling the various strands together and it would be a project which would gather strength as it goes along, as more research work is done, as other communities also join in.

I was very pleased that Prof. Wang Gungwu, when he retires from Hong Kong University, will be coming over to spend some months in Singapore every year to be an Adviser to this project. They have also got Lynn Pan, the woman who wrote the book Sons of the Yellow Emperor, to be the Executive Director of the Centre. So it is on, and it will be opened in May this year, as part of which they are going to reconstruct the archway of the original Nantah in Yunnan yuan ( ), and the old four characters which have been stored away would be put on to this reconstructed archway in the Yunnan yuan ( ).

For the other communities, the Heritage Centres are also making progress. For the Malays, in Kampong Glam, we have been having many discussions with URA and with Mr Ridzwan Dzafir's Committee to see how best to arrange the development of the site in order that the centre can be self-sustaining and draw in the crowds.

For the Indians, we are looking at two shophouses in Little India.

The Eurasians, small though they may be, have done a lot of good work in the last few years and they have really gotten themselves organised. They are renovating an old bungalow and building on it in Mountbatten and they are setting up their own heritage centre. Even our old colleague, Mr Joe Conceicao, who used to tell me that the best thing that the Eurasians could do for themselves is to melt into the bigger community, finally told me the other day that he better go and see how he can participate. I think that is nice. I have been associated with them because there is no Eurasian Minister in Cabinet. So they say, "Ah, you grew up in Katong. So you represent us." I thought it is such a great honour, I agreed readily.

For the 50th Anniversary, we will be unveiling plaques at 11 sites in the four official languages, including the Battle at Kent Ridge, including the Kempeitai Centre at Stamford Road and it will be there in the form of a solid open book in four languages on a plinth. It will be there in a very permanent way for all to see and learn. We should keep pushing on heritage because, at the end of the day, to internationalise successfully, we must preserve our sense of self.

I was quite pleased, recently, when I attended a musical at NTU entitled For love of country. I thought it was going to be a ra-ra, patriotic musical. Being the Minister in charge, I had to attend. But it was nothing about modern Singapore. For love of country was for love of China and it was about how the Singaporean Chinese community reacted during the Second World War. I was quite surprised by the story. It was a kind of a re-do of the life of Lim Bo Seng. I asked the house master. I said, "Who gave them the script?" He said, "No, I have nothing to do with it. The students wrote the script themselves. They wrote the words, compose the music, did the production, entirely their own efforts." I thought to myself, "All is not lost." We might have thought that the old bonsai had died and then one morning you wake up to find new leaves, and it was such a wonderful feeling that I had that night that young undergraduates, I do not know where they learnt it from, maybe it was from their parents and grandparents, had not forgotten.

The series of commemorative events for the 50th Anniversary will continue until 12th September, which is the anniversary of the Japanese surrender to Lord Louis Mountbatten. We are also working with the Education Ministry to impart knowledge of our heritage to students in secondary schools. This is an effort which is the work of generations but if all of us persist, if all of us do our part, as parents, as MPs, as community leaders, then I think the effort will bear fruit.

Sir, we are one minute before moment of interruption. I prefer not to move on to my next topic.

The Chairman: Do I have the agreement of Members that we stop here for the day?

Hon. Members indicated assent.

Thereupon Mr Deputy Speaker left the Chair of the Committee and took the Chair of the House.

BG George Yong-Boon Yeo: Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I beg to report that the Committee of Supply has made further progress on the Main and Development Estimates for FY95/96, and ask leave to sit again on Monday, 20th March, 1995.

Mr Deputy Speaker: So be it.