EXEMPTED BUSINESS (Motion)

Column: 709

EXEMPTED BUSINESS:

(Motion): Resolved,

That the debate on the Budget Statement be proceeded with beyond 6.00 pm and the proceedings thereon be exempted at this day’s sitting from the provisions of Standing Order No. 1. - [Mr Wong Kan Seng].

Column: 709

ANNUAL BUDGET STATEMENT: * * *

* Debate resumed *. Ms Braema Mathiaparanam (Nominated Member): Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, for allowing me to speak on the issues related to the Budget 2004.

My comments are on two matters - the procreation policy and the proposal to reduce subsidies for university education.

First, on procreation policies. I would like to, first, commend the Government on taking a stance to be less prescriptive in this area. Though we are stuck with the possibility of becoming an endangered species or to put it less alarmingly, in spite of this gravity of not replacing ourselves, it is astute and sensitive of the Government to be more consultative and collaborative in looking for solutions on an issue that is, at the same time, so very personal and yet has such national implications. This is a refreshing change.

On procreation policy, let me, first, discuss it as a 'fit' question

that in some instances we have not looked at who wants babies, people who are trying hard to become parents to assess how we can help them along the way. Earlier, Dr Michael Lim has elaborated on the ART of trying to have children. I will look at when the biological struggle to have a child fails, what are the other options and how can the state help in this case.

Column: 710

Parent wannabes can be persuaded to adopt, and right now the process is becoming less painful, with MCDS setting up two VWOs to look into this area. The question here is: can we further enhance the easing of this adoption scheme and allow desperate couples to get their children from overseas or locally as soon as possible?

The other area was also brought up by Mr Ang Mong Seng and Mayor Heng Chee How about abortions. We have 14,000 abortions roughly in a year. Is it possible, like Mr Ang Mong Seng said, to look into how we can persuade single mothers-to-be or married couples to reconsider aborting their healthy foetuses and instead support them to full-term pregnancies and, perhaps if they so wish, put up their children for adoption.

It is also perhaps time to review the baby drop idea that was discussed in this Parliament last year. A baby drop idea might help mums in trouble to drop off their babies for adoption rather than to go for an abortion.

There is also another group of singles who do want to adopt babies. If they are part of an extended family structure which we do recognise, and there are in some cases wonderful aunts and uncles, is it possible to slaughter this sacred cow and offer them a process of adoption too?

Thirdly, there is another group of men and women who cannot wait to start families. Yes, many of them are married to work permit holders and former foreign domestic workers. They face an uphill task in securing PR or citizenship status for their families, and so continue to conduct their lives split over two countries. I have come across two cases of good responsible Singapore men, both married to ex-domestic workers. Both ex-domestic workers carry wonderful recommendations by their Singapore ex-employers.

Column: 711

If these domestic workers have helped our own Singapore children, would it not then be a natural conclusion to say that when it comes to their very own, they will help bring them up as good responsible citizens? Is it possible also when we look at these short-term solutions, to see whether we can review or relax on the criteria of assessment of such Singapore men or women who are married to work permit holders?

If, in these short-term solutions, there is a concern over the diverse origins of babies which we will bring in through adoption or through marriages to spouses of foreign countries - I think we can believe in our own system that we do have a meritocratic system, we have great emphasis on responsible parenting, and we have a wonderful scheme of lifelong learning programmes. Put the three together, I think the chances of having children not being brought up as good citizens of this country will be very small.

Next, we look at another group of Singapore citizens who have decided for whatever reasons best known to them that they do not want to have babies or are happy to have one or two, and that is that. We have heard Mr Tan Soo Khoon speak about how it costs about $77,000 to bring a child right through university, and in terms of real years, quarter of a century. If this is how costly, perhaps in personal terms, it can be to an individual couple, maybe it is also time to stop badgering these couples to let them make their own choices, to give them the due respect that they are asking for, suspend judgment, and look at where the fit can work better for us. Couples who really want to have babies, we can see how we can help them, and even if it means that a particular family is already with five children and is looking towards their sixth,

Column: 712

we can give them the support that is needed.

The long-term approach to delivering more babies in Singapore lies in a structural setup. The baby shortage problem is every citizen's. Till today, the language used by some colleagues, the media and employers have squarely put that responsibility on the women. We are today still seeing a policy of men being heads of the household. With that policy comes all other policy matters, from medical benefits to definitions of leave, etc. This whole suggestion of even offering six months' leave has been termed as maternity leave. That alone shows that we are still putting the responsibility back on the mothers-to-be.

I would like to say, as Mdm Halimah Yacob had also brought this up, that we should reconfigure the status, we should reconsider packaging this leave not as maternity leave, etc, but as parental leave. In Norway , fathers and mothers have joint childcare leave which is left to the parents to decide as a team between them. Of the 42 weeks with full pay entitlement, the mother is only entitled to three weeks before and six weeks after birth. The rest of that 42 weeks is a negotiation between father, mother and the employer. This will be an ideal way of placing joint responsibility of bringing up children between parents, fathers and mothers.

If we are really serious about trying to fix this problem on a longer term basis, then we really need to look at what are our policy structures in terms of what we consider the status of women. Gender mainstreaming has to become part and parcel of how we approach a lot of our policies. On these, let me also talk about some other schemes.

The five-day week has to become, in my opinion, a reality. We still have a five-and-a-half day week. I would love to

Column: 713

know what studies show how productive that half day really is. Yet, we have many industries that work on a 24/7 model. When we have a 24/7 model, why do we not work on a five-day week, spread from one Sunday to the next Saturday? Employers, if they have such flexible arrangements, can offer parents whatever scheme that they can fit into the whole structure of that organisation, instead of having that half a day that intrudes into family life too. At the same time, we also have to relook at what employers term as compulsory activities for their employees, especially on their weekends, because we have to keep aside time as a family, and I think employers at times try to put quite a lot of pressure on that balance between family and the workplace.

The second point is on the six months' maternity leave. As I have mentioned, the Norway example offers us some good lessons and maybe we can modify it to our own experience, meaning that after perhaps two to three months of leave being given to the mothers, then it becomes a joint decision with the employer, the father and the mother on how the rest of the leave is to be shared.

Tax relief should be extended to all children irregardless if you are a twin or a triplet, or even a quadruplet. Because I think a child does not deserve to be known as a child without the tax relief.

Infant care and childcare are not just questions of facilities. We need to look at how accessible they are to the employees and how are they staffed. We have a good pool of retired teachers, nurses who may really wish to be retrained as childcare teachers. I think we can look into this area to enhance the pool for childcare resources. On foreign domestic workers, much has been said already. But I think we need to look at whether it is necessary to have a foreign domestic worker as being domiciled within the

Column: 714

home. The concept of having foreign domestic workers on wheels is an option that, I think, many parents would welcome. So it works like a childcare until the parents come home, then the foreign domestic worker goes off to another setup to begin the next day.

Again, on the issue of the foreign domestic worker, we conducted a seminar last year, and it was very telling that we had a young girl who was about to be married and she asked this pertinent question that I would like to share. She said that for the last, almost more than two decades, we have had the foreign workers. She wanted to start a family. She asked, "Where are the childcare facilities and infant care centres that are close enough to my home or to my employer, such that for all these years that we have been paying the levy for the maid, that money could have been used to bring about more childcare centres, more facilities and better resources within easy reach?" And that is a question that, I think, we do not have an answer. Maybe there can be an answer later.

On another point - I think the most important of all, I suppose - is socialisation, which quite a number of Members brought up. How do we wish to perhaps socialise a nation to look and to value children again, to see the whole responsibility, not just as having children for the nation but to enjoy the child. I think, so far, we have forgotten that children are there to be enjoyed. We have used words, even in some of the discussions here, like 'yield', 'buy', which are commercial terms. I quite understand perhaps why we use these terms. But if we are going to talk about socialisation, if we are going to shift the nation's attitude a little bit further into appreciating, bringing up children, etc, and not see it as a burden, the language that we use becomes very important, and it needs to be managed consistently at the same time.

Column: 715

On a last note, I would like to perhaps encourage all my fellow colleagues to perhaps read this book called 'A Bitch in the House'. I have forgotten the authoress. Excuse the language, it is the title. The very first page - even if one does not go beyond - spells out clearly the dilemma that faces a wife from a dual income family who is trying to manage a wonderful career, and who is also trying to manage a wonderful home life. I think that kind of insight needs to be internalised beyond the lip service that sometimes we give to this whole concept. And I think the Government is now on the right track in looking for longer term solutions.

Mrs Fang Ai Lian (Nominated Member): Mr Deputy Speaker, I would like to speak from the point of view of business.

Budget 2004, to me, is a focused act of fine-tuning, reflecting a government which knows what it wants to achieve. I am very glad that Budget 2004 continues to stay on course - the course set by the Economic Review Committee and also by the Finance Minister in his last two Budgets.

Our strategy is about globalising our economy, diversifying our economy, making our business environment much more competitive and also fostering the spirit of enterprise and creativity. An essential part of our strategy is about transforming our tax system

into one which relies less on direct taxes. So we need to lessen the burden of direct taxes on our economy, on businesses, on individuals, so as to attract investments and talent and also we need to encourage Singaporeans to create wealth for themselves. So to balance the Budget, quite rightly, we need income streams and revenue streams from other areas and that will be in the area of indirect taxes, GST.

Column: 716

Many of the recommendations made by the Economic Review Committee have already been introduced or announced. So it is not surprising there is not a great deal of high expectations in terms of dramatic changes or surprises. Indeed, the focus of the Budget shifted somewhat to babies, about growing population because of a very serious decline in birth rate. And this is right because it is a long-term problem and we need to address it early because, without people, we cannot hope to achieve or sustain a vibrant economy.

Our economy has improved, exports are up, business profits are up, also employment. The mood is definitely much more cheerful and optimistic, compared to what was the mood just not so long ago which is all gloom and doom.

So Budget 2004 brought cheer to the business community with the 2% tax cut. It was expected, but it is still appreciated. Budget 2004 also brought cheer to, I would say, several important sectors of our economy, such as financial services, hub services and also for entrepreneurs. Incentive measures have been targeted at these sectors. All these are very much in line with making our business and investment environment that much more competitive and I think here it is noteworthy to record the Government leading by example by cutting its own expenditure. Although some have said that perhaps 2% is not enough, it is a sure start.

I suppose individuals might not be so happy because there is no tax cut for them yet, but the commitment remains there. There is also no increase, in terms of personal reliefs, although a lot of calls have been made in the past to get this much more realistic and also in line with actual living expenses. It would have been nice for them not to feel left out, perhaps with the 1% tax cut and this would have increased disposable income

Column: 717

and high pub consumption and also lift up optimism which itself is a great multiplier component in any economy.

The tone of the Budget 2004 is considered cautious and conservative. It could have been a bit bolder. We say this because the economy is looking up and the last three years' budget deficits have been smaller and calls for a bit of minor celebration here. And really, it does present a wonderful opportunity to push ahead with the remaining recommendations of the Economic Review Committee. I say this because it also represents, in part, a bit of entrepreneur there. The Government has been calling on all Singaporeans to be much more entrepreneurial, to dare to take the risk, and I think this culture ought to pervade all levels of society, including the democrats perhaps.

Now, I would like to touch on specific elements of the Budget 2004 for consideration for future refinement and extension. Firstly, corporate tax. The 2% cut is certainly welcomed although it was expected, as I said earlier on. I think the business community never for once took it for granted that it would be implemented. So the Government kept to its word and this sends out a very important signal about the serious intent on the part of the Government to keep the business environment competitive. So that is very important. And now, the discussion is about: what's next? Should it go down to 17 1/2%, like Hong Kong? Or should it be lower like 15%? My own view is that we should not keep a closed mind about future options. That is said. We need to know and that is the general feeling of the business community as well that our tax regime, taken as a whole, without looking into specific measures, is one of the most attractive in the world. So there is a limit as to how low the tax rate can be. We certainly do not want to emulate other countries with huge long-term budget deficits. And, also, although

Column: 718

low tax rates are important to keep costs low, there is also the other political as well as economic consideration. Here, I would just like to say that, let us keep our minds open and evaluate the situation as and when necessary. Let us not make 20% a sacred cow.

The reduction of withholding tax from 15% to 10% is definitely viewed as a very significant step, and another sacred cow being slaughtered. Withholding tax is meant for foreign parties selling goods and services to Singapore. However, invariably, this gets picked up by the Singapore party, making the acquisition of technology and know-how that much more expensive. So the cutting of withholding tax on royalty for the right of use of technology and intellectual property is certainly a step in the right direction. However, more can be done. And this is one instance where I feel that the Government could have gone a bit further and extend the withholding tax for payments on other areas like interests, rentals and other services as well, because this will make it, from the point of view of business, a lot more lower.

It would also be helpful if the definition of "royalty" can be clarified. Because it would appear that the treatment for payment of information and know-how can be treated differently from payment for use of services in connection with information and know-how. I think the two are so interlinked that they should both enjoy the same reduced tax rate.

Another related area concerns the writing down allowance of intellectual property rights (IPRs). Businesses were also hoping for a relaxation, in terms of criteria, in situations where a taxpayer is not the legal owner, but certainly it is the economic owner of the intellectual property right for an agreed period of time. Before I leave intellectual property rights, I might as well say that, the

Column: 719

writing down allowance claim is for three proprietaries. But in case of tangible capital assets, it is from one to three. I think both intellectual property rights, as well as capital equipment, are both essential in the manufacturing process to generate income and perhaps this discrepancy ought to be closed.

Moving on to entrepreneurs, I think they ought to be feeling happy. Previously, I have spoken of the need to recognise the value for all types of industries and not just high-tech. So it is nice to see that this is being taken on. It is great to see many of our industries, in recent years, and they are not necessarily high-tech, they are in fact low-tech or no-tech engaged in fish-balls, popiah skins, and so on, making their mark in the regional as well as the global arena. All these industries were classified sunset, and I suppose they knew better. From the regional and global perspective, the sun never set for them. It is also good that some of these industries are engaged in products which Singapore does not have a competitive advantage, like the selling of sofa, leather tanning, when we do not have the capital industry. And, also, in terms of beating the Japanese in the sushi game, with very innovative ideas like the portable conveyor belts. So kudos to our entrepreneurs for their resourcefulness as well as their creativity.

It is a really welcomed factor that Technopreneur Investment Incentive is now known as the Enterprise Investment Incentive which captures all enterprises, all start-ups, not just high-techs. This really is a great leap forward, in terms of our promotion of piling up the entrepreneurship spirit. Not only that, it represents a shift in mindset, not directing business in a particular direction but actually encouraging individual investors to believe in what they do and to carry on what they do best as well.

Column: 720

Other incentives for entrepreneurs are also noteworthy. As mentioned, the three-year tax exemption, in terms of taxable income up to $100,000, will free up valuable financial resources to be reinvested in terms of upgrading as well as regional expansion. Here is another area which I feel that the Government could have been a little bit more generous because, in the early years, a typical setup would have very lean profits, or, in fact, losses as well.

I think it is great that a lot of incentives have been introduced for entrepreneurs, for example, the idea of loan securitisation is a good one too. Because it is about funding and this is one of the challenges that entrepreneurs have long talked about. And talking about that, I would like to raise the issue of fund-raising expenses. This can be very significant, be it mortgaging your house to raise funds, be it a public share offering, or in the case of issuance of bonds to raise funds. Businesses here, again, have been calling for these expenses to be tax deductible in order to lessen the burden on fund raising. Perhaps, the Finance Minister could kindly take this into consideration.

On hub incentives, these are commendable. The maximum duration for regional headquarters incentives has been extended from three to five years. I see this as a very significant measure in attracting regional SMEs to locate in Singapore as well as for our own SMEs to go regional and then global.

Also, likewise the extension of the Pioneer Incentives from 10 years to 15 years, I think, is a very timely move, in the case of MNCs moving out of Singapore. And this will help to keep them here, it is not just about buying time. It will also encourage MNCs to upgrade their activities into higher value-added activities. Besides, it will also encourage projects with long gestation to

Column: 721

locate in Singapore. So both these incentives will help Singapore position itself as a hub for manufacturing and services. Because to be an effective hub, we need a wide corporate base. So we need to attract more companies to Singapore as well as to continue to retain those companies already rooted here.

I like to move on to financial services because this is of great interest to me. I am very happy that in fact this received most attention, except that it has got obscured by the babies. Budget 2004 introduced many incentives in the financial services sector. I agree with the Economic Review Committee's recommendation

to develop the high-end processing services for this sector because we simply cannot compete with countries like India for mass processing. On the other hand, this is not something that only we can do. So, we cannot rest on the notion that our competitors will not go up the value chain and also do this business now or in the near future.

I am much more optimistic about wealth management. Although it will not create a great deal of employment, it does involve very highly skilled and very competent professionals, and it will spur the financial services industry and bring about spin-offs in terms of other benefits. I am optimistic because the new set of incentives which has been introduced has really broadened the criteria under which investors can qualify for tax exemption. I would like to record this sector's appreciation of the tax exemption which has been introduced to exempt all foreign-sourced income received in Singapore by resident individuals. This will really help encourage the flow of funds back into Singapore and create a dynamic fund as well as wealth management industry.

Lastly, I would like to comment on babies as a mother, working professional and woman. But much has already been

Column: 722

said, and it is a bit of a non-event because the incentives have not been announced. We will have to wait until National Day to hear about them. As Ms Braema Mathiaparanam said, this is a refreshing change, I suppose because this affords a wonderful opportunity for the Government to receive feedback as well as suggestions. Much has already been given, and I would like to reiterate some of the points made. I think it is important to recognise the problems of affordability and about how burdensome it is to raise children. Put it that way, it does not sound very nice. And also the problems of beyond tax incentives, of how to make work easier and also less stressful for the couples. In particular, I would like more attention or help being put in the way of infant care as well as after-school care.

I would also like to join in the discussion on abortion as well. I am told that we have the highest rate for abortion in the world. The Minister, Mr Lim Hng Kiang, is already shaking his head, which obviously means that I have had my facts wrong. But, be that as it may, it is a high figure. We have a target of some 40% increase to achieve, and that is not easy. Perhaps, it would be useful to review this area to see how much of the baby stork we can save.

On that note, I look forward to listening to Mr Lim Hng Kiang's proposals, come August. For the time being, I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate the Minister for Finance for a very positive set of measures which will help us steer ourselves towards a much brighter future.

Sir, I support the motion.

5.50 pm

Mr Zainul Abidin Rasheed (Aljunied): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of the motion in the name of DPM and Finance Minister.

Column: 723

We have just heard the voice of business earlier from hon. Member, Mrs Fang Ai Lian. Allow me to talk a little about strong society from the socio-economic point of view.

To me, Sir, this is the right Budget for the right time. To agree with that statement, one needs to see the Budget in the context of what has been offered and achieved by way of the few previous budgets, particularly since the financial crisis of the late 90s. For those who look at the Budget in anticipation of more personal goodies, I agree with some of the feedback I have heard from my grassroots that it did not provide much excitement.

For me, DPM's reminder and call for Singaporeans to reaffirm our fundamental for Singapore's survival and success and to make Singapore a Land of Opportunity are indeed exciting. I hope DPM's and the Government's thinking on such guiding principles will continue to fire the imagination of today's Singaporeans and that of succeeding generations, to carry on and to keep that torch burning.

Sir, after two decades of fast-track growth, the last six years after the 1997 financial crisis have been rather humbling. It is like the lyrics of the Hokkien song " ai piah zia ay yiah: wusi ki, wusi lo ". For those who do not understand Hokkien , it means, "It can go up, it can also come down." The residents in my constituency, however, get even more excited when the words are sung as " wusi ki, buay sai lok ", ie, can go up but cannot go down, although reality tells us that the former is normally true. I am glad, however, that the song believes that it is 70% hard work that matters, and that it is only 30% " sa hun ti chu tia ", meaning luck or fate.

But, Sir, one thing we do not want to leave to luck is manpower planning, as

Column: 724

our human capital is one key resource we have to do our best to develop. Thus, I see the Government's intentions to raise university fees with some concern. So do I worry about healthcare affordability in our efforts to build a strong society, what more a greying one.

I agree that a strong society is marked by a high degree of self-reliance, resilience and social responsibility. This, I call the Singapore Spirit. I also agree with DPM that "the migrants from China, India and the Malay archipelago who built modern Singapore relied on themselves, their families, and their communities to make a living against great odds". This, indeed, will have to continue to be the trump call, even more so for those lagging behind, as the world gets more competitive. Local communities and the people sector indeed had launched a variety of self-help initiatives and played an important role in society. DPM's call for more of such initiatives, I am sure, will be heeded, including by the CDCs and the public sector.

Having said that, I appeal to the Government not to rush into asking undergraduates to pay a bigger share of the cost of university education. It is already high. Tertiary education is no longer the enclave of the privileged. In my days, an exclusive 5% benefits from university education. Now, it is more than 25%. Is it really true to say that the benefits of a university education accrue mostly to the individual? Not only do they end up contributing more to the country's coffers, more often than not they help to bring up their immediate families' economic well-being, thus helping the economy too. While DPM's assurances that no one needs to miss a tertiary education because of financial reasons are well-received, in reality, the number of bursaries and scholarships is limited. Loans are also tight and, when made available, often hang like a psychological

Column: 725

burden on the heads of the fresh undergraduates and their families.

I would not be surprised if that also contributes to the larger concern to delay having their babies, let alone to have more bundles of joy when discharging loans still unpaid. If fees need to go up, requiring more to resort to loans, perhaps the Government could also consider allowing an incentive scheme where those graduates with such loans who marry early and have children would benefit from the baby bonus schemes, eg, a rebate on their outstanding loans.

But dollars and cents aside, I agree with the hon. Member Mr David Lim that it is very much a question of emotions. The passion for having more children must be there before any policy to promote a more productive TFR rate could succeed.

Mayor Othman was right that the Mayors generally have set a good example on this score. Mayor Heng is still young, and there is still hope. As the Government needs to set a good example on policy implementation, I suppose it is also right to hope that the younger married MPs should also set the example. I do not know about Mr Lim Hng Kiang, but younger Ministers, too, of course!

When I was Editor of Berita Harian , I used to write editorials to persuade my readers to stop at two, as the situation then warranted such a policy. Personally, however, I felt that I could afford and should have more. I am now blessed with four lovely children. In fact, I used to encourage my Malay and non-Malay professional friends to have at least four children. But, mind you, people used to stare at my wife and myself when we walked with our four kids. Perhaps, they see us as anti-socials! Now, they say we have foresight! But I must say that it was not easy to have three or more kids, especially for the wife. It is easy to talk about shared responsibilities in bringing up

Column: 726

families, but reality is different. Of course, we must do more to bring about this sense of shared responsibilities, as this will also be an important factor whether we succeed in promoting bigger family size. And it is more than just a question of affordability. It is also about quality of life, the pressures and demands on our time, and whether we could provide the kind of time necessary to ensure quality time for the family. Like other Members of the House, I also empathise with Mr Lim's unenviable task, but I am sure Minister Lim will not leave any stone unturned to ensure that this fundamental about procreation and a better replacement rate is a success.

On a different note, Sir, while we want to generally promote more babies, we must also be careful not to send the wrong signal to those whom we feel would best provide a fighting chance for their families to make good, if they keep their families small. For those who are already struggling to make ends meet, for the sake of the future of their children and themselves, there is HOPE which we are trying to promote, and where an important consideration is still to stop at two. Perhaps the Government could also review this policy and consider whether those with three children could also benefit from the scheme, thus - excuse the expression - killing two birds with one stone through HOPE Plus.

Similarly, Sir, an area of concern hanging like dark clouds on Singaporean minds is the question of healthcare cost. Feedback I get from the ground is that they are very reassured that the Government and DPM Lee care about keeping healthcare cost affordable. They cited the escalating cost of medical care, like the example DPM mentioned about angioplasty with stents, as cause for concern, with cost rising very fast, and, worse too, if there were complications. We are told that only 5% of cases end up with complications but, knowing how

Column: 727

kiasu Singaporeans can be, many would feel it is better to be cautious than to risk high charges.

Means testing sounds equitable but, being new, I am glad to see the Government agreeing to "proceed cautiously". MOH needs to work out a system that is sustainable and this will be possible with time and experience. The Government must ensure that this means testing will not end up being seen as "mean".

Flexibility must be its test, as services cover a wide range of inpatient care to surgery to specialist outpatient. There is also the need to differentiate from the ordinary observation ward to the ICU, with or without complication, no matter how low the chances of complications surface.

The heart-wrenching case of filial children wanting to show gratitude to their father and placing him for observation in class A, ending up with complications and weeks in ICU and a $170,000 bill a year back, would be a case worth looking at. Indeed, for fear of such a situation

or complications, there would be many Singaporeans who would prefer to be prudent in going for lower class treatment and not because they want to abuse the subsidy system.

On a final note, Sir, while it is certainly helpful to boost the Singapore spirit with talk of the land of opportunity, the Government will need to do more to convince Singaporeans that we are still indeed a land of plenty, especially for those who are still out of job and struggling to find alternatives that would keep themselves and their families afloat. We note that while 12,000 jobs were created in the second half of 2003, 30,000 jobs were lost in the first half.

Column: 728

The deficit has had a dent on that Singapore spirit.

I would like to call on the Government to work even closer with the people to strengthen that Singapore spirit. That is also a fundamental. It is more than just a question of nuts and bolts and policies. It is also about mending mindsets.

Sir, I support the financial policy of the Government.

Dr Lily Neo (Jalan Besar): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, DPM Lee, in his Budget Statement, said that Singapore's declining birth rate is a serious problem. Today, I would like to beseech this House to deliberate on my suggestions for specific pro-natalist schemes and to request DPM Lee to favour such incentives to improve the environment for Singaporeans to raise a family.

The Total Fertility Rate, or TFR, in Singapore has reached the lowest level in 25 years at 1.26 last year. TFR has been coming down over the years and has remained below the replacement level since 1977. Sir, this trend is threatening the survival of our nation. The repercussions may be felt sooner with a lessened labour force, insufficient working population to maintain the prosperity of the country and an aging population. With our present immigration policy, such a dismal picture will reduce the resident population with consequential social implications. If this trend is not arrested, the population will start to peak in just a few decades and then Singaporeans will start dying out. While marriage and family sizes are private matters, our Government has no alternative but to try and reverse the dismal threatening trend to address the larger important societal consequences as a country.

Some have expressed scepticism that no matter what Government does, it is going to be a losing battle as this trend, in

Column: 729

today's affluent society, is already too entrenched for various reasons and therefore cannot be reversed. Sir, I beg to differ for the following reasons:

(1) Singapore's procreation incentives appear to have had some effect in the early days of its introduction.

(2) A recent study that polled more than 1,200 Singaporeans from housewives to professional working women of varying ages, races and educational levels, showed that the number of children they really desired was significantly higher at 2.7 children, while the women surveyed had small families with an average of 1.9 children.

(3) The study on social attitudes towards the family carried out in 2001 found that 84% of Singaporeans aged 15 and above agreed that it is better to be married than to remain single while 89% agreed that married couples should have children.

(4) Some northern European countries, with generous pro-family policies and Government handouts, have higher TFR. For example, Denmark has a Total Fertility Rate of 1.7, compared to most countries on the southern rim of Europe, such as Italy and Spain that have some of the lowest TFR on the continent of about 1.2. The governments of the southern countries provide much less child-related allowances than the Nordic countries. It is noteworthy that the northern countries have some of the highest fertility rates in Europe, despite the fact that the proportion of women in their labour force is also among the highest.

In August 2000, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, PM Goh noted that it might not be possible to reverse the downward trends of marriage and birth rates, as they reflect urbanisation and changing norms, and he said and I quote, "But we must at least try to arrest the problem," stressing that,

Column: 730

"not to try is to give up on Singapore". I am glad that DPM Lee had also said in January this year that he listed the low birth rate as one of the Government's top three priorities. I also agree with DPM Tan's call for a "total" solution to this problem.

In order to be successful this time, all aspects of conducive factors in raising a family should be considered in totality. Although finance is an important factor, it should be coupled with a slew of other considerations for promoting and improving the environment. This includes looking at the emotional, psychological and lifestyle choices of couples that will make any new or enhanced policy work this time. I would like to urge our Government, while retaining the old measures, to boldly implement more schemes with real impact and not as piecemeal gestures.

Thus, I would like to recommend the changes in the following 28 areas. Sir, my suggestions will require a strong fiscal stomach and I do hope that our Government will see it as an investment - expensive but unavoidable.

Baby Bonus

Singaporeans are pragmatic people and many have expressed that raising children is costly. Finance has been considered the deterring factor, besides others, for many young couples. Sir, the Baby Bonus Scheme has not stopped falling birth rates and, therefore, there is a need for a review. I would suggest that while retaining the second tier of the Baby Bonus, the first tier payment of cash gifts of the Baby Bonus should be doubled to give it more impact, ie, from $3,000 to at least $6,000 for the second child and from $6,000 to at least $12,000 for the third child.

The age at first marriage has risen for women in Singapore. The median age at

Column: 731

which women turn mums is 30.5. One in three Singapore adults in their early 30s is still single. In line with the high age at marriage, Singapore women also begin childbearing at a relatively older age. In order to improve this trend, the Baby Bonus should be extended to a first child delivered before the age of 28.

There is a need for extra incentives rather than disincentives for couples to go for the fourth child. Therefore, the Baby Bonus should be extended to a fourth child as well. Whatever valid reasons for not giving incentives for a fourth child should now be sacrificed for a bigger picture. Last year, our Government paid out $38 million in Baby Bonuses. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, even if this is doubled, it would be worthwhile for the future of Singapore.

Tax rebate and tax relief

In 2003, the female employees made up 44.7% of the total working population. The female labour force participation rate in 2003 was 53.9%, of which about 54% were married women and about 40% of all married couples were dual-earners. DPM Lee said in his Budget Statement that low birth rate problem is more serious for the mothers who are more educated and earn higher incomes. Sir, some existing incentives should therefore be further sweetened to encourage women to continue contributing to the economy for having a family.

The Special Tax Rebate should be extended from the first to the fourth child starting at $20,000 for the first child to $40,000 for the fourth child. Presently, this rebate only applies to second to fourth child with a cap of $20,000 to be offset against either husband's or wife's income tax liabilities and may be claimed over five years. Taxpayers can claim child relief of $2,000 presently. This

Column: 732

child relief should be further increased to $5,000 from first to fourth child.

In formulating our procreation policy, due consideration should be given to each child born in the case of a multiple pregnancy. Sir, having twins certainly carries double the burden for a couple and they should not be disadvantaged. Also, the Special Tax Rebate is only applied to children from the same marriage. This should be amended to cater to couples that have to remarry for various reasons, following the demise of the spouse, for instance.

Childbirth

Working women find it demanding to try to balance a full-time job and motherhood. There is guilt to outsource caring of a child, especially with the newborn babies. This uneasy conscience is a phenomenon of modern parenting that makes having children daunting.

Sir, it explains why extended maternity and paternity leave, prevalent in Scandinavia, seems to work. In England and many Scandinavian countries, maternity leave is six months and we should similarly extend maternity leave here in Singapore. However, as I believe our people are pragmatic and reasonable, six months would be too idealistic and an increase from the present eight weeks to at least 16 weeks would be more accountable. The extended maternity leave is especially appropriate in lieu of the scarcity of our infant care facilities and because the post-delivery period is fraught with problems and adjustments, besides being a crucial time for mother-baby bonding. In order not to burden the employers, the Government should bear all the expenses for the extra leave and this leave should be extended from first to fourth birth order. Furthermore, I would like to suggest that some, maybe four weeks, of the extra leave can be taken intermittenly, as and when required,

Column: 733

during the neonatal period. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, this flexibility will certainly exemplify the spirit we want in encouraging flexible working arrangements to facilitate unexpected or urgent childcare needs at different times in the first year. Women should also be assured of their jobs after their maternity leave. Labour force incentives are as important as monetary ones to facilitate women to have children without giving up or losing their jobs.

Presently, Medisave can only be used to pay for delivery and hospital charges after the third child. This should be extended to the fourth child. The present higher public hospital accouchement fees should also be removed for a third and fourth child.

Childcare

Sir, childcare concerns are a top worry for many couples. Especially in Singapore, children are precious to parents and they want to give them the best care and nurture. Working parents need more support in childcare arrangements.

There are less than 24 childcare facilities, which offer infant care for babies younger than 18 months. More efforts have to be made in this area to rectify this anomaly quickly. In providing such centres, the infants' needs, such as the necessity of a constant mother figure, should be a consideration. Childcare incentives for working mothers should be subsidised to 75% of the fees charged by centres to give parents more options. The present subsidy of $150 is too little especially for infant care that costs $700 to $1,200 per month.

Childcare incentives should also be extended to grandparents, nannies and relatives who have been supervised and certified by MCDS. Sir, this will give

Column: 734

couples the choice of homecare for their children and will provide the elderly or housewives income while staying at home.

Better childcare centres staffed with certified professionals and dedicated carers will give peace of mind to parents who now want professional care for their children. There should be more childcare centres conveniently located in relation to either the home or the workplace. This, in effect, calls for employers to consider providing childcare centres at the workplace. In this respect, Sir, I hope more generous grants be given to companies to set up childcare centres at workplaces. The present $26,000 is too small an amount as set-up cost, especially for those providing childcare centres in accordance with MCDS' guidelines.

Family-friendly work environment

The 1990 Singapore Census showed that 40% of all married couples are dual-income earners. Many dual-income earners have difficulty in balancing work and family due to the lack of conducive working environment and this causes the lower fertility. Working women find it stressful to juggle between inflexible work schedules and family given that both roles are equally intensive and time-consuming. The recent study that polled 1,200 Singaporean women showed that they preferred to take on a full-time housewife's role or engage in part-time work, which suggests that they found the pull of home stronger than workplace.

Almost four in 10 mothers polled preferred not to work at all, a third chose part-time work and only a quarter, the more highly educated women, wanted to continue working full-time. All these indicate that family-friendly work arrangements must have the top priority of attention to help the career-minded or working couples balance their commitments and stay in the workforce.

Column: 735

Sir, the United States has never tried reshaping the birth rate or pushing any population policy, yet its fertility rate of 2.1 is the highest for the industrialised countries. The US has accommodated the need for two-earner families better in many ways than European countries. The experiences of family-friendly firms in the US have been that they reap productivity gains, better customer service, higher staff retention rates, reduction in recruitment and training costs and a drop in absenteeism.

Although our Government has set up a Work-Life Unit under the MCDS to promote family-friendly practices among employers, more has to be done in terms of tangible incentives such as grants and tax incentives for companies to adopt family-friendly policies for their employees. Sir, many employers expect their employees to attach greater priority to the company and demand that their employees spend as much time as needed at work, even beyond office hours. Complaints have been heard that employers are not happy when their employees are expecting and taking time off for antenatal check-ups and maternity leave.

Presently, only 3% of the Singapore work-force is on part-time work compared to 24% in the UK, 23% in Japan and 17% in US. Less than 2% of workers have flexible work hours compared to 28% in US, 12% in the UK and 8.7% in Japan. I would like to beseech our Government to really do a lot more to facilitate flexible work option and family-friendly working environment. Presently, there is a dearth of flexibility in work arrangements especially for professionals. Teleworking has not taken off. There is also not enough assistance and training for women to re-enter employment after being away for a while.

Column: 736

Stressful education

The study by Dr Stella Quah of National University of Singapore on the Singapore Family revealed that the greatest worry for about 45% of them came from the problems associated with their children's education. Sir, Singaporean parents have also frequently mentioned children's education as the contributory factor in opting for smaller families. A study in 1999 on pupils' stress showed that pupils' stress in terms of overload had increased since 1990. The Ministry of Education should strive for a less stressful education while developing a child's potential. I think it is time that our Ministry of Education reviewed and effected some changes.

Primary education streaming should be scrapped to reduce the stress for pupils and parents for primary level. This will also address the fact that there are late developers that may be disadvantaged from early streaming.

Principals must ensure that teachers do not overload pupils with homework and tests. More emphasis should be given to better teaching resources to make education in schools interesting. Better parent-teacher rapport and feedback are needed to monitor pupils' progress and family stress from education. There is also the need to provide teacher-counsellors and professional counsellors. There must be guidance on supportive parenting and the prevention of parents pushing their children to achieve beyond their ability and to avoid parents' stress.

Sir, many parents turn to private tuition for their children. It will be a good idea if our schools provide tutorial classes after normal school hours, not for giving the children extra work, but for helping them cope with their "homework", to free the children to spend quality time at home with their parents. Another way to help

Column: 737

parents, especially working parents, is to organise the extra-curricular pursuits, like learning drama, piano, ballet, and so on, collectively, after classes in the schools. This will save parents having to ferry their children to and from different places for these hobbies, and this will also help Singaporean parents save much time, effort and money. Let us make our schools, especially our primary schools, more holistic and comprehensive in nature.

The criteria for the ranking of schools need to be expanded to lessen the emphasis on academic achievements and grade scores. More weightage should be on other markers relevant to the present times. Thus, ranking should take attainments in developing the potential of students in information technology, sports and the arts into consideration. Schools should be ranked by bands, rather than individually. Sir, the lessened emphasis on how individual schools fared on the O-level results just recently is welcome indeed, and I hope MOE will further ease individual school ranking.

Having flexibility in school and university entry criteria, such as considering the non-academic ability, will lessen the stress from many students and parents. Parents can then be more relaxed to allow their children develop their own unique potential though it may not conform to the norm. Universities should not be too fixated on accepting students with a string of straight A's and there should be more flexibility and some open-mindedness in student admission. The Second Language ruling for varsity and independent criteria for university acceptance announced recently were commendable and a good start, and I hope to see more favourable criteria expanded.

Sir, we do have to convince Singaporeans that success does not come from just highest academic achievements

Column: 738

alone. There must be more definitions of success. For instance, one can be considered a success also from being well-trained and qualified in the vocations. The Government must also show the example by not just selecting and promoting people in the civil service with the highest academic qualifications alone, but also with other and different criteria.

Mindset change

There is a need for a change of attitude in parenting towards "Happy Parenting". There had been too many negative reports and negative emphases on parenthood. We need to start an aggressive campaign to correct this negative mindset. I remember the publicity on "Stop at Two" campaign in the past, which was so intensely carried out that I was bombarded with that message every single day. Sir, that had left an imprint in my brain till today and I can still see that message in my head. Now, aggressive affirmative publicity should be on happy parenthood. The emphasis on campaigning should be on the joy that family brings such as the great feeling to hear the little ones saying "Mum", "Dad" and "I love you", and the happiness the first time you hold your newborns. The slogan, Sir, could be, "The more in the family to share your life with, the merrier it is".

In Singapore, women assume the main responsibility of housework and childcare, regardless whether they are employed. Working women are often stressed from the multiple responsibilities. Research into marital satisfaction among Singaporean women showed a direct correlation between stress levels in women and the amount of help they get at home. Traditionally, the father had been the sole breadwinner and the distant disciplinarian while the mother was the nurturer and homemaker. In the present dual-income family, there should be a shift towards this perception of the roles of

Column: 739

fathers and mothers. Parenting and homemaker tasks should be shared between spouses.

Our Government can promote this mindset by increasing the paternity leave from three days to 10 days with full pay borne by the State in order not to burden companies. This will send a strong signal that men are responsible too for the care and upbringing of a child. More effort in this area will be useful, such as giving further incentives for companies and having a campaign to change the stereotyped mindset of many men regarding their roles in parenting and household responsibilities, and the need for them to be equal partners in raising families. Sir, a good marriage needs time and commitment to nurture and sustain and can be very time-intensive. Unfortunately, employees lack time due to the demands from work. Therefore, family-oriented working environment will help employees, especially for young couples. A campaign on family-friendly practices to be adopted by companies as good investments with profitable returns should be stepped up.

Sir, there is a need to inspire the young with a deeper sense of individual responsibility towards the family. Basic social etiquette and interpersonal skills should be taught and promoted. This will lead to our young being better equipped with skills in handling boy-girl relationship, marriage, parental responsibility, and so on. Such "values" transmission can be done through teachers in schools, through a parent-school-community partnership, through religious and community groups and through the media. Facilitating and providing avenues for young people to come together in the schools, polytechnics, universities, workplaces, community centres and so on will give them the opportunity to intermingle with peers within their cohorts. Government

Column: 740

should provide funding and incentives to facilitate this avenue for young people. This opportunity may not be there once they start their working life. There is a general tendency for the younger people in our workforce to put off courtship, marriage and childbearing to very much later on in their lives. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, parents and young people should abandon the mindset that students should not court until they have graduated and are established in their careers because by then it becomes increasingly difficult to interact and to start courting. Young people would be well advised to be responsible adults who are accountable in relationship, responsible towards others and sensible in pursuing studies simultaneously with a relationship without jeopardising one or the other.

It has been noted that one in five single British men and women is turning to dating agencies and personal advertisements to start relationship; confirming a trend researchers have found that modern lifestyle and job demands are killing traditional courtship. Sir, credible web-sites run by our Government agencies or reputable private organisations that ensure correct and certified data of individuals will be useful. I believe that, in the IT era, this channel will prove to be the preferred choice for many of our IT savvy and busy young people to acquaint and befriend each other.

As the trend is for Singapore families to get smaller, extended families will not be the norm soon. And, since they are all working, many will become too busy for interaction with families and friends. Such a trend, Sir, is bad and must be addressed. Strengthening family ties, better bonding with extended families and neighbourliness are areas worth cultivating. Community-based organisations should organise more activities in grassroots programmes to promote these virtues. Our CDCs, CCCs, CCMCs,

Column: 741

RCs and Town Councils should actively promote and support more of such activities.

Medical

Lastly, I would like to touch on the medical aspects of procreation. In Singapore, one in five women has kids when she is 35 years old or older. Sir, this figure far exceeds the developed world average. Pregnancy in older women carries increased risks for mums and babes; these include miscarriages, pregnancy complications and complicated deliveries. Publicity and promotion of earlier childbearing age should be done extensively to educate the public on the medical disadvantages of pregnancies in older women. MOH can promote this message through the Health Promotion Board or in collaboration with other organisations. I have suggested for more risk-pooling insurance schemes for medical expenses, and maternity insurance should be provided for from our Medisave to insure couples for complications of pregnancies, childbirths and premature babies that can incur financial burdens to young couples.

The prevalence of infertility in Singapore is high. One in five married couples finds it difficult to conceive. More should be done to help these couples in their dilemma. We should re-look ways of assisting and increasing fertility success such as in the funding of existing non-profitable fertility enhancement centres and the funding of sperm and ova banks. The Medisave withdrawal for in-vitro fertilisation (IVF) should not be capped anymore and we should allow the use of Medisave for up to at least three treatment cycles and facilitate infertile couples to afford the expensive treatment. Sir, in 1987, the one-week sterilisation paid-leave was removed. I would like to suggest that now we should have a replacement of such leave as one-week procreation leave

Column: 742

borne by the Government to facilitate expecting mothers to attend antenatal check-ups in the early stages of pregnancy and to allow infertile couples to seek treatment.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, in the past, we often heard our Government asking our people to bite the bullet and take the painful measures. Today, in conclusion, I call on our Government to respond and take the bitter fiscal measures to save our nation.

Dr Jennifer Lee (Nominated Member): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, it is kind of hard to follow Dr Lily Neo who has already listed all of the various measures. I saw Minister, Mr Lim, taking frantic notes. But, Sir, I am very happy indeed to hear the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance say that we will finally take a comprehensive approach to address the problem of our plummeting fertility rate, instead of the rather tentative and piecemeal attempts that we have made in the past to encourage Singaporean couples to have more babies.

That this issue resonates with Singaporeans at large is clear from the media coverage, the amount of feedback that has been received in this week since, and

the number of MPs who have been and will be rising to speak on various aspects of the subject. I do not propose to go into a comprehensive listing of measures that I may have to suggest, as these have already been amply covered by many hon. colleagues. I would, however, like to bring up a couple of areas of concern.

DPM Lee spoke of the need for a holistic and coherent approach, of looking for long-term solutions, and of the need for patiently working on changing attitudes and mindsets. Unfortunately, even as he said this, the principles he set out for guiding Government's thinking on the subject displayed the prevalence of

Column: 743

some ongoing distinctly old mindsets, in particular the singling out again of the better educated higher income women as a group needing special attention and incentives. I would venture to say, however, that with our fertility rate at an all time low of 1.26, we should be desperate enough to depart from this constant focus only on our better educated women. It is a simple matter of mathematics - we really need every woman in the reproductive age group encouraged to consider having babies, not just those with secondary education and above.

It is a fallacy to think that the higher educated mothers need more attention. Experience elsewhere has shown that companies are much more accommodating to higher skilled women with regard to good work-life balance programmes and schemes, and it is the lower skilled ones who have difficulty accessing any degree of flexibility of accommodation of their needs. Also, lower educated and lower income couples are the ones for whom two incomes in the family are a necessity, and the availability and affordability of childcare and other support and arrangements are a real problem.

Making a distinction between lower and higher educational groups is alienating and, I think, counter-productive. We have already, in the past, targeted incentives at the better educated women. Now, rather than repeating the refrain, perhaps we should simply make sure instead that the children from lower income households have indeed every opportunity in our society to make good, with universal access to education, financial and other assistance where it might be necessary.

In the follow-up to the Budget Statement, Minister Lim Hng Kiang, who has the challenging assignment to come

Column: 744

up with the specific proposals by National Day, shared some preliminary thoughts with regard to some areas that are being looked at, namely, extended maternity leave, child and infant care, work-life balance and financial support. I fully agree with, notably, Deputy Speaker Lim Hwee Hua and Mdm Halimah Yacob's comments with regard to maternity leave and with the need to change mindsets regarding sharing of the responsibility for parenting.

The Minister correctly identified that many working mums feel that our current eight weeks of maternity leave is too short, and leaving the baby at home and returning to work at the end of that period is both wrenching and stressful. But what is the right number of weeks or months? When does child minding or child rearing end? Two options were proposed - four months and six months, with varying levels of pay. I think it is without question that Government will have to pick up the tab, as it would run counter to our efforts to try to keep Singapore attractive as a cost competitive place to do business, to lay that burden directly and upfront on companies.

But the financial impact of extended maternity leave is only one of the tough questions that arises. The second is the issue of disruption to work when an employee is away for, say, six months of maternity leave. Employers and colleagues are likely to view this without much enthusiasm. So, extended maternity leave is a double-edged sword for women, as indeed are other, what might be termed, "family friendly" benefits, if these are to be targeted solely at working mums and seen as an accommodation to them. Companies will come to view married women as less desirable employees to have. Unless anti-discriminatory hiring laws are enacted concurrently, extended maternity leave carries significant risks for women that it will come to the detriment of their job and career prospects.

Column: 745

This brings us to something very fundamental in the equation in the decision process with regard to the number of children couples choose to have. If the burden, so to speak, of adjustment and accommodation falls largely upon women, then in the longer-term, women will still opt to have smaller families or no children at all, simply because the sacrifice called for is more than they are willing to make.

Mr Tan Soo Khoon quoted the low fertility rates of Italy and Spain in the context of the extended maternity leave that they have as something to be considered when looking at maternity leave. But there is, in fact, another reason that has been identified as to why these countries in Southern Europe have such poor fertility rates. And that is, in fact, they are very traditional societies with very strong gender stereotyping of roles, and that the women largely bear the burden of all of the various family issues. And this is, mind you, when you take into consideration that they are largely Roman Catholic countries with the prohibition of use of contraception notwithstanding, you still have no luck there with the Southern European countries.

So, this whole issue of sharing of responsibilities of parenting cannot be done away with. And the subject of involvement of fathers in parenting was not touched upon at all either by the DPM or Minister Lim, except that when the latter was asked why paternity leave was not an option proposed, he started laying the groundwork, I suspect, for saying no by listing all the reasons why this was not going to work, even as he said that it was open to the public to give him feedback. If we are to succeed in raising our fertility rate in the long term, we must look at how to involve fathers much more in child minding and child rearing. The job of parenting must be fully shared between mothers and fathers. The perceived

Column: 746

burden when shared might turn out not to be so burdensome after all.

There are growing numbers of Singapore men, I think, who are willing to participate and take responsibility, but we must support and facilitate their taking part in the process of bringing up the kids and taking more responsibility. While this would take much time and effort, to see any significant change in mindsets, all the more reason that the message must be clear and consistent and immediate. We should not be waiting some more to be really making real efforts here. I would therefore go further than Mrs Lim Hwee Hua and Mdm Halimah Yacob and, in fact, Dr Lily Neo's suggestion of 10 days of paternity leave. I would propose to the Minister and his committee that should they, in fact, propose extended maternity leave, this indeed be called parental leave instead, and that eligibility for the leave be tied to the father taking one month of the four or six months, not concurrent with his wife for child minding. And it should be a case that if dad does not use it, the couple loses it. So, it is mandatory that if they want the parental leave, father should be involved as well.

I can see the looks of disbelief from the Frontbench, but I think it is important to make a start. I believe Mrs Lim Hwee Hua has talked about an educational campaign on shared responsibilities, and I think educational campaigns will only go that far. I think you need to go beyond that and actually push that the dads do participate, and this is one way to get started. I may sound ridiculous to the men in the House, but I think it is important enough and I am willing to sound ridiculous to give it a try.

As child rearing, in fact, does not end at eight weeks, six months, or a year or two even, I am happy to hear that the Government will be looking also into increasing subsidies for child and infant care, as well as exploring other family

Column: 747

day-care options to address the problem of looking after baby after the period of parental leave is over.

Apart from the quality of care provided, the convenience of location of a childcare centre is an important factor. The siting of child and infant care centres at the workplace makes life much more convenient, but comes with a significant price tag and, very often, individual smaller companies especially may not have enough staff with children in the pre-school age to justify setting up such a centre of their own. To address this situation, I had, on occasions in the past, previously appealed to the Minister for National Development to consider requiring developers of business and industrial complexes above a certain size to set aside space for childcare or multi-service centres with rentals kept low, but to no avail. I dare say that MND did not think it their responsibility to help the Singapore stork.

So, I shall take the opportunity now to redirect my proposal to DPM Lee instead, since he has larger clout, with the hope that this can be included as part of the holistic package of measures to raise our fertility rate. I trust that Minister Lim and his working committee will be able to get all Ministries across the board to take ownership of this effort rather than to dismiss suggestions made to them as not within their remit or interest.

Back to the issue of childcare centres. It has been brought up in the Minister for National Development's reply in the past that developers would feel rather imposed upon. But if gross floor area exemption could be granted for the space, this would help to ease that problem and they would not then feel so unduly penalised by the requirement. This way, employees of many companies sited within such complexes would have a childcare centre

Column: 748

conveniently and helpfully located close by. And with their combined numbers, this would make the running of such a centre a viable option.

Before I move on to comment briefly on a separate subject, I must make an observation that the recent months have seen very encouraging developments in the education system, presenting students with more diversity of routes to tertiary education, easing the pressures related to mastering Chinese language and, most recently, the signalling of the departure from the academic ranking of schools. As the pressures of our education system are invariably featured very high on any listing of the stresses of bringing up a child, I dare say that if this promising trend continues, we may find that the hero in our Singapore baby saga turns out to be the Minister for Education! So, please do keep up this promising trend in terms of the measures to ease the perceived difficulties and challenges that our kids have struggled with in the system.

Before I conclude, moving away from issues on procreation, I have one observation to make with regard to Medisave top-ups for the above 50s. We all appreciate the indication of the importance that Government places on managing healthcare costs and the attention it is paying to the needs of older Singaporeans that this gesture signals. However, my observation is that while the gesture was well intentioned, it is, in fact, not a very good use of the money.

As we have been saying with regard to means testing, we would like to target Government subsidies to those who need it. The $50 to $200 deposited into the Medisave accounts of those over 50s, who need it will, I can assure you, not be enough. The same amount deposited into the Medisave accounts of those over 50s who do not need it will be irrelevant, and hence wasted. The $104 million will end up neither providing adequate relief to the

Column: 749

needy nor even gain much goodwill for the Government in the process. I would therefore like to ask DPM Lee to reconsider and redirect the $104 million to Medifund instead, as this will then indeed be used to give assistance to those who truly need it.