Acknowledgement to the Chair

3.59 pm

The Leader of the House (Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien): Mr Speaker, thank you for the opportunity to speak as we round up 2019's Budget and Committee of Supply debates.

Some months ago, the BBC Global Survey found that three in four people around the world thought their country was divided, and six in ten felt their country was more divided now than it was 10 years ago. With the prevalence of identity politics, many countries today find themselves fractured along partisan lines, or struggling to bring communities across racial and socio-economic divides together. So, I am heartened to see that over the last 10 days, Members of this House were unified by the common goal of creating a better future for all Singaporeans.

In 2017, this Parliament set its teeth on economic transformation; last year, we tackled social inequality. This year, Members seized recent developments in our geopolitical and digital world with the high number of questions received by MCI, MINDEF, MFA and MOH on our diplomatic relations, physical security as well as cybersecurity. The social Ministries also received a record high number of cuts, as significant emphasis was placed on educating and training Singaporeans for the future, and caring for the aged and the vulnerable. MCCY received the highest number of cuts and longest “cut” time reflecting Members’ interest in volunteerism, art and culture, and community relations.

We have had robust debates over the past weeks. I observe that Members agreed on three key things.

First, that we need to put Singaporeans at the heart of our policies. A good many Members stressed that in pursuing economic progress, we must not leave our workers behind. Ms Denise Phua, Prof Daniel Goh, Mr Chong Kee Hiong and Dr Intan reminded us that our workforce needs to be an inclusive one, as those with special needs and those advanced in their years also have much to offer, and ought to be treated with dignity. Miss Cheryl Chan and Prof Lim Sun Sun talked about improving the working environment for women. Putting Singaporeans at the centre of what we do extends also to the social sector. MOH shared plans to improve access to affordable healthcare, and to give every Singaporean outpatient medical subsidy through CHAS. My Ministry has made its focus to ensure that Singaporeans from all walks of life can engage in sports and enjoy the arts. MOE talked about what it will do ensure that every Singaporean has a strong foundation in education, starting from pre-schools. Mr Ang Wei Neng, Mr Charles Chong and Mr Louis Ng urged a re-examination of our approach to educating Singaporeans. And so, with Singaporeans at the core of our policy considerations, we did not shy away from making major changes like removing streaming in Secondary schools.

Second, Members agreed that while we work on the present, we must keep an eye on the future. There are key challenges that lie ahead. Mr Pritam Singh pointed out that we must leverage technology, to ensure that critical functions, like national security, are not affected by our shrinking population. MTI and MCI spoke about how we must focus on innovation and creativity and help our businesses digitalise, to ensure our competitiveness in the future economy and that the purpose of future-proofing our economy is so that our workers will seize the new opportunities that the future will bring.

We were also reminded that we must maintain fiscal prudence so that we do not burden our future generations with our decisions today, and that we must find the next water story in waste and food and be responsible towards our environment, even as effects of climate change will be felt in decades to come. That we are thinking far into the future, planning for the future and acting for the future now is the hallmark of Singapore.

How do we know if the long-term plans we make are going in the right direction? The answer lies in the third theme that has run through this debate. By giving space for civic participation and partnerships in our policies and implementation of plans, we can forge effective solutions, leverage each other’s expertise and strengths, and do good by all Singaporeans.

Several Ministries are conducting public consultations, so that Government and the people can co-develop effective solutions. Through the Tripartite Workgroup on Older Workers, the Government gathered feedback from workers, employers, union leaders and other stakeholders to inform policies to support older workers. MCCY worked with other public agencies to conduct Youth Conversations, where over 8,000 youths came forward to share their perspectives on topics ranging from mental health to social inequality. MSF, MCCY and MOH are building an extensive network of community support and volunteers to care for the elderly and uplift low-income families. To ground our work in designing housing and facilities for assisted living, MND and MOH will be consulting senior citizens and healthcare providers.

Ministries are also working more closely with each other. To address inequality, no fewer than four Ministries have come together to ensure that we deliver practical solutions to help low-income families in Singapore. To help businesses navigate the digital future, Minister Iswaran shared how MCI and the economic agencies are working together to raise the digital capabilities of our SMEs. These follow from initiatives like the Industry Transformation Maps, where Government agencies partner each other to drive enterprise growth, support worker training, and address regulatory matters. In a complex world, combining our expertise, assets and strengths is the best way to overcome challenges. And our public service has the will and ability to do this.

Mr Speaker, on this note of confidence, I would like to conclude the debate by thanking all Members for coming together to weave our strategies to build a stronger fabric for united Singapore. To use the words of Prof Lim, this has been a forum where we are unafraid of asking tough questions of one another. Our Nominated Members of Parliament that debuted this year deserve special mention. I thank them for speaking on a wide range of topics from mental health, volunteerism, retirement adequacy, sport, to the value of the arts and culture. They have researched, studied and presented their case with robustness. Their contributions have enriched the debate.

On behalf of the House, I would also like to thank you, Mr Speaker and your deputies for your stewardship. We are also grateful to the Parliament Secretariat and all those who have helped behind the scenes, including the interpreters, for providing their steadfast support. Thank you, Mr Speaker. [Applause]

4.06 pm

Mr Speaker: It is now my turn. I spent the last year – it is a very long year – thinking about what to say today. I was actually quite tempted to repeat the same speech from last year, not because you would not notice it, because I am sure you paid rapt attention to it last year, but also because some fundamentals actually do not change. At the heart of everything we do and we have heard that, it is that it surely must be about Singaporeans. But as we all know, what is ideal for the individual is not always optimal for society, for Singapore as a whole. What is best for Singapore, as a whole, may not always be maximal for the individual.

And if you add in the perspective of time, there are urgent needs of today and there are also contingencies of tomorrow. There are our pressing wants and desires that are here and now, but there are also those of our children and our children’s children in the many, many years to come.

If we are an inherently selfish society, we will only be preoccupied with the individual and the present. Is this who we are and what we aspire to be?

When we look around the world, some systems are running from pillar to post, from one election cycle to another because the preoccupation is the present, just to get elected. Some systems operate in ways not because the work they do makes sense but how it makes dollars and cents for them. Let me illustrate.

Long-term investments in public infrastructure are not always made because you do not reap the political dividends of these efforts. It takes a long gestation time. By the time the projects are ready, someone else will be benefiting from your generosity. The monies are better spent on initiatives where people respond to, in the way they vote, today. In countries where the systems are corrupt, you will actually initiate these projects, in fact, many projects because that is where you cream off the kickbacks, and you make what you can because sometime you do not know how long you are going to be there. These projects are seldom seen all the way through. Either way, there is precious little long-term planning to talk about. Because it is always about me and it is always about the present.

Are we different? Is there, as Minister Heng Swee Keat puts it, a "Singapore way" where we are actually interested in others and not just self, and where we are actually interested in our future and not just the present?

Otto von Bismarck said, "Politics is the art of the possible, the attainable – the art of the next best." That is where we come in.

These are the blueprints we lay down, and the difficult choices we make here during the Budget to attain the possible.

To do this well, we need to have perspective. We need to have a sense of history, a sense of time and space, where we came from, why and how our story and policies have evolved. We need to know the context and how it and the world are changing. Our citizens too need that perspective.

As we debate this Budget and all its details, we need to remember that this Budget is built upon what has been said by many of you and in the years passed and also based on inputs surfaced by our fellow Singaporeans in many, many different forums. Budgets are built upon Budgets of years gone by. There is always a context and there is always a system in place.

When we consider, for example, the Merdeka Generation Package during this COS, some have asked for more universal and permanent schemes. Actually, a simple search online will yield you an existing menu of universal benefits and schemes. When we begin to understand the context of each group that we are looking at, you then realise that there are differentiated needs as well. Hence, you layer it on with various packages.

There will be those who feel that they are not directly benefiting from the Budget, but it is useful to remember, and we have been through the debates in the last two weeks, that we have honoured so many different groups, but it is also useful for us to cast our eyes back to previous Budgets, where it is clear that we have also benefited in different ways.

In this COS, the well-being of one particular animal was at stake. Many supported the slaughtering of this particular sacred cow, including, surprisingly, Mr Louis Ng. It sounds exciting but it may be disastrous if we do not understand why the cow was put out in the pasture in the first place. Streaming changes are much welcomed but as Minister Ong Ye Kung explained, there was a reason for that cow. While every cow is a good cow, no cow is perfect. There are sometimes unintended consequences. Because over the years, we have learnt that it emits methane gas so, therefore, it impacts environment. So, over the years, as he has shared, we have sought to trim the cow, adjust its diet, sliced off its rump, have a little barbeque, its flanks, and finally, we lay it to rest. It is a far less dramatic story but I think a more accurate one and a recognition of the work done by many to get to where we are today.

I know that the slaying of sacred cows sounds bold, it sounds daring, even romantic, perhaps. Dramatic changes always seem exciting. But I think it is useful for us to also remember, with a sense of perspective, but that is not the objective. Change is not the purpose. Better outcomes are. So, even as we make bold moves, never do it for its own sake.

Some have asked if the various Budget goodies are part of a cynical election scheme? Honestly, I have no idea when the election will be but what I do know is that our Constitution requires us to maintain a balanced Budget over each term of Government. Towards the end of each term, we have better clarity of the overall budget and how it affords us the space to carry out strategic moves if we need them. So, having a perspective of how the system works may help us understand why some of these major initiatives can be launched at this stage.

And let us also begin to have a sense of reality and see how the world operates elsewhere. Honestly, if this were an election budget, you will not see us not budgeting for the Merdeka Generation package here. We will shift the burden to the future. That is what most governments do. Because the monies can be spent to make all of us happier in so many different ways. A politically astute government would use this dominance and wherewithal to justify even more spending rather than still talk about prudence, about balance, about trade-offs, possible GST increases in the next term. It is actually incredibly politically naïve to do so! Which government in the world would embark on this when they have funds and reserves to do so many more things to keep the electorate happy?

But that is not the way we are. And I do not just mean the Government but I would like to also highlight that the Opposition, at least this Opposition presently in the House, and our Nominated Members of Parliament over the years, in spite of occasional differences and disagreements over details, we support this approach and do not just seek wanton political largesse and populism.

But we can only do this, we can only take this approach if – and only if – our fellow Singaporeans support it. This can only happen if they also understand the issues that are grappled with and debated here, and have that same sense of perspective.

But do Singaporeans take reference from what is articulated here or from other sources? Are distortions purveyed online much more seductive? Are we Singaporeans very evidence-based in the way we look at things? We talk about false and fake news impacting perceptions. This is really not trivial at all because they erode trust, they erode confidence, and, ultimately, they undermine leaders and institutions, including the Parliament. When that happens, you lose the mandate and space to make the difficult decisions for the long haul and the greater good even as you endeavour to make life better for individuals today.

4.15 pm

When that happens, there will be a reversion to the norm. And the norm is an absence of long-term planning. And what will Singapore look like then when that does not exist?

In my inaugural speech in Parliament, I said that we, Parliament, need to be a beacon from where Singaporeans can take reference, with confidence, when addressing and understanding issues that will matter greatly for our collective well-being. To be this beacon and to do this well, we need to gain the trust and respect of the public.

This is our business.

In the past two weeks, if we actually listen to the points made by the ruling party, the opposition, the NMPs, the front bench, you would find that different perspectives are shared and articulated. We have an opposition that does not shy away from making sharp challenges. Notwithstanding the fact that there is no tussle over balloons this year, whether trial, balloons or otherwise, you will find Members of Parliament on both sides of the House pushing and pointing out issues that may not sit comfortably with the Government. That is how it should be. I urge you to continue in this vein and for the Government to be open as you have been to this robust discourse.

It is only if we as a Parliament can remain relevant, trusted and respected, our people will afford us that space and mandate to lead and chart the way forward.

We will therefore be able to put people and our society at the center of everything that we do; plan for the present as well as the long term, and grapple with all the difficult challenges and trade-offs that need to be address.

Indeed, we are not done building Singapore. While we may not have the same mudflats to metropolis transformation on the same scale on many fronts, we can continually improve, and we will, and extend our edge so that we can better provide for our people.

But we can have a mudflats to metropolis transformation in the kind of people we want to be, and the society we can be. Ms Irene Quay's sharing and story on the volunteering journey is inspiring, and is exactly what SG Cares is all about.

As we begin to volunteer, as we begin to lose ourselves in the service of others, we will begin to change, and we will find ourselves as a society where we care not just about self, but about others, and also about the future. The wonderful thing about it is that it actually does not cost us very much, except a bit of organisation and a bit of our time. And it is something that every one of us here, and every Singaporean can do something about.

When we become that kind of society, then I would say that we will live long and prosper, and that our best years are truly, truly ahead of us. [Applause.]