Parliament Highlights - 10 Sep 2012

MND tightens tender rules, including single-bid deals
Minister Khaw says NParks could have called for bike quotations again to get better deal
By Phua Mei Pin, The Straits Times, 11 Sep 2012

TENDER procedures have been tightened by the Ministry of National Development (MND), including requiring all deals with only one bid to be approved by the chief executive or deputy chief executive of its agencies.

The move was announced in Parliament yesterday by its Minister Khaw Boon Wan in his reply to queries from three MPs on the Brompton bike saga.

The National Parks Board (NParks) had bought 26 of these foldable bicycles and the $2,200 price tag of each led to a public outcry that grew louder when it was revealed that the tender received a quotation from only one company.

The NParks officer involved has been suspended and is under investigation by the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB) for possible breaches of the procurement procedure.

In his detailed account of the decision-making process that led to the buying of the bikes, Mr Khaw also cited another measure to improve oversight of the procurement process.

Its statutory boards, like the Housing Board, for example, have extended the opening period of their online tenders from four to seven working days, to encourage more suppliers to take part.

This is in line with the change in rules across the public service announced by Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam last month in Parliament.

He had said the bidding period for contracts of between $3,000 and $70,000 would be extended from four to seven days.

The MND's departments are also free to call for quotations again and extend the tender bidding period if they feel it would help get more competitive bids.

In explaining the way the Brompton bike tender was conducted, Mr Khaw stressed that "we do not and will not condone any wrongdoing".

But he defended the buying of the bikes, saying it was especially useful for female officers who can fold and carry them on board buses when going from place to place to do their inspection.

He said he was convinced after he cycled on the park connectors. In some stretches "we actually got to carry the bicycles up the overhead bridges", he added.

Still, NParks could have called for quotations again to get more bids, he said.

"With greater competition, I feel that NParks might have gotten a better deal."

NParks set the maximum price of $2,200 per bike after it did market research on various models and their retail prices, he added.

Replying to Mr Pritam Singh (Aljunied GRC) on the role of online media in the saga, Mr Khaw said he first knew of the purchase from a story in Chinese daily Lianhe Zaobao.

Also, netizens' observation that the NParks officer was Facebook friends with the successful bidder was already known to the ministry's internal audit team.

It also found rival bike suppliers among the officer's 300 Facebook friends, he said.

But "what was material to our decision to refer the case to the CPIB were some disclosures by certain parties interviewed by the audit team", said Mr Khaw.

Replying to Ms Lee Bee Wah (Nee Soon GRC), he said NParks officers were using expensive bikes they owned for their work.

"Should an employer continue to take advantage of this? I think the management decided that they should provide (the bicycles) to some - not to everyone - depending on needs."

$43m plan to build cycle paths in 7 estates

Other safety initiatives include talks, exhibition, handbook on etiquette

By Maria Almenoar, The Straits Times, 11 Sep 2012

THE number of accidents involving cyclists injured or killed has gone down by 17 per cent between 2008 and last year.

Still, every fatality is one too many, Parliamentary Secretary for Transport Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim said as he outlined measures to keep cyclists safe in response to six MPs' questions.

These include a $43 million project to build dedicated off-road paths for cyclists in seven neighbourhoods. These paths are primarily for cycling within towns, to the nearest MRT station or market, for example.

Member of Parliament (Pasir Ris-Punggol GRC) Janil Puthucheary asked if the Government would consider putting in more resources and funds into the safety of those who cycle on the roads.

"No matter how many cycle paths we build, there will always be on-road cycling. There just isn't the possibility of building enough cycle paths," he said.

In response, Dr Faishal, who is is leading a public consultation on road safety and cycling, said cycling behaviour was affected by many things.

"One of the factors to provide safe cycling is to have separate off-road cycling. Beyond that, we will continue to educate the public, not only the cyclists, motorists and beyond, to see how they can care for one another," he said.

Among the educational initiatives the Government has undertaken are enlisting the help of volunteer cycling wardens, conducting road safety talks in schools and worker dormitories, and holding safe cycling exhibitions.

The Land Transport Authority is also producing a new handbook on good cycling etiquette and safety tips for those cycling within their neighbourhood.

Cyclists were found to be at least partly at fault for about half of the accidents recorded in the last four years, said Dr Faishal.

Nominated MP Nicholas Fang asked if more was being done to encourage cycling as an alternative mode of transport.

Dr Faishal said commuters mainly turn to their bicycles for the first and last leg of travel, and this has increased in intensity in the last few years.

"If you go to the interchanges, MRT station, you look at the bicycle racks that have been provided... very highly utilised," he said.

Nevertheless, he added, the Transport Ministry was looking to link up intra-town cycling paths so that cyclists can commute between towns.

In response to MPs' questions on penalties, Dr Faishal said the Traffic Police and Home Affairs Ministry were reviewing cycling penalties to ensure that they were commensurate with the severity of offences.

National Day Parade costs rise to $17.2m
By Goh Chin Lian, The Straits Times, 11 Sep 2012

THE bill for the National Day Parade has more than trebled in 10 years, reaching $17.2 million last year.

Costs have been climbing since the annual bash to celebrate Singapore's independence was moved to the Padang and also the Marina Bay floating platform, said Defence Minister Ng Eng Hen.

The show, organised by the Singapore Armed Forces, was moved from the National Stadium after 2006, when it was decided that the venue would be torn down for the new Singapore Sports Hub.

"These sites required substantial preparatory work for the show and spectator stands," Dr Ng said in a written parliamentary answer to Non-Constituency MP Gerald Giam. Mr Giam had asked for the costs for 10 years and details like the manpower costs for civil servants and soldiers in the parade.



The most expensive show was in 2010, for the 45th anniversary celebrations at the Padang. It cost more than $20 million, almost double the amount spent in 2005.

The higher expenditure was due to hardening of the field to withstand a heavier load and putting up LED screens as well as supporting towers for a visual display, Dr Ng said.

The show accounts for about half the spending - this goes into items such as costumes, props, lighting, special effects and multimedia equipment.

The other half goes into infrastructure development, improvement works, logistics, supplies, publicity and security, he added.

For these items, manpower costs are imputed and not directly calculated, so the Defence Ministry is not able to give an accurate figure, Dr Ng said.

On average, the parade involves 10,000 SAF and Home Team personnel and 5,000 volunteers from companies, schools and other organisations, with very few civil servants directly involved, he said.

The participants spend many hours a week over several months to prepare, and are given food, transport, props and costumes.

"The commitment and contributions of these participants are entirely voluntary and far exceed what they receive," Dr Ng said.

He also noted that 125,000 people watch the parade live on five occasions - the three National Education shows for students, the preview and the show on the actual day. The show also attracts more than two million TV viewers each year, and many more follow it from abroad or online.

He said: "The National Day Parade is the most significant highlight on our national calendar and one that brings Singaporeans here and overseas, of all races and religions, together to celebrate our independence".

New law abolishes pensions for office-holders and MPs
Move will strengthen principle of clean wage system, says DPM Teo
By Janice Heng, The Straits Times, 11 Sep 2012

GOVERNMENT office-holders who turn 55 can no longer collect pensions if they remain in office.

As for those who have been accruing pensions, their pension amount is frozen at the value reached on May 20 last year.

Yesterday, Parliament passed a Bill to make these changes - and others related to politicians' pensions - into law.

The changes were proposed in a White Paper on ministerial salaries that Parliament debated and endorsed in January. They were already in effect administratively.

The Parliamentary Pensions (Abolition) Bill abolishes pensions for office-holders and MPs.

Office-holders appointed on or after May 21 last year will not get pensions. Neither will those who, by that date, had served for fewer than eight years.

Office-holders with eight or more years of service before May 21 last year, and current MPs who were elected before Jan 1, 1995, have been accruing pensions. But these have been frozen since May 21 last year, at the level reached a day before on May 20.

"The removal of pensions will further strengthen the principle of clean wage and align the retirement scheme of office-holders and Members of Parliament to the Central Provident Fund system," said Deputy Prime Minister Teo Chee Hean, who is also Minister in Charge of the Civil Service.

A clean wage system with no hidden perks was one of the principles that guided the committee to review ministerial salaries, and which produced the White Paper.

Appointed by Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong after the general election in May last year, the panel also recommended large cuts to political salaries, and changes in how bonuses are determined.

Yesterday, Mr Christopher de Souza (Holland-Bukit Timah GRC) noted that the changes were the result of "a deliberate and widely debated consultative process" between the Government and stakeholders.

This showed the Government's "attitude of responsiveness and a willingness to be persuaded by rational, well thought-out views put forth by our citizens", he said.

Nominated MP R. Dhinakaran also rose in support, but had some suggestions. One was that MPs or office-holders found to be corrupt should have pension rights removed permanently.

Currently, the president has discretion to transfer such a person's pension to his family, or reinstate it after the corrupt person has served his sentence.

Noting that the same approach is taken in the case of corrupt civil servants, Mr Teo said it "is meant to provide discretion during circumstances when transfer or reinstatement may be warranted".

Also passed yesterday was a Bill that removes Parliament's power to grant a pension to a former president - another of the White Paper's recommendations.

The same Bill removed Parliament's power to grant a pension to a current or past president's dependants when he dies.

Although the White Paper did not call for this, the change is "in line with the spirit of the recommendation to discontinue pension benefits for the president", said Mr Teo. Thus far, no president has ever been granted a pension.

Bill to protect personal data tabled
By Matthias Chew., The Straits Times, 11 Sep 2012

A BILL to protect personal data was introduced yesterday which, if passed, will restrict organisations from collecting, using and disclosing such information.

People will also have the right to ask organisations to provide data that they hold about themselves and how the data was used or disclosed in the past year.

The Bill, however, will not cover government agencies.



The Personal Data Protection Bill will also provide for people to opt out of unsolicited calls and text messages through a do-not-call registry.

Organisations that make these calls will have to check the register before calling, and those making the calls or sending the messages will have to identify the organisation behind them.

Not doing either may result in a fine of up to $10,000.

The Bill also provides for a Personal Data Protection Commission, with the power to investigate breaches, to be set up to enforce the new law.

It will also advise the Government on data protection matters.

The Bill, which was originally slated to be introduced in Parliament early this year, was delayed by several rounds of public consultation to take into account the concerns of industry.

It was one of the four Bills introduced in Parliament yesterday. The other three are:

- An amendment to the Voluntary Sterilisation Act to require people with hereditary illnesses to give consent before they can be sterilised if they are deemed to be capable of doing so.Family members who want to sterilise a person without the mental capacity to decide will be required to seek a court order. 

- Changes to various statutes relating to the upcoming redistribution of ministerial portfolios. 

- An amendment to the Civil Law Act which will make it easier for more assets belonging to those who die without legal heirs to be given to "moral claimants", or those whom the deceased may have reasonably been expected to leave his assets to.

CPF members can top up in-laws' accounts
By Janice Heng, The Straits Times, 11 Sep 2012

FROM next year, you can top up the Central Provident Fund (CPF) Special or Retirement Accounts of the parents and grandparents of your spouse, in addition to your own family members.

This is under the Minimum Sum Topping-Up (MSTU) scheme, which also gives a tax relief of up to $7,000 if you make the top-ups in cash.

The scheme was extended in response to suggestions from the public, said Acting Minister for Manpower Tan Chuan-Jin, and is one of several changes being made to the CPF Act that Parliament passed yesterday.

Currently, it allows CPF members to top up the accounts of their own parents, grandparents, spouse and siblings.

The changes will also make it easier for people to top up their own CPF accounts.

Now, they can top up their Retirement Accounts either under the MSTU scheme or by making a voluntary contribution. If they want to top up their Special Accounts, they can do so using their Ordinary Account savings or make the top-up in cash through the MSTU scheme.

But people found the multiple channels confusing, noted Mr Tan. So, by the end of the year, the schemes will be merged so that all contributions will be made under the MSTU only.

Another change aims to resolve disputes between co-owners of properties who sell them after age 55.

Those who sell their property before they turn 55 must pay back the money withdrawn for the property, plus the interest it would have earned, into their CPF account. For those aged 55 and above, they need only pay back enough to reach the Minimum Sum that they would have to keep in the account.

Co-owners might then be unhappy if the "refunds" they each have to make do not match the original amount of CPF that they used, said Mr Tan.

While they can distribute the cash proceeds among themselves to even it out, this could be contentious if they are not on good terms or the property is sold at a loss.



Thus, from Jan 1 next year, those aged 55 and above will face the same refund rule as others. But this does not mean that more money will be tied up: After the refund is made, savings in excess of the Minimum Sum can still be withdrawn.

A minimum age of 16 was also introduced for making CPF nominations, which determine where CPF savings go after death.

Several MPs rose in support of the Bill, but also voiced concerns.

One was Mr Seng Han Thong (Ang Mo Kio GRC), who noted that low- and middle-income earners do not benefit from MSTU tax relief as they pay little or no taxes. Mr Tan replied that they still benefit from the CPF interest, larger GST vouchers and government grants, and Workfare, which tops up their wages.

Oral Answer by Mr Tan Chuan-Jin, Acting Minister for Manpower & Senior Minister of State, National Development, to Parliamentary Question on the Downtown Line Bugis Station Accident

NCMP: Let private operators enjoy same grants as PCF, NTUC
By Goh Chin Lian, The Straits Times, 11 Sep 2012

NON-CONSTITUENCY MP Yee Jenn Jong yesterday proposed levelling the playing field in the childcare sector for private operators to keep fees affordable and drive up quality.

They should get the same grants as non-profit, anchor operators such as the PAP Community Foundation (PCF) and National Trades Union Congress' My First Skool, he said in Parliament.

Non-profit operators get development grants to set up centres in HDB areas and enjoy subsidised rental rates.

Anchor operators are non-profit operators who also receive a recurrent grant to defray the cost of recruiting and developing teachers, to provide affordable and quality childcare for the mass market.

"There is no magic in non-profit or in anchor operators," said Mr Yee, pointing out that their lower fees can be matched by private operators if they, too, get the same benefits.



He cited several examples in the 20-minute speech he made, having filed an adjournment motion that gave him more time to tackle the issue in depth.

One example is the difference in monthly rent of $15,000 or more between non-profit and private operators.

With a typical enrolment of 75 children, non-profit operators have a cost advantage of about $200 per child. Yet their median fees are lower than that of private operators by just a little over $200.

Were they really doing enough to keep fees affordable, he asked.

Mr Yee proposed that the Government extend subsidies to private operators in the same way it does for bus and rail operators, which are not charged the market rate for use of the infrastructure.

But private operators must meet strict criteria on fees and quality, which the Government should control more tightly, he said.

Replying, Minister of State for Community Development, Youth and Sports Halimah Yacob said the current approach has improved childcare and given parents choices.

Commercial entities can also set up a non-profit arm to get the grants given to anchor operators, she noted.

The Government, she added, is looking into making childcare more affordable for low- and middle-income families.

She urged people to give ideas to a committee that is studying how to improve the preschool sector.



Public agencies encouraged to adopt Blue Sky Day
By Kimberly Spykerman, Channel NewsAsia, 10 Sep 2012

The Public Service will continue to encourage more public agencies to adopt the practice of Blue Sky Day where possible, said Deputy Prime Minister Teo Chee Hean.

Blue Sky Day is the term used for a day of the week when employees do not stay late at work so they can have personal and family time.

Mr Teo was responding to a question by Member of Parliament for Aljunied GRC Muhamad Faisal Abdul Manap about the weekly working hours of civil servants.

In a written reply, Mr Teo said that civil servants are required to work an average of 42 hours a week - about the same as companies in various industries, according to labour market surveys by the Manpower Ministry.

Mr Teo noted that Blue Sky Day is gaining traction, and that 35 public service agencies have already introduced the practice on a weekly basis.

He added that civil servants are encouraged to leave work on time every day, as long as doing so does not affect their operational readiness and level of service to the public.

In response to a question about whether the government would consider lowering the number of working hours to 40 a week, Mr Teo said that there is a need for "careful study" of what kind of impact such a move would have on service levels to the public.

A move like that can only be considered if civil servants are confident that they can provide the same level of service in a shorter time. 

Yaacob defends Biennale decision
By Matthias Chew., The Straits Times, 11 Sep 2012

SINGAPORE will not set up a pavilion at next year's Venice Biennale, as it wants to see whether the cost of participating is worth its while.

Despite the millions of dollars spent, only "a handful of artists and curators" have benefited from past shows, said Minister for Information, Communications and the Arts Yaacob Ibrahim, as he defended the decision to pull out of the world's most prestigious visual art show.

Instead, the Government will continue to support individual artists who are invited by the biennale's curated section, he added.

Singapore has taken part in the Venice Biennale six times since 2001, spending an average of over $750,000 each year.

Last year, the Republic's pavilion cost $850,000 and benefited one artist and one curator.

In contrast, the National Arts Council's (NAC's) grants budget for visual arts in financial year 2011 was $1.78 million, and it benefited more than 135 artists and visual arts groups.

Dr Yaacob gave these numbers after Nominated MP Janice Koh, who represents the arts community, queried the NAC's decision to pull out from the Venice showpiece.

The decision caused much dismay among the arts community when it was reported last month, and prompted more than 200 people to sign an open letter last week urging the Government to reconsider.

Yesterday, Dr Yaacob pointed out that feedback on the wisdom of Singapore's participation from various parties was "mixed".

He said: "It would not be prudent to proceed with participation... without first addressing concerns of how public money is best used to maximise benefits for all our artists."

Not having a pavilion at the show, he added, did not mean that Singaporean artists selected for the show's curated segment would stop receiving support.

He also confirmed that the Government hopes to participate again in 2015, when Singapore celebrates its 50th anniversary.

He said: "We hope that when we've done the review thoroughly and when we re-enter Venice Biennale, we can enter with perhaps a lot more pomp and grandeur."

Of bikes and biennales: Getting value for money
By Jeremy Au Yong, The Straits Times, 11 Sep 2012

THE question of how best to spend public funds emerged in relation to two matters yesterday.

But while MPs scrutinised spending in the first instance and indicated that the Government should rein in spending, they did no such thing for the second. In fact, the only parliamentarian to speak on it actually asked for the funding to continue.

The first involved the $57,200 the National Parks Board spent on 26 foldable bicycles for its staff. The second involved $850,000 spent on sending two people from the local arts scene to the Venice Biennale.

On the issue of the now infamous Brompton bikes, Mr Pritam Singh (Aljunied GRC) asked how processes have been tightened since the saga started in June, while Ms Lee Bee Wah (Nee Soon GRC) focused on the absolute value of the bicycles.

Addressing National Development Minister Khaw Boon Wan, Ms Lee asked: "How was the budget of $2,200 (for each bicycle) determined? In my view, this is high. Second question: Are there any other cheaper bicycles that can equally do the job?"

Mr Khaw replied by explaining the decision-making process and outlining the rigour that NParks officers required of their bikes as they go about their daily duties.

It also emerged in Mr Khaw's reply to Ms Lee and Mr Singh that NParks now requires all tenders that attract only a single bid to be approved by the chief executive officer or the deputy CEO of the agency concerned.

About half an hour later, however, when talk turned to Singapore's decision not to participate in next year's Venice Biennale, the subject did not draw questions about funding.

This despite the revelation that participation in the renowned event was expensive and did not yield significant results.

The argument for pulling out of the biennale put forward by Minister for Information, Communications and the Arts Yaacob Ibrahim was that the cost of being involved - around $750,000 each time - could be better spent elsewhere.

He noted that last year, the National Arts Council (NAC) spent $850,000 on the biennale that benefited just two people - one artist and one curator.

By contrast, the grants budget for the whole visual arts sector last year was $1.78 million, and that benefited 135 artists and visual arts groups.

And for all the money spent over the past 10 years of participation, the result has not been a resounding success.

Said Dr Yaacob: "NAC received mixed views from the various stakeholders regarding Singapore's participation in the Venice Biennale.

"On balance, we decided it would not be prudent to proceed with participation in the next Venice Biennale without first addressing concerns of how public money is best used to maximise benefits for all our artists."

Nominated MP Janice Koh was the only one to raise questions in response. She asked how the Government measures the value of the participation in the event and also if Singapore might continue to participate even as it is conducting the review.

No others stood up to ask why the Government had set aside such a large proportion of the arts budget for this nor whether participation could be achieved at a lower cost.

Admittedly, the foldable bicycles and the Venice Biennale are not completely comparable.

The issue with the bicycles is as much about the absolute price of the bicycle as it is about the process in which the bicycles were bought - hence the two different lines of questioning from Ms Lee and Mr Singh.

But while there are no clouds hanging over the procurement processes involved in Singapore's participation in the biennale, it also does raise - or at least should raise - questions about what is the best way to spend public funds.

That there were none could be, as Ms Koh alluded, due to the fact that the benefits from participating in an international art exhibition are so much more difficult to quantify.

Most people have a better sense of how much they would pay for a bicycle.

The encouraging takeaway from this episode is that though there was no public pressure nor questions from MPs, the NAC still reviewed the expenditure and stopped it when it thought it was no longer value for money.