Follow us on Telegram for the latest updates: https://t.me/mothershipsg

On Apr. 20, after Minister for Health Ong Ye Kung called out opposition MPs for their approaches to Parliamentary debate, Workers' Party MP Leon Perera and Progress Singapore Party NCMP Hazel Poa spoke to clarify their parties' positions.

Ong was responding to both Perera's and PSP's Leong Mun Wai's speeches that were made in Parliament on Apr. 19, 2023, with Perera having addressed Deputy Prime Minister Lawrence Wong's remarks.

The tea break that was not meant to be

After the speech, Speaker Tan Chuan-Jin proposed to take a break. "The key to happiness is having a tea break."

While his remarks had drawn brief laughter from the Members of Parliament, he realised that Perera raised his hand to request to speak, and allowed Perera to respond.

Perera said, "Sorry to stand in the way of the break. I will keep it very brief. I just wanted to thank the minister for his responses to my speech and I just have two points of clarification."

Ask if Ong agrees to disagree

"Philosophic differences"

Perera first asked Ong to clarify if he acknowledges or agrees that their "different views" on the Net Investment Returns Contributions (NIRC) ceiling is a "philosophic difference" but "not a difference that we have have not explained".

"We have put our proposals, talked about where the financing will come from, Professor Jamus Lim and other WP MPs have explained and put forward proposals for financing and different ideas we put across, and the minister referred to one of them which is to raise the (NIRC) ceiling."

NIRC comprises i) up to 50% of the Net Investment Returns (NIR) on the net assets invested by GIC, MAS, and Temasek; and ii) up to 50% of the Net Investment Income (NII) derived from past reserves from the remaining assets.

He then asked Ong if he acknowledges "in the same vein" that WP does put forward "concrete ideas" that PAP may disagree with.

"Some of the ideas we can debate, and agree to disagree but there are alternatives and i mentioned some of those alternatives that we have put forward in the past in my speech."

"Balancing exercise"

Perera’s second point was he asked if Ong agrees that it's a "balancing exercise" on the point of future generations.

"If conditions become too difficult and liveability becomes damaged too much for the current generation, that will affect our fertility and there may be fewer people in the future generations to enjoy the benefits that the reserves and the other things are meant to provide."

Ong affirms balance best struck at half-half

Ong first addressed Perera's second "balancing exercise" point for the future generation. He replied that "balance is best struck" with a 50/50 split, an "equal apportionment".

Ong raised the example of the Hokkien song "One Half" (一人一半), which had a line that went "a half for each person, then the relationship will not disperse".

"If you divide things (in) half, you preserve the relationship, you preserve the peace. The song didn't go...it doesn't say you get 60 per cent you get 40 per cent, you preserve the peace. There is wisdom to half-half."

He then recounted the proverbial story of foxes dividing a piece of meat. When the meat was first divided with a 60/40 split, the fox who had gotten the smaller piece of meat took a bite at the bigger piece of meat in order to make his own piece bigger.

The other fox then did the same thing. "They keep taking bites until in the end there was nothing left," Ong said.

Ong said that he remembered the story since young, not because it was interesting but because it was a "lesson in values".

"It's a matter of values and principles. For future generations that are not born, we should honour half-half. And it's in our constitution now, we don't want to change it too easily."

The WP's position on GST

Then referring to Perera's first question, Ong said that the WP has indeed raised many ideas, as he pointed out in his speech.

He asked if the WP could clarify whether they support the Goods and Services Tax (GST) system as a whole or whether their position is that they support GST staying at seven per cent, but not at the increased rate of nine per cent.

Ong asked if the WP is contemplating "not having the GST system," as he recalled that the WP has always been against the GST, although he said he could be mistaken. If that's the case, Ong would say it "does not make sense", as it is neither viable nor serious, as it is a crucial source of revenue. However, if the WP accepts having the GST but not hiking it to nine per cent, the PAP would have a different view.

Perera replied that WP had laid out the position during the debates on the GST hike, which was a few years back, that they "accept the reality of GST at 7 per cent" because the revenue generated is "so substantial" that it's become "such a structural part of the government revenue mix", and that to bring it down to zero would involve "too many other trade-offs".

"So we do accept that the GST at 7 per cent is something that we do not oppose, but we oppose the hike to 8 per cent and 9 per cent," Perera said.

After Perera's clarification, Ong pointed out that WP's stance brings the issue to what is the difference between two percentage points and how WP proposes to make up for the difference.

Ong said that among WP's proposals is to shift the NIRC ceiling, which he thinks they disagree fundamentally.

Ong's views of the roles of the ruling & opposition parties

Ong then went on to say :

"We can debate issues, we can point out where are the shades of differences, where are the areas that PAP government say we do this and WP opposition say let's do a bit more, where are the areas with fundamental differences in the end.

For this whole system to work, for this House to be a constructive chamber for debate, for us to serve the people well, we also have to decide, between us we have to uphold good politics."

Ong then laid out what he considered to be the different roles of both a ruling and opposition party should be.

He explained that he thinks Singaporeans expect the governing party to be strong, competent, with integrity, and able to "deliver the goods".

"We will have checks and balances but we need that agility and the strength in order to serve Singapore well," Ong added.

Understands S'poreans want strong government, but don't believe in absolute power

Ong said he believes that Singaporeans want a strong, competent government, and does not believe its power should be absolute.

He also thinks the opposition needs to present alternatives so that people "have a basis of decision" and "have a basis to compare".

Ong said that but in doing so, the opposition had to do "homework" to ensure their proposals are credible, and he feels there is enough publicly available data that can be accessed.

He also feels it is important that the opposition take a stand on "sensitive issues", such as the repeal of Section 377A, and not "hedge".

"Pick a clear stand so that the people have a measure of what the party truly stand for," Ong said, in a possible reference to the WP deciding to lift the whip on the 377A debate and motion to repeal, which led to some WP MPs voting in favour and others voting against.

He added that opposition parties should be "consistent" in their proposed alternatives.

Political parties should carry themselves well

Ong then talked about how all political parties should "ensure our leaders and our representatives carry ourselves well."

"So that people know that we are people of integrity and honesty, that we have a heart for the people, we are doing this for the people.

There will be moments of truth when bad things happen. Members misbehave or something illegal got uncovered within the party. How we handle them. These are moments of truth. It gives people a deep evaluation of what is the core of this political party."

Ong said that this is what he feels they need to do to ensure there's "good politics that serve the people, and that the contest between opposition parties is just the "part and parcel of political contestation".

"But in many ways, we are also working together at a time when the political landscape of Singapore is evolving. The people wants good strong government but yet they want checks and balances and opposition," Ong said.

Perera says WP share same goal of better S'pore

Perera responded by reiterating that they have "philosophic differences" but share the same goal of a "stronger and better Singapore"

He then pointed out that WP had offered "differentiated proposals" and in some cases, the government had "moved closer" to such positions.

Back on the GST issue, Perera said that the WP had provided alternative financing proposals that would address the GST shortfall that would occur if GST was not raised by two per cent.

"It is not that we have not explained it, it is not that we have hidden the trade offs, it's not that we have no explanation for how to finance the gap. We have explained it multiple times in the past."

Perera also said that the WP's housing paper in 2019 did not propose a cutback in BTO supply or halting it, but it should taper down when flats hit year 70 in about 12 years' time.

Ong said there are some policies where the two parties are on the same page, and there are others that "are really shades of the same policies".

However, there are fundamental points of differences between the two parties, such as their stance on the NIRC.

PSP says its "never a matter of race"

Poa also stood to respond, saying that she would leave the PSP's secretary general Leong Mun Wai to give a fuller response at a later time, but disputed that the PSP had targeted a particular race when debating the motion on foreign talent policy.

Poa said that the party had claimed that the "growth rate of foreign manpower from a particular nationality is growing at a much faster rate than other nationalities, and that is factual" and that it was "never a matter of race". 

Ong warns that "words can be scary"

Ong replied that the PAP has "always acknowledged" the angst and anxiety of Singaporeans, and he wanted to remind the PSP members that "how we raise issues matters a great deal".

Relating an example of how common neighbourhood problems can have wildly different outcomes depending on the approach, and approaching issues with a "certain racial undertone" could create "sworn enemies out of neighbours".

"Words can be very scary, so be careful what we say, we need to preserve the harmony that is so hard-fought and hard-earned," Ong said.

Related Stories

Top image via Leon Perera/ Facebook, Ong Ye Kung/Facebook & Hazel Poa/ Facebook