Statement from Leader of the House

Mr Speaker, Sir, on 1 March, Ms Sylvia Lim questioned in this House the Government's motives in announcing the increase in the Goods and Services Tax (GST) some three to seven years before the increase is implemented. She said, and I quote, "We do note that in the run-up to the Budget discussion, there were some test balloons being floated out about the fact that the Government needs to raise revenue. And immediately the public seized on the fact that Deputy Prime Minister Tharman and, perhaps, other leaders had earlier said that the Government has enough money for the decade. So, the public pointed out, 'Hey, you know, is this a contradiction?' And I rather suspect, myself, that the Government is stuck with that announcement. Otherwise, if the announcement had not been made, perhaps, we would be debating a GST hike today."

Ms Sylvia Lim was suggesting that the Government would have raised the GST immediately if not for the adverse public reaction when it "floated" the suggestion late last year and if it had not been "stuck" with the previous statement that it had enough money for the decade.

Ms Lim was, in fact, accusing the Government of being untruthful when it said that it had planned ahead and that its proposal to raise the GST between 2021 and 2025 was the result of such planning.

Both the Minister for Finance and the Minister for Law had responded to Ms Lim to explain that there was no basis for her allegations. The first mention of the need for the tax increase was in the Prime Minister's National Day Rally in 2013, more than four years ago. The Minister for Finance reiterated this in his 2017 Budget Statement and again at a constituency function a few months later. The Prime Minister spoke again of the likelihood of a tax increase last November and had expressly referred to the Finance Minister's earlier statements.

Indeed, in the previous term of Government, Deputy Prime Minister Tharman had said during the 2014 Budget Statement and in the 2015 Budget Statement that while the Government had taken steps to ensure that it had sufficient revenue to meet spending needs till the end of this decade, I quote, "we will run into structural deficits if we did not raise revenues in the next decade."

As the Minister for Finance told Ms Lim in this House last Thursday, what Deputy Prime Minister Tharman said in 2014 and 2015 remains true today. The Government has enough money till the end of this decade but, beyond that, it would have to raise taxes to meet rising expenditure needs, especially in healthcare.

The Government never floated test balloons on this matter. It has been deliberate and consistent in all its statements since August 2013.

When presented with the facts, Ms Lim said that her allegations were based on "suspicion", not fact. She admitted that she was not certain of the facts herself but would check on them later. But she did not withdraw her allegations.

The next day, on 2 March, the Minister for Finance issued a statement setting out the facts again and asking Ms Lim, now that she had had an opportunity to check the records, if she would withdraw her allegation, as an hon Member of Parliament should, and apologise to the House. Ms Lim has not answered.

As the Minister for Finance said in this statement, Members of Parliament are entitled to raise suspicions in Parliament, if they honestly believe them – but honest belief requires factual basis. And when clear factual replies have been given, an hon Member of Parliament should either refute them with further facts or acknowledge them and withdraw their allegations, especially if the allegations had insinuated lack of candour or wrongdoing on the part of the Government.

With the clarifications that have been given to the Member by Ministers both in this House and elsewhere, Ms Lim cannot contend that her "suspicion" remains reasonable and honestly-held. Her allegations have been refuted. The facts she has cited have been shown to be inaccurate and she has not raised any further facts to substantiate her suspicion.

In her intervention in Parliament on 1 March, Ms Lim said "there is such thing as Parliamentary privilege". However, Parliamentary privilege does not entitle Members of Parliament to knowingly maintain allegations that have been shown to have no factual basis.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I am speaking to put these facts on the record. Now that Ms Lim has been apprised of the facts, I request that she withdraw her allegation that the Government had floated test balloons on the need to raise revenues within this term and had intended to raise the GST immediately, and apologise to this House, before the end of this Sitting of Parliament on Thursday, 8 March 2018.

Mr Speaker, I note that the hon Member Ms Sylvia Lim is not in this House. I will extend a copy of my Statement to her. Thank you.

Order. The Clerk will now proceed to read the Order of the day.