Mr Speaker, Sir, thank you for giving me this opportunity to join in the debate.
Sir, the key point of our debate is whether the Government should be involved in business, especially in areas of business where the private sector is already capable of providing those services. If that is the focus of our debate, then I am utterly puzzled why NTUC cooperatives were brought into the discussion. This is because NTUC cooperatives are not Government-linked companies. The NTUC cooperatives are not owned or managed by the Government.
Perhaps, this erroneous perception may have arisen from the fact that some NTUC leaders are MPs of the ruling Party. But if we go on this basis, then we also have the ruling Party MPs in this House who work for large companies and business groups in various sectors. Surely, we will consider it absurd to call their companies Government-linked.
Sir, I feel strongly that parliamentary debate must be based on correct facts. Only then can we have proper and useful debate. If we know that a particular view, even if it is one that is widely held in the public mind, is an erroneous one, then we must seek to correct it rather than to repeat it and to add to the misunderstanding. Leadership is not about running ahead of the mob.
Given that NTUC cooperatives are not GLCs, then I would suppose that their inclusion for mention in this debate must be because of a perception that they can be big, or that there are NTUC cooperatives in different areas, or that NTUC cooperatives may have unfair means of edging out smaller competitors.
Let me take each argument in turn. If we say that the problem with NTUC cooperatives is that some of them are big - as if bigness is itself a sin - then we have to broaden that to include all big players in all economic sectors. For example, our property sector is dominated by a small number of big players, TLC and private sector alike. So, what are we going to do to level that playing field for the smaller developers? But that discussion is for another time, because the Motion today is not about curtailing potential excesses by big business but on the role of GLCs in the Singapore economy.
Or, perhaps, the misgiving about NTUC cooperatives is that they are present in a number of different sectors. We make no apology for this, because NTUC cooperatives are set up in areas where the common man needs value-for-money services for everyday living. And wherever NTUC cooperatives are present, they have the effect of moderating prices and improving quality through providing benchmarking.
By our sincerity and hard work, we have earned the trust and patronage of our members and customers. Our cooperatives compete for the support and business of our customers every business day, against strong competition from both local and foreign players. Our members and customers know that NTUC and NTUC cooperatives care, that we do not take them for granted and that we are not some cold, opportunistic, profit-crazy outfit out to squeeze the last dollar out of them. As Mdm Halimah Yacob said yesterday, for several years now, we measure the performance of NTUC cooperatives by a set of social indicators. And the NTUC publishes this report card each year. Our cooperatives also publish their social indicators in their annual reports, and table them at their annual general meetings.
Sir, we have seen the excesses of the free market, in the wake of globalisation. It is not just the Enrons or the barons of bankruptcy. We are seeing banks in free-market economies not wanting to provide services to the low income, or those living in small villages in developed countries. We see tens of millions not covered by medical insurance, when it is left to the private sector. In the drive to maximise shareholder value, millions of workers have been retrenched around the world. This has evoked a response, a backlash. Workers are disenchanted. Unions and NGOs campaign against globalisation.
What should be our response? I believe we should adopt the free market and embrace globalisation. But we would have to instill a greater sense of social responsibility. How? By encouraging the small men to fight back and compete well. This they can do through cooperatives. And cooperatives can act as the counterweight against unbridled greed. This then is the big difference between our cooperatives and private-sector business. Private-sector companies are profit-driven, to return the highest value to their shareholders. This is their mission. Our cooperatives are driven by the goal of providing the best value for the customer. That is our mission. We do well in order to do good. Today, this role is growing in importance.
In a recent survey, 74% of Singaporeans surveyed were very satisfied with the role that NTUC cooperatives play to moderate the cost of living for them. These Singaporeans and households will want to know the rationale behind any proposal that seeks to deny them these savings and the convenience that they enjoy. So, unless moderating prices and creating value for money for the common man is something objectionable, then I cannot understand what the problem is. In any case, if we say NTUC cooperatives are in different sectors, we must also note that it is not uncommon for business groups to have businesses in different sectors. For example, if we look at property developers again, they may also have subsidiaries that provide for finance, maybe even make drinks.
The final possibility may be that there is a perception that NTUC cooperatives have special privileges that guarantee them choice of location or other perks. But the fact is that all NTUC cooperatives have to compete for all the business that they get and all the business locations that they do business in, just like all their competitors. And, just as they have been successful in some bids, they have also lost other bids. NTUC FairPrice, for example, lost the bid for store space at Changi Airport's Terminal 2 to a competitor during a recent re-tender exercise. It was outbid. The lessons are, firstly, that neither the Government - in this case, the CAAS - nor any private-sector property owner can be expected or will give any special consideration to NTUC cooperatives; and, secondly, that what replaces a NTUC FairPrice store is not going to be the mom-and-pop shop, but another retail chain, most possibly a foreign-owned one. So, let us face facts and not delude ourselves.
All Members who spoke want to develop local enterprise. I share that same sentiment. But I must point out that NTUC cooperatives or - as some Members have called them - NLCs, they are local enterprises, and they are successful local enterprises. So, why do we not support them? Some Members have bemoaned the lack of capital for local enterprises. Perhaps, our local enterprises can look at the experience of the NTUC cooperatives and see how they have raised their capital. Let me give some examples. The early cooperatives faced much more difficulties than SMEs today in finding capital. So, union leaders aggregated the funds the hard way - persuading workers, one worker at a time, who have very low incomes - to buy shares in these cooperatives. That was how NTUC Welcome, the predecessor of today's NTUC FairPrice, started. Today, FairPrice is a household name in Singapore, and perhaps it is the only local supermarket chain that can withstand and compete against foreign supermarket retailers. NTUC Income was started the same way, collecting a few dollars from each union member. So, too, NTUC Comfort, which is now divested and listed on the stock exchange as the Comfort Group.
Some Members have called on NTUC cooperatives to help small businessmen. And they have. As Mdm Halimah Yacob explained, Denticare is indeed a cooperative of dentists. They share the revenues. NTUC Foodfare operates food courts, but the people who run the stalls are the hawkers themselves, who rent the space. NTUC Income uses its website to provide a matching service between handymen and homeowners, between tutors and school children. NTUC FairPrice, NTUC Healthcare, NTUC Childcare cooperatives operate franchise schemes in order to share opportunities with the business community.
Sir, I believe that the crux of today's debate is about fair competition and how to better promote it. This is important. This must be our focus, and we should keep our focus. Listening to some speakers, one may get the impression that behind the phalanx of accusations lie local businesses scared of public-sector GLCs because they are big, angry with competition in the private sector because they are big, and then suspicious of one another, not quite wanting to work together, just in case the other one might grab the secret formula and become big. This will not do us any good. Singapore - if we look at our natural endowments - is indeed a SME among nations. And we have no one to complain to. But we got to where we are today not because the international stage is a model of fair play, not because the big boys imposed a moratorium on themselves to give us a leg up, but because we as a country took the hard decisions - and I would say some rather unconventional ones relative to the received wisdom of their time - and worked hard to build the necessary capabilities, capacities and attractiveness in order to compete well.
If we look at the NTUC cooperatives, how did they get to do well? By following the advice of Dr Goh Keng Swee, ie, employ good professional managers. There is no reason why our SMEs cannot follow that same formula - pool resources and employ professional managers. That was very good advice that local SMEs pooling resources can note.
Sir, I hope that this debate can help focus Singaporeans' attention on what is fundamental, namely, on how to help SMEs strengthen their leadership, vision, competitiveness and resourcefulness, rather than confuse the debate with red herring. Life is not about avoiding competition or defining away the competition. And to reinforce any such tendency would indeed be the ultimate disservice to our SMEs and to all Singaporeans.
