Cham Hui Fong
Singapore
“Hence, in times like this, we would like to urge both the companies and workers to take a total approach in managing the cost. Companies should optimise whatever resources and support the Government is providing in areas that will support the training and upgrading of their workers.”
“One clarification – would the Ministry review the Retirement Age Act? There is a particular provision on a cut of up to 10% for worker reaching 60 years. Currently, there are already sectors that have significantly reduced the salary ratio, eg, the banks which have already moved to 1.5 and below.”
“So we would like to urge the Government to conduct probably more road shows at some centralised industrial areas, where they are densely populated with such contract workers, heartland shopping malls and bus interchanges to create more awareness of the scheme and the rights of the workers, because we have to bring more of these workers on…”
“Because we believe that all Singaporeans should be able to join this learning fund which is primarily the objective to help them to upgrade. I would like the Ministry to make available training funds for this group of workers who are vulnerable to being displaced by the economy, and whom we should really help to allow them to move up the…”
“At the same time, the labour movement will continue to work with MOM, the employers and relevant agencies to re-develop the industries, to retrain the workers, to re-design the work, and to reward the workers accordingly. Sir I would like to thank the Government for this bold and socially inclusive Budget. I fully support this Budget.”
The complete record
Every one of 72 lines we hold for Cham Hui Fong, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 2 of 2.
“Lawyers and doctors or corporate leaders cannot be compared to the political leaders that we have today. The Government needs a more acute strategic understanding of the world that we are operating in. We are also competing in an environment today where all the familiar signposts are already no longer the same, and we need people to be able to look at the changes rapidly. Our public officers that are led by the Ministers or the leaders must be able to see the changes. We need thinkers, planners and, of course, doers and implementers, to ensure that Singapore continues to prosper and thrive. Therefore, we cannot afford a Government that fails. We have spoken to our people. For example, SIA can fail, but Singapore cannot fail as an air hub. DBS Bank probably can fail, but Singapore again cannot fail as a financial hub, because the stakes are probably too much. Hence, there is this very high expectation on the deliverables of our Government. And because of this high expectation, I think what we are expecting from them is tremendous, compared to any corporations that we can think of. Then, again, we ask ourselves: what is the purpose of having this four-day debate on this? Do we have a good Government that our people can trust? Can we sleep in peace when, say, we are attacked by SARS or when terrorism is actually threatening everywhere around the globe? The answer today must be, "Yes". Why then is there this big hoo-ha again over these extra millions of dollars that we are paying when, if you look at the Budget, we are already giving so many tens of millions of dollars back to the people, whether it is on account of GST, PESA, or many others?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I am not that surprised that Ministers' pay adjustment would be such an emotive issue. But I think I am quite puzzled and I am saying, why should it be? We have recently read about the CEO of ST Engineering being paid probably about $2.8 million a year. Are the employees of ST Engineering very unhappy? So I called up some of them. I asked them whether they are upset that their boss, the CEO, is actually paid that much. And they told me, "Of course not." I then added, "If he is paid a fraction lesser, maybe the rest of you could get a bit more." But they told us, "No. As a boss who runs a company with a turnover of millions of dollars, we want to hold him responsible, that he must know that earning this much of money, he has this obligation to fulfil to his people, that he should be there to provide good jobs, and good-paying jobs, for his employees in ST Engineering." So why are they not quarrelling and debating on how much their CEO should be paid? Some would say that, well, because they have no authority to do so. If they are not happy, at the most they quit. But, more importantly, what we have realised is that the workers are able to see what the management has done that has a lot of positive impact on their pay packets. To many people we spoke to, there is probably no price tag to leadership. How do you price leaders? One million dollars? Two million dollars? There is actually no price tag, although a lot of people on the street just cannot understand. One million dollars is not enough? One hundred percent pay jump? They find that this is probably a bit too much for them to accept. But, in my view, there are probably flaws in any benchmark. We can use any kind of benchmark, there will still be flaws.”
“Because we believe that all Singaporeans should be able to join this learning fund which is primarily the objective to help them to upgrade. I would like the Ministry to make available training funds for this group of workers who are vulnerable to being displaced by the economy, and whom we should really help to allow them to move up the value chain.”
“In the light of the Government's decision to institutionalise the Workfare Bonus, licensing the labour suppliers would also help to ensure that these unprotected contract workers are able to enjoy the full Workfare Bonus on top of the CPF contributions and the basic employment benefits. Training Opportunities The labour movement has schemes to help our members who, on their initiatives, wish to train and upgrade without employer's support by NTUC providing them with training awards and also by acting as their surrogate employer. WDA also provides funding assistance to company for training, not only for employees directly under their payroll, but also for their subcontract workers, such as employees hired through a third party employment agency. But for temporary and casual workers, who are usually at the bottom of the value chain, the employer and employment agency are usually not willing to train them because of the short tenure that they have with them. Government funding is also not available except for the individual based training which is very limited in scope. It does not quite help in the functional training which most companies require for them to upgrade their skills. Of course, in most cases, attending the courses will also mean no pay for these contract workers who are usually paid on a daily basis. If our intention is to graduate these low-end workers out of the Workfare, then we have to make training more easily available for them. Training opportunities must be given to all Singaporeans, whether you are a regular employee or a casual worker or a contract worker. Government can act as a surrogate employer, since they are all Singaporeans, for them to enjoy the subsidies and even to consider the absentee payroll.”
“Sir, while employment agencies are required to be licensed under the Employment Agency Act, labour suppliers are not. So with more and more companies outsourcing more of their non-core services, such as cleaning and security services, to service providers who are essentially the labour suppliers, many workers who are employed to work for these labour suppliers are often exploited and not provided the statutory benefits, although the Minister has earlier said that all employees, whether they are in the formal or informal sector, should be getting it. But the reality is that they are not being paid the statutory benefits, including the CPF. So, in order to secure the service contract and to maximise profits, most of the labour suppliers often treat these workers as casual contract workers and do not make the necessary CPF contributions for them. They also do not provide them with the basic employment benefits, such as sick leave and annual leave. It is therefore necessary for the Government to consider at least licensing the labour suppliers or the service providers under the Employment Agency Act. I understand that some countries have already licensed them together with their employment agencies. Licensing of labour suppliers will impose on them the responsibility of complying with the Acts - the CPF and the Employment Acts. So, before a licence is issued, the suppliers can be briefed on their roles and responsibilities, towards the workers, and this would certainly help the workers to have some savings for their medical and old age needs as well as the basic employment benefits.”
“Sir, this year's Budget emphasises on growing the pie with more spending on building capabilities and training of our people. The bigger economy will certainly create more and better jobs, and therefore we will need more workers. While we acknowledge the fact that we need to embrace the top talents and skilled foreign workers in order to compete successfully for value creation jobs in Singapore, we have also become overly dependent on the unskilled foreign workers. This has resulted in low-value, low-paying jobs and resulting in waste at the bottom. Sir, we need to intensify our efforts to re-create some of these low-value jobs into better-paying ones in order to help reclaim these jobs for our people. There may also be job opportunities for our older people as well. Hence, may I ask the Minister to share with us some information on the job creation in the various sub-sectors for the local and foreign manpower over the last three years, and the manpower mix projection over the next three years? I hope we can intensify our efforts in job re-creation and the factors dominated by the foreign workers, other than construction, to create more job opportunities for our local workers. Next, Intelligent Nation 2015 will create probably another 80,000 jobs in the next 10 years, and Manufacturing 2018 will create another 20,000 per year. May I also ask the Minister to share with us his plan to see that our local workers will have a fair share, if not the lion's share, of these job opportunities?”
“There is mention of insurance playing an even larger role in Singapore's healthcare financing in the MOH's Budget report. May I ask what kind of enhancement in the insurance design is the Ministry looking at? In the meantime, with more workers on Medisave, will the Ministry also review the use of Medisave for purchase of at least a basic Medishield rider, subject to a cap, just as what the Ministry has mentioned recently about using Medisave to purchase the Eldershield rider, subject to a cap? With the withdrawal of medical subsidies for the foreign workers, employers are now obliged to purchase compulsory medical insurance for their foreign workers. From what I know, most of our Singaporean contract or casual workers do not have any hospitalisation medical insurance for themselves. While we are not asking for the Government to pay for them, can we at least allow them to use their own Medisave money to purchase for this rider? This will at least give them some certainties about their in-patient expenses. With the Government topping up Medisave contribution to the casual and the informal workers, allowing the use of part Medisave for rider scheme will certainly benefit those casual workers with no medical coverage by their employers. It will also help us to encourage more to join the CPF scheme. Medisave”
“Singapore's healthcare financing framework aims to ensure fiscal sustainability and affordability for all Singaporeans. The 3M framework has worked well over the years and the linking of the Workfare to the CPF or Medisave should encourage more Singaporeans to join the social safety net. For regular employees, most are already provided hospitalisation benefits by their companies while they are in employment, while most of the contract and the casual workers do not have such benefits. Currently, Medisave can be used to purchase Shield plans or other Medisave-approved insurance scheme with co-payment and deductibles. We agree that this is a sound principle as it helps to eliminate the buffet syndrome. However, the employment landscape has changed over the years. There is now high turnover in the job market due to attrition, restructuring and many other reasons. So, while one is out of employment, especially for the lower-income workers, the only insurance he will have is probably the Medishield, that is provided he has not opted out. Some insurance companies have introduced rider plans which help to cover for medical expenditure not covered by the Shield plans. Such scheme can be individual based and is portable. So, the tripartite partners, together with MOH, have discussed about the portable medical benefits scheme and the transferable medical insurance scheme (TMIS) for many years. The Economic Review Committee has also suggested that we promote both the PMBS and TMIS, but over the years, we have made very little success with both schemes to date. As at end November 2005, only 109 companies have made additional contributions to the employees' Medisave.”
“At the same time, the labour movement will continue to work with MOM, the employers and relevant agencies to re-develop the industries, to retrain the workers, to re-design the work, and to reward the workers accordingly. Sir I would like to thank the Government for this bold and socially inclusive Budget. I fully support this Budget. 5.40 pm”
“For the labour suppliers, they are probably the ones that are a bit sore because they were previously their employees and now they have actually moved on to join ST Aerospace and they are the better employers. I think as far as we are concerned, the union is happy, the workers are happy and, of course, the employer, ST Aerospace, is happy. So we have to continue to work with more like-minded companies on this, who are prepared to spend a bit more to train the workers even though they may not be directly employed by them, but they believe that if these people continue to work for their company, they must have value-add. They must have the right skill so that they can continue to contribute. So there must be new approaches to address this. We are now currently working with our NTUC colleagues who have some competencies in re-developing the industries as they have some experience in transforming the security and the cleaning industries. We are working with them, WDA and some economic agencies to see how we can re-develop some of these industries that are flooded with these low-end contract workers. What we hope to see is that the day will come when every contractor is a best source contractor. Every contract worker is paid better and he takes pride in his work. It will certainly take a lot of time but I think we have to start somewhere and we are committed to do this. Sir, contract workers are one big group of workers that the Government, employers and the industry players need to pay more attention to if we intend to let them move up the value chain. We hope that the Government, as the biggest employer, will ensure that cheap sourcing does not happen in the Ministries or in the Government agencies.”
“It is almost unlikely for them to benefit from employer-sponsored programmes as their jobs are short term in nature. And individual-based training does not quite suit them because it is very much institutional-based and it is only a handful, very limited in scope, and only a handful of courses that I can think of. We have tried talking to a few companies because we could not get the employers to sponsor. As far as the employers are concerned, these workers are only going to be with them for five or six months and they are not going to be regular. As far as the labour suppliers are concerned, these workers are not permanently with them. Today, they can be with them; tomorrow, they can be somewhere else. So we have a lot of difficulties getting them on board to provide some training programmes which are helpful because they need some functional kind of training for them to actually move up. So, to overcome this, we have already started a pilot project with ST Aerospace to convert 20 casual workers to direct contract employees on 1st December last year. We only have 20 now although there are probably about more than 100 casual workers. We probably have to do it step by step. So these 20 contract workers who are now under direct employ of ST Aerospace benefited from some training because ST Aerospace, as the employer, claims for recruitment and training under the Advantage Fund. I think this is a win-win-win. As far as the employers are concerned, they have got a more stable workforce. They have got people whom they know will certainly come every day and the workers are also happy because they are paid CPF, given some core benefits like medical and leave.”
“It will also affect their operation. And some of the companies told us that we have to be fair to them because if you whistle blow on them, you have to make sure that you do the same to their competitors out there, because they cannot lose their competitiveness. We are quite happy to hear that because we know that they will start to sabo one another and start to tell us who are the ones that are not paying. But this is going to be even more difficult because we have to really clean up the entire industry. But we believe it is doable, and will continue to try. Sir, I totally agree that we have to get more workers onto the CPF scheme on the basic fundamental that CPF provides for in the long run. So Workfare is only part of the solution. While we welcome Workfare as a permanent feature, we do not want our individual workers to regard this permanently They should not do it because we do not want them to be recycled again and again in this low-end market and continue to be a beneficiary of this Workfare. Although the Second Minister for Finance said that 438,000 Singaporeans would benefit from this Workfare - this is probably about 16% of the working population - we hope that in three years' time when we review this, this number would have dropped significantly because our intention is to ensure that lesser people are on this Workfare scheme and more people are self-reliant and out of this scheme to be able to fend for themselves. Sir, what we need to do is really to equip these workers if we do not want them to be perpetually on this Workfare scheme. We need to equip them with the right skill sets so that they are able to take on better jobs. Today, the training mechanism does not quite support casual or contract workers who do not have regular employers.”
“Sir, I hope that the SMEs' cash rebate on the CPF contribution could help these contract companies to defray the cost and therefore be more responsible and put these workers on the CPF scheme. I have one company in the chemical sector, Mediagate, which produces CD-ROMs. We spoke to them recently that they have to put their workers on CPF. We are quite happy that they agreed. They went back to talk to their suppliers and they even have a provision on the contract that they have to pay the contract workers CPF. On top of that, what they have done is that they even get their employee to act as a supervisor to supervise these contract workers and show them that they are treated fairly and they are on CPF. Sir, this is one company that illustrates very good social responsibilities. They believe that even if they are not directly employed by them, they have the responsibility to see that the workers working on their premises, working side by side and next to their own workers, are treated fairly. But do all the buyer companies think the same? Unfortunately, not so. We do understand some of the constraints that they face because when we spoke to them, we understand that it is difficult for them to police and that is the main reason why they have outsourced. They do not have time to look after this group of people. That is not their core function. When they outsource, they usually outsource to more than one and it could be five or 10 because they cannot be dependent on just one. They have told us that it is not easy to police this although they very much want to help us. And some of them told us that if you whistle blow, enforcement would have to come in and the same problem would arise as to what will happen if the contractor starts to pull out.”
“Sir, we are fully aware that this is an uphill task to eradicate all the errant contractors. We have tried for a few months. It seems endless to clean them up. The moment we chase after one, the next moment we realise that they have closed the company, changed the name and the same thing happens again. So we have to really put in more efforts to do this and, at the same time, when we talk to the workers, to encourage them to come on board, to file a complaint with the Ministries. They are worried that they will run the risk of losing their jobs if we were to push for CPF payments. Can we guarantee them another job? We cannot, not immediately. So this is the dilemma that we are facing. We need more concerted efforts from responsible employers, for the Government to come in with the enforcement and, of course, we will continue to speak and educate them. Last year, there were some 120,000 workers who signed up for the Workfare through self-declaration. I believe that there should be more than this number because some of the contract workers that we spoke to - we have a team of about six people who are going round to talk to them - told us that probably half of them were totally unaware of this Workfare. They assumed that they were on the scheme and there were some who did not dare to apply for fear of implicating their employers. The moment they fill in the name of their employers, because they need to declare where they work, the nature of the job, they think that the CPF Board will come chasing after their employers and they would lose their jobs. So there is a lot of fear among the workers and they dare not apply for the Workfare.”
“But, unfortunately, what we have seen over the years is exploitative and cheap sourcing of companies. Some buyer companies have absolutely no clue as to who they have actually outsourced the contract to, because they did not know that the contractor that they have outsourced to has subsequently sub-sub-subcontracted to many other sub-contractors. As a result, what we have seen is that workers are not paid salaries on time. Sub-contractors can just disappear without paying the workers their salaries. In some cases, if the worker does not come to work for one day, his pay can be deducted for three days. And there are just so many creative ways of exploiting the workers that one can imagine. So the labour movement now is working with the Ministry of Manpower and also the CPF Board on a "3E" approach, because we understand that if we want to tie this Workfare to CPF or Medisave, we need to get more people on board this scheme. So we adopted this three-pronged approach, which is essentially to educate the workers. They need to understand what is the rationale of linking. Why is it that they do not get the cash outlay which they used to enjoy last year. We have to educate them about the long term effects on them, the implication of them having Medisave that will meet their retirement adequacy and also their medical needs in the long run. Next, we have to also engage the buyers because they are the ones who award the contracts. We need to engage the buyers to let them understand that they have this social responsibility, that they need to do this to ensure that the workers are being treated fairly - not just workers under them but workers who are working with them. And the third part is to really enforce the suppliers to make sure that they toe the line.”
“The only resource Singapore has is its people. Now that the labour market is tightening, now that we need more workers to help the economy to grow, as the Chinese saying goes: "ren jing chi cai wu jing chi yong ", we should maximise the talent of our people and optimise the resources that we have. Recognise the values and experience that these older people have so that we can enable them to continue to contribute to the society and play a fair share in the economy. 5.30 pm Sir, I have also received some feedback on this Workfare Income Supplement for the lower income workers. While it is good news for them to have a higher take-home pay, the good news for the employers is to pay a lower CPF contribution, what it will effectively mean is that they will have lesser CPF contribution for the six months commencing this July until next January. So, some of my older members, who are now currently topping up cash for their housing loans each month, have this concern that for the next six months, they would probably have to top up even more cash during this period when there is lesser CPF contribution to the account because they are expected to only get their first tranche of WIS only in January. So the question they have asked is: would there be some flexibility? They would like to know how to deal with this six-month slack before they collect the Workfare Income Supplement next year. Sir, I would like to move on to the next aspect of the Budget, which is on the contract workers. Contract work is not a new phenomenon in Singapore and we have seen that for many years. Buy-in companies outsource the non-core functions to focus on the core business and I think this is perfectly all right.”
“It does not mean that if you are in the company longer or you are older, you are paid more. You are paid based on the value of the job, based on your output and based on your performance. So, there is no difference between a younger worker and an older worker. This is something that we want to encourage and we will certainly want to work with more companies to come on board. These are some good cases that we have seen but we do not think that we have seen enough cases. So we need more companies to come on board to look at their wage structure, to redesign their work environment, to be elderly-friendly and look at where are the opportunities for the older workers. Because if we were to bulldoze our way to insist that companies must re-employ the older workers, what is going to happen is that if there are no substantive changes to the workplace, workers will not be competitive, jobs will be lost, and they will be replaced by the cheaper foreign workers. This is something not anyone of us wants to see. So with the reduction of the CPF for the older and lower income workers and the lowering of the corporate tax rate, we hope that companies can make full use of this good opportunity. When the economy is doing well, when they are still profitable, re-position themselves, and find new ways to create opportunities for the older workers. We need them to come up with the commitment to help to identify these opportunities. It need not be the same job or the same pay but it must be at least a decent job for these workers who have actually contributed to the growth of the company. So it is time that we recognised them. Our leader, Victor Phang from SATSU, openly told the companies that companies can use less of the workers but they are not useless.”
“So I think these are very good initiatives. Then we also have companies that understand that the work environment has to change because whatever they will be operating on will be an environment suitable for the workers 30 years ago when generally the people were relatively young. But, today, if you step into some of the older companies, you will realise that the workforce has aged tremendously. So the work environment has to change to cater to the needs of these people and we have seen some companies tapping on the Advantage fund that allows them to equip the workplace with new environment so that it is older-workers friendly. Tan Tock Seng Hospital and some other hospitals are good examples of this. They have actually made full use of the fund to transform the place to one that is elderly-friendly, to allow the nurses, the older employees, to continue to be there to serve the public. We do have companies that tell us that wage is a problem. Seniority-based wage system is still a concern although studies did show that a high percentage of companies have moved into a flexible wage system. We know that this is not enough because we have to do drastic change to the wage system that we have today to address the problem of the seniority-based wage system that we have. Keppel Hitachi Zosen is one good company. They believe that they want to keep this group of older people but they do acknowledge the fact that if we do not address the wage system, they will have difficulties in keeping the competitiveness of the company. So what the union has done with the company is to ensure that they move towards one that is performance-based. So, as a result, the wages of the workers are no longer paid based on their seniority.”
“So I do not want to think what will happen in 10 years' time. I totally agree that a strong family unit with mutual support is necessary and we have to do more to encourage that. It is clear that there must be a multiple approach to address the issue of the ageing population. Whilst some may want to work to keep themselves mentally and physically healthy, there are many others who need to work for financial reasons and for the pride and they do not just work to pass time. So we have to step up our efforts to help these older Singaporeans to get back into the workforce. For those who are now in the workforce, we have to find ways to retain them. For those who are not there, we have to find ways to encourage them to get back to the workforce and provide opportunities for them to work beyond the retirement age of 62. Some of the companies that we work with needed the workers. In the case of G B Yachts, because they are the ones who need the workers to do carpentary work for the high-end luxury yacht, they cannot find the skills anywhere else, so the workers are fortunate enough that they continue to be kept in the company and they are still working at the age of 60 and 70. We also have some employers that are proactive as they recognise the tested values of the older workers and help to create new jobs for them. PUB is one good example. They identify new areas and they train up these older workers to take on new job roles because they appreciate the values and experience that these workers have and they know that they will have a shorter learning curve to enable them to take on these new job roles. SBS Transit is another one. They create new job roles - driver mentors - for drivers to be trained up to be mentors to the new drivers.”
“We need a more sustainable and progressive approach to ensure that these 2,500 workers can continue to move on, and more people that are actually joining this age band can continue to move on beyond 62. We realise that raising the retirement age itself is not going to be the right way to do if the real changes at the workplace are not being addressed as in the needs of the workers and the needs of the employers. So what is the right approach? Unfortunately, there is no easy answer to this. The changes in the CPF rules on increasing the Minimum Sum and phasing out of the 50% withdrawal rule will have significant impact on the money that our workers can receive upon reaching 55. If you look at the Singaporeans who turned 55 in 2005 and who have been actively contributing to their CPF, only 40% of them have met the Minimum Sum after pledging half of the amount into the property. And if you do not consider the property pledge, only 20% of them have the Minimum Sum in cash. So what does that translate to? Effectively, it means that our workers will therefore need to work and, I believe, this is something that they totally understand - that there is a need for them to work. Many of them are asset-rich, but cash-poor, and life expectancy is on the upward trend. Of course, coupled with the lower fertility rate, it has also compounded the issue of an ageing population. Family support is certainly important but is seems to be shrinking. I hardly even hear much about three-tier families nowadays. Based on a national survey that was conducted by MCYS two years ago, the proportion of those elderly who are 55 years and above depending on their children as a source of financial support has dropped from 76% in 1995 to 66% two years ago in 2005.”
“This is something that we appreciated very much. Sir, we would also like to thank the Government for paying special attention to the elderly folks. Last year, the Progress Package provided something for the older people. Likewise, this year, the Senior Citizens' Bonus is a wonderful recognition of the elderly in Singapore who have contributed or who are still contributing to the making of Singapore. Sir, I would like now to touch on the older workers. I think the signal that we get from this Budget is strong and clear, ie, get a job and work if you are able to. Sir, it is easy to say that but there are still workers out there, the older ones and the lower skilled, who, once displaced, find it difficult to get back to the workforce or, when they re-enter the workforce, feel they are under-employed. So with the introduction of Workfare, I think there will be mounting pressure on everyone to ensure that every Singaporean out there who aspires to work, who want to work, must find a decent job. I think this is a fair request because anybody out there who wants to get a job should be given the opportunity to work, provided that the older workers here have this right mindset change, ie, they must be prepared to adjust to the changes and, at the same time, employers must have this mindset change to employ older workers. So NTUC has started to work with employers (about 167 companies) over the last one-and-a-half years. We now have about 2,500 older workers being re-employed, that means they have already hit the retirement age and they are re-employed. While we are happy to have hit these 2,500 workers, we believe more has to be done.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, this year's Budget is indeed one that is generous and gracious, as echoed by many of the Members here and our elected leaders. First, the Budget is pro-business, as you can see from the two percentage point cut in the corporate tax rate which will cost the Government $800 million. But I would like to look at that as a $800 million savings for the profitable companies out there. Then there is this cash rebate on the CPF contributions for the employers and employees for the SMEs that make up about 99% of the establishments and employing more that half of the workforce in Singapore. I think this will certainly ensure that Singapore will remain economically sound and competitive and with this, we can expect and look forward to more and better jobs for the people. So a pro-business budget that is job creating would therefore be a pro-worker's budget. As one of our elected leaders said to us yesterday, Swithun Lowe from Singapore Teachers' Union said that, "This Budget marks a historical significance because it provided for the fourth pillar - which is the workfare - with the fundamental principle of self reliance as in, 'You help yourself, we will help you'". I think this, in particular, has tilted in favour of the lower income worker, someone who needs the assistance more than anyone else. So this is again good news for the lower income workers. The middle income group has something to cheer on, which is the CPF restoration. We spoke to the unions - the higher-end unions from the banks. Wee Soon Guan from the banks told us that although their employees from the banks do not benefit from the workfare, they are happy that the Government has kept its promise and faith by restoring part of the CPF when the economy has recovered.”