Gerald Giam Yean Song
Singapore
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. The focus of my supplementary question will be on the film classification guidelines, which currently state that, quote, "Chinese films meant for theatrical release should generally be in Mandarin, in line with the Speak Mandarin Campaign.”
“Mr Speaker, we cannot allow physical infrastructure expansion to blind us to the shifting digital geography of global trade nor should we allow frontier technology to reduce the economic agency of our transport workers.”
“Sir, I thank the Minister for his replies. I understand the difficulty in getting the exact numbers. But is there an order of magnitude that the Government can provide as to how many such fees were collected and what is the total quantum? Just an order of magnitude, does not have to be an exact number.”
“Sir, I thank Mr Ng Chee Meng for acknowledging my OJT proposal. I am aware of the work of CTCs, but my proposal goes beyond what the CTCs currently provide. First is the depth of the wage support, and second is the structural design of OJT.”
“I thank the Minister for responding to my question just now. I am glad to hear that there will be more precise matching with the help of SWDA's the integrated intelligence function. But can I ask if this function will be provided to all jobseekers who approach SWDA or its agencies, like e2i, to seek for job assistance?”
“Sir, can the Minister elaborate a bit more about how SWDA will enhance the job search assistance programme? Specifically, will career counsellors move beyond basic resume editing and portal referrals to leverage real time vacancy data for proactive matching and advocate for candidates?”
The complete record
Every one of 984 lines we hold for Gerald Giam Yean Song, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 16 of 20.
“Thank you, Madam. I have just two more supplementary questions. I agree with the Minister's point that one point should not be used to measure a trend. So, in line with what I asked in my question, what would be the job growth figures in quarter two of 2015? Are those numbers available yet? Secondly, regarding the tradable and non-tradable sectors, if I understand the Minister right, he was saying that the productivity growth has been more successful in the manufacturing and other export sectors. Can I conclude that vacancies are growing more in the non-tradable sectors? And if so, if there is a high number of vacancies in the non-tradable sector, how would the shortage of foreign labour damage the economy because of the shortage and the vacancies in the non-tradable sector? Because for the non-tradable sector, the demand is domestic, the demand is not going anywhere. So, for non-productive companies in the non-tradable sectors, they will be forced to restructure or they would be replaced by others who can meet that demand. So, in some ways, the disruption for the non-tradable sector, due to foreign labour shortfalls, would be self- correcting, would it not be?”
“Madam, I thank the Minister for the answers. I have three supplementary questions. Firstly, the Minister mentioned that this is due to seasonal drops in job creation. But this is a 99% drop from the same period a year ago. So, how does the Minister explain this drastic drop, assuming that it is the same season a year ago? Secondly, does the situation of high vacancies, coupled with low unemployment and low job creation, indicate that many companies are not restructuring fast enough to become less labour-intensive and more productive, or what other explanations could account for this situation? Thirdly, is most of the employment creation occurring in the tradable or the non-tradable sectors? What are the proportions of job vacancies in the tradable and the non-tradable sectors?”
“Thank you, Madam. I would just like to seek the Minister's answer to the question I asked about clause 10(b): why LTA would be basing its decision on licensing the third-party taxi booking services on the existing demand of these taxi booking services. It should not matter whether or not there is demand, because if there is demand, then the service would be used and, if there is no demand, then the service would just fade out. So, there is no need for the regulator to decide for the consumers.”
“Third-party taxi booking services could encourage greater competition, innovation and service quality and improve customer satisfaction. In regulating third-party taxi booking service providers, the Government should focus more on maximising benefits to consumers and taxi drivers and less on protecting a particular business model or existing taxi operators. I would like to seek clarification from the Minister on clause 10(b), in which the regulator, in deciding whether to register an applicant, "must have regard" to the demand for third-party taxi booking services in Singapore. Does this mean that if supply of these booking services exceeds demand, as assessed by LTA, the regulator may decide not to issue a taxi booking service licence? Can the Minister explain why LTA needs to base its licensing decision on demand for third-party taxi booking services? Is it not the responsibility of potential entrants to assess the viability of their own business models? If the service being provided by the new entrant is more attractive, this will give consumers more choice and consumers will naturally gravitate towards them, with weaker players fading out. I do not think the Government needs to make this decision for consumers. Overall, I am glad to see that this Bill does not go the way of several other cities that have implemented outright bans on drivers accepting bookings via certain ride-sharing apps. It is not a free-for-all, where any private car driver can accept bookings via these apps. At the same time, the regulations require basic consumer protections to be in place, like requiring drivers to be properly insured, conducting background and health checks on drivers and prohibiting overcharging of passengers. Madam, I support the Bill. 5.48 pm”
“Mdm Speaker, this Bill introduces a framework to regulate third-party taxi booking service providers, which include taxi booking mobile apps. In recent years, the near-ubiquity of smartphones in Singapore has facilitated the entry of several taxi booking mobile apps like Uber, GrabTaxi and Easy Taxi. Most of these apps allow passengers to book rides with any taxi driver, even independent limousine drivers, unlike the booking services run by taxi operators which are limited to a smaller pool of drivers. This can provide better matching of passenger demand with taxi supply. Some of these apps allow passengers to track the cab driver's location, contact the driver directly, rate their drivers and even share a cab with others who are travelling on the same route. This can help reduce transaction costs while encouraging taxi drivers to maintain high levels of service. They are a win-win for both passengers and taxi drivers. Passengers enjoy greater convenience booking cabs and drivers have easier access to a wider pool of passengers. I understand some enterprising Singaporeans have started their own limousine companies and receive their bookings through these apps. A larger supply of drivers could help address the perennial problem of not enough taxis being available during peak hours or when there is a heavy downpour. Page: 99 With these "disruptive" technologies, the dominant taxi operators have to up their game or risk losing drivers to rivals. Their drivers could decide to switch to other operators who charge cheaper taxi rentals, while still receiving enough bookings via mobile apps. This could put downward pressure on rentals charged by taxi operators, which will benefit cab drivers.”
“I thank the Minister for the clarifications. I just have one clarification regarding the effective date of this Act. I understand from reports that it is going to be on 1 June. Does it mean that the operators need to apply for a permit and obtain a permit before that time, or would they be given some time to apply and wait for the permit approvals?”
“Finally, this Bill does not appear to address data protection or privacy issues with regard to the use of drones. My concern is mainly with the possibility of drones being used to take photographs of people or private property in a manner that infringes individuals' privacy. Do current laws already provide for data protection and privacy from drones? I hope the Minister can explain how these laws are adequate and what penalties there are for violators. Madam, I support the Bill. 4.59 pm”
“While this Bill will probably be effective in preventing law-abiding drone operators from unintentionally causing harm to persons and property, it is unlikely to stop a determined terrorist from using a drone to fly explosives, chemical or biological agents into key installations or large crowds, causing mayhem, fatalities and serious injuries. It is important that our security agencies develop plans for detecting, intercepting and taking down rogue drones. These include acquiring systems to "detect and defeat" drones. I note that clauses 13 and 17 give the authorities the power to direct a drone operator to change course or assume control of the drone, by force if necessary, to end the flight of the drone in the fastest and safest practicable way. However, detecting and defeating rogue drones is not a straightforward task. Most drones are small, move slowly and fly low, which makes it difficult for radar to detect them. To "defeat" a detected drone by shooting it down or jamming its control signals could risk injuring innocent bystanders when it plunges to the ground, particularly if it contains a hazardous payload. According to The Economist, there are currently systems that can hijack a drone's navigation and control systems and fly it to a desired location, or to use another drone to catch the drone in a net. In addition, there are technologies available to track the control signals of a rogue drone back to its human operator and intercept the operator. Has the Government already acquired such systems to deal with rogue drones? Page: 83 Also, will there be any enhanced penalties for anyone convicted of using a drone to carry out a serious crime, as is being proposed in the state of Washington in the US?”
“While it is still early days for this technology, I hope that CAAS remains open to issuing permits, on a case-by-case basis, to companies to test-bed such technologies in Singapore so that we maintain an edge over our overseas competitors. Fourth, it was reported that all commercial drone operators will need to apply for a permit. Can the Minister explain why this requirement is being imposed on all commercial operators? Is the risk posed by commercial operators higher than that of, say, hobbyists? Would it not be fairer to require permits only for drones above a certain weight or size, Page: 82 rather than placing a permit requirement on all commercial operators? Fifth, if commercial operators are required to apply for a permit, then it is important that the assessment criteria for permit approvals be made transparent, in terms of the specifications of the drones, the types of commercial uses that will be allowed and whether there would be any requirements for operators, in terms of training and qualifications. If this law is to be effected on 1 June 2015, which is just over two weeks from now, then sufficient time must be given to operators to obtain the permits without interrupting operations. Sixth, CAAS says that it will serve as a one-stop centre for all drone permit applications. This is a welcome move. I hope this will help reduce red tape and the time taken for permit approvals. Can the Minister share what will be the expected typical waiting time for permit approval, so that commercial operators can better plan their schedules and operations? I have some security concerns about the risk of drones being used for terrorist activities.”
“First, will the regulations specify that drones must keep a safe distance from persons, vehicles, buildings or structures as well as from congested areas or large groups of people, such as sporting events or concerts? Second, on requiring "geo-fencing". Flying drones within five kilometres of an aerodrome is already prohibited under the Air Navigation Order. However, there is a risk that drone operators may unintentionally fly too close to an aerodrome or military installation. This will pose not just a security risk, but also a safety threat to aircraft taking off and landing. As such, has CAAS considered requiring drones above a certain weight or size to be equipped with geo-fencing capabilities? Using geo-fencing, the drone can be programmed with the coordinates of aerodromes and security-sensitive areas in Singapore. If it tries to enter these areas, it will be forced to turn around or land. I understand that many commercial drones already come equipped with geo-fencing capabilities, so it should not pose too much of a regulatory burden for these drone operators. Third, CAAS regulations currently prohibit a drone from being flown beyond the normal unaided "line of sight" of the person operating it. However, there are currently beyond-visual-line-of-sight (BVLOS) technologies being developed, which will enable a drone operator to make course changes to avoid obstacles, including other aircraft, using on-board cameras. It was recently reported that the US Federal Aviation Administration is working with private companies to test commercial drones that can fly beyond an operator's line of sight. This will open up the possibility for more sophisticated drone operations, such as package delivery.”
“Mdm Speaker, unmanned aircraft, also known as UAV, remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) or "drones", are aircraft which can be operated without a human pilot on board. This Bill introduces a new regulatory framework to address security and safety concerns posed by unmanned aircraft flying in Singapore's airspace. Until recently, drones were better known for their ability to spy on enemy movements in the battlefield or deliver precision strikes on terrorists in troubled regions. However, in the past few years, drones have been more commonly mentioned for their commercial and civilian, rather than military, uses. There is the "Octocopter", which online retailer Amazon is planning to use to deliver packages in as little as half an hour after the purchase. Drones are also being used for aerial photography, patrolling of secure areas, inspecting ships and oil spills, and search and rescue operations, to name just a few. In introducing this new regulatory framework, the Government should take care to avoid hindering commercial developments by placing too heavy a regulatory burden on the Page: 81 drone market. This is so that our companies and our local entrepreneurs can benefit from, and contribute to, some of the promising innovations in this exciting new space. The Bill empowers CAAS, with the approval of the Minister for Transport, to make orders and regulations with regard to unmanned aircraft. The detailed regulations have not been spelt out in this Bill, although some have been mentioned in media reports and the Minister's speech. I would like to clarify if the following regulations are on the cards.”
“Madam, has the Government received any requests from casino operators to issue more licences after 2017? If so, are these from existing operators or are they new ones? And what arguments have been put forward by the casinos, if any? Second, what will the Government's considerations be in granting or not granting casino licences after 2017? Finally, how is the Government tracking the social harm that has been brought about by casinos since they were introduced?”
“I thank the Second Minister for his replies. Two points: first, in response to his second point, I am aware that only the "dip bags" are excluded from screening. So, my question is: given that these bags are excluded from screening, would that pose a security threat or threat of smuggling of any other items? Page: 18 On the first point about the gold, I acknowledge that it was not a security threat item. But would this amount of gold have been allowed to pass through if it was detected without being declared?”
“I thank the Second Minister for the reply. I have two supplementary questions: first, why was there no detection of the alleged items in his baggage, given that it was detected when he arrived in Bangladesh? The Second Minister said that no security threat items were discovered. I suppose this does not include gold. Would the diplomat have been allowed to transport that amount of gold, allegedly, through Changi Airport on that day? Secondly, under the VCDR, diplomatic bags or "dip bags" carried by diplomats are protected from search and seizure. This means they need not pass through security screening. How do the Police ensure that this is not exploited as a security loophole for terrorists or trafficking activities? I am concerned about this because there is no limit to the size of the "dip bag" and there have been international incidents in the past where "dip bags" have been used to smuggle a variety of banned items, including drugs, weapons and even people.”
“I have two clarifications. First is regarding the review of the Medisave Withdrawal Limit for the Integrated Shield Plan premiums. Can I ask the Minister if MOH will ensure that the limit is high enough for the standard B1 Plan so that all policyholders do not have to pay out of pocket even as their incomes drop? The second question is regarding the immunisation rate for pneumococcal disease. I am very happy to hear that it has gone up from 24% to 75%, just after the additional Medisave was provided. This shows that reducing the cost does increase the take-up rate. But 75% is still much lower than the 95% to 99% for the other vaccinations on that same list. Can I make another appeal for this to be fully subsidised because I am not sure if 75% is enough to ensure herd immunity?”
“Sir, the National Childhood Immunisation Schedule (NCIS) lists seven vaccinations against infectious diseases for children under 18 months. All are free at polyclinics, except the pneumococcal disease vaccination. Although Medisave and CDA can be used to pay for it, these have alternative uses. Some parents may decide against this vaccination if they have to pay, especially if they are not aware of the dangers of this disease. It is the leading infectious cause of death in children worldwide, and can cause deafness, brain damage, paralysis and even death. There were 146 cases diagnosed last year in Singapore. Can the Minister share what percentage of children above two years old have been immunised against pneumococcal disease? Why is pneumococcal disease on the NCIS as recommended by the Expert Committee on Immunisation, but not provided for free? Making it free could encourage a higher take-up rate and build up herd immunity against the disease, which occurs only when a significant portion of a population is immunised. IT-enabled Healthy Living”
“Mdm Chair, MOH has released a good amount of health-related data on its websites and in response to Parliamentary Questions, and I appreciate the Ministry's willingness to release this data. However, there remain some information gaps which I hope can be addressed. We typically see health reports from MOH stratifying disease rates by ethnicity, gender and age, but seldom by income level. Several studies in other countries have found an association between income and health, with lower income households tending to have poorer health. Collecting data by income brackets could help the Government better calibrate social and health programmes. If socio-economic factors indeed affect Singaporeans' health status, then social interventions should be used to complement healthy-lifestyle campaigns targeting particular races, genders or age groups. If such data has already been collected, then it should be made available to researchers and the public. Publication of the Price of Drugs”
“Government regulations in many countries lag behind technology. Singapore should strive to do things differently and be among the first to reap the social and economic benefits of these innovations. Aviation Security and Safety”
“Mdm Chair, new transport technologies like drones and self-driving cars have the potential to improve our quality of life, increase productivity and contribute to economic growth. It is important that regulation stays ahead of the curve, so as to provide a welcoming environment for these technologies, while addressing safety and security concerns. Commercial aerial drones have seen an explosion of interest in recent years. They have found an eager marketplace among movie makers, online retailers and security companies, just to name a few. Even NEA is reportedly planning to use drones to search for mosquito breeding grounds. Global spending on drones could be almost US$100 billion over the next decade. 4.30 pm There are legitimate concerns about safety, security and privacy, but these can and should be addressed without stifling innovation. MOT said that it has started reviewing the regulatory framework for drones. May I ask for an update, including when the public consultation will take place and the review completed? Page: 99 Self-driving cars will revolutionise the urban transport scene. They are potentially safer, can drastically reduce the car population, free up carpark space and cut down on emissions. Many countries are in the process of passing laws to allow driverless cars to be tested on public roads, including Sweden, Japan and several US states. Big technology companies and major carmakers, as well as local research institutions and companies, are all racing to develop their own self-driving cars. As with drones, I believe Singapore is in an excellent position to lead the world in the adoption of driverless cars. But we must ensure that legislation promotes and does not inhibit the test-bedding and public use of these vehicles.”
“Can MOT push for a fully wheelchair-accessible fleet to be rolled out earlier, for the benefit of wheelchair users, which nowadays include an increasing number of elderly residents? Safer Traffic Junctions”
“Mdm Chair, public transport accessibility is a key enabler for people with disabilities to commute for work and leisure, empowering them to be more independent and enjoy more fulfilling lives and productive careers. This will more fully tap the potential of many Singaporeans. Much progress has been made over the years to make our buildings and public transport system more accessible. I am of the view that Singapore should strive to become a world leader in public transport accessibility. We should strive to provide accessibility from door-to-door, especially for wheelchair users and visually-impaired residents, including the first- and last- mile routes between bus stops and homes, which could be located anywhere on the island. Currently, only 14% of the 6,000 signalised pedestrian crossings in Singapore are equipped with audible pedestrian signals (APSs). This means that visually-impaired Page: 88 pedestrians may still face difficulty crossing the remaining 86%. Noise disturbance has been cited as a reason for not installing more APSs or extending their operating hours. Can I suggest that tactile pedestrian signals be installed at all signalised crossings, as is common in cities like Geneva? These are little arrows located next to the crossings, which vibrate when the green man lights up. Tactile announcements can also be used at all bus stops to inform visually-impaired commuters of the arriving bus service number, without disturbing nearby residents. LTA says that about 50% of buses are currently wheelchair-accessible and it aims for 100% coverage by 2020 while SBS Transit is aiming for 2023.”
“Sir, last month, the Government announced that it is planning to build a dedicated telecoms network for public sector use, as part of the Smart Nation push. Instead of leasing connectivity, as is usually the case now, the Government will own the network backbone infrastructure. IDA said this is to provide a platform that is secure and trusted to safeguard potentially sensitive information used across multiple Government agencies. Sir, there are many security and privacy mechanisms that can be put in place to prevent unauthorised access by both outsiders and insiders. Just because a network is owned by the Page: 159 Government does not, in and of itself, make it more secure than if it were owned by private entities. In any case, the Government plans to commission private sector telcos to operate this dedicated network on its behalf, so they will still have access to it as well. 7.15 pm The other reason cited is that the Government wants to build a common infrastructure to support the deployment of Smart Nation applications. Can this not be achieved by expanding the capacity and resiliency of existing infrastructure? I am not sure if these reasons justify the cost to the public purse of building a dedicated network. Can the Minister share what is the estimated cost of building this dedicated telecoms network? How will the Government ensure that this dedicated network does not end up with excess capacity while the public networks become increasingly clogged? And lastly, can we be sure the Government will not sell away its telecoms network infrastructure to private enterprises in the future, like what happened to OpenNet, which was sold to a Singtel-owned company in October 2014? Infocomm Media Masterplan”
“I believe more comprehensive wealth statistics will help the Government to better track its effect on social mobility, and plan future tax and redistribution policies. Effective Taxation Assoc Prof Randolph Tan (Nominated Member): Chairman, I strongly applaud the Government's use of a progressive tax system – including the innovations in negative taxation of low-wage workers – to confront inequality. Effective taxation is an important aspect in measuring the success of a state. I share the feeling that increasing personal income taxes will have to occur if Singapore is to undertake more social support programmes. Personal income taxes are a sustainable means of building up reserves and, if one cannot impose effective taxation, then drawing on reserves becomes even more risky because the prospects of replenishing them would be limited. The rise in tax rates for the top income brackets is a significant move and a welcome one. Although I agree with Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister's warning about not taking tax competitiveness for granted, I believe that Singapore's personal income tax regime remains competitive against other countries until you reach fairly high income levels. Page: 143 Even though the rise in the rates which have been announced will no doubt have an effect on high-income earners, it should not easily reverse the competitive advantage. I have two questions. First, what are the risks that the announced increase in personal income tax rates will result in lower-than-expected receipts? Second, what can be done to further mitigate such risks in order to bolster the effectiveness of the tax regime? Corporate Retirement Plans”
“Sir, much has been discussed in recent years about income inequality and the steps that have been taken to reduce it. What is less discussed, but no less troubling, is wealth inequality. This refers to the unequal distribution of assets, including land, property, stocks and inheritances. Wealth inequality can increase income inequality over the long term. The wealthy can increase their income from not just high salaries and bonuses, but also from their assets in the form of rent, dividends, interest, profits, capital gains or royalties. Those with less wealth depend almost exclusively on income from their own labour. Page: 142 According to the Credit Suisse Global Wealth Data Book, the top 1% of Singapore's wealthiest people hold 29% of the country's wealth, and the top 10% hold 60%. Wealth inequality in Singapore fell slightly during the Global Financial Crisis in 2008, but since the economic recovery, it has been showing an uptrend again. Of course, complete equality of income and wealth are both unrealistic and undesirable. However, reputable studies have shown that in advanced economies, greater income inequality is associated with diminished social mobility and less equality of opportunity. Does the Government share my concern about wealth inequality in Singapore and, if so, what are its strategies and plans to narrow this gap? How are statistics on wealth inequality being tracked by the Government? The Department of Statistics has said it will continue to monitor international developments in the compilation of wealth statistics and review the feasibility of doing so in Singapore. Does MOF take the same approach, and if so, have there been any developments in compiling wealth statistics?”
“Thank you, Madam. I have got three clarifications on the Jobs Bank, Fair Consideration Framework, as well as the Progressive Wage Model. Firstly, on the Jobs Bank, in response to Senior Minister of State Amy Khor's question, I am aware that job applications can come through many different channels. But for employers who post on the Jobs Bank, can they be required to update MOM whether the position was filled by a Singaporean or foreigner? I think that is not too much to ask because the Jobs Bank service was provided for free to them, and this will enable MOM to be able to spot any companies which are hiring an unusually high proportion of foreigners for new vacancies. And MOM can take steps to address it with these companies without waiting for complaints. Secondly, on the Fair Consideration Framework, could I request for the Senior Minister of State's response to my suggestion that employers submitting EP applications be required to justify hiring a foreigner instead of a Singaporean? And on a Progressive Wage Model, I know MOM is not currently planning to legislate PWM for sectors beyond cleaning, security and landscaping. The Senior Parliamentary Secretary cited criteria like outsourcing and cheap sourcing. So, are these the only three sectors where outsourcing and cheap sourcing are prevalent, and what other criteria is MOM Page: 128 looking for to quality for PWM? 5.45 pm”
“I urge the Government to look into introducing sectoral minimum wages under the Progressive Wage Model to more domestic-oriented industry sectors, so as to ensure that Singaporeans in those sectors are paid wages that are enough for themselves and their families to live on.”
“Mdm Chair, a minimum wage aims to protect employees from exploitation and enables them to afford the basic necessities of life. But critics say it makes lower skilled workers uncompetitive, resulting in job losses as companies move overseas or hire fewer workers. There is no national minimum wage in Singapore. Salaries are subject to negotiation and mutual agreement between employers and employees or the trade union representing the employees. However, the wages of those in the lowest income group are not enough to cope with the high cost of living in Singapore. According to the Household Expenditure Survey, there are almost 85,000 resident households with a monthly income of less than $1,000 a month. Yet, these households spend an average of $1,461 per month, or 46% more than they earn. [Please refer to "Clarification by Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Manpower", Official Report, 10 March 2015, Vol 93, Issue No 13.] The Progressive Wage Model is being implemented for the cleaning and security sectors, and soon the landscaping sector. However, these are not the only sectors which suffer from the malaise of low wages. Low-wage jobs can be found in other domestic-oriented sectors like F&B, retail and personal services. In these sectors, jobs are usually performed locally for customers who are in Singapore, so there is less risk that such jobs will move overseas even Page: 112 if wages rise. The Finance Minister has pointed out in his Budget Statement that productivity growth in the domestic-oriented sector is less than a fifth of that for the outward-oriented sectors, yet employment growth has been mainly in the former. This lends weight to the need for these sectors to be upgraded to improve their productivity.”
“This should be included as well so that Singaporean PMETs have greater opportunities to apply and be fairly considered for these positions. FCF”
“Mdm Chair, the Jobs Bank portal was launched in July 2014. It now boasts of thousands of job postings, registered employers and Singaporean job seekers. However, none of these point to its effectiveness in meeting the objective of ensuring that Singaporeans are fairly considered for jobs before firms hire foreigners. This is a key plank for the Fair Consideration Framework. I would like to make some observations about the Jobs Bank and provide some suggestions for improvement to meet this important objective. First, the outcomes of the Jobs Bank postings do not seem to be effectively tracked. MOM should require employers who post advertisements on the Jobs Bank to subsequently indicate whether those positions were filled, and if so by Singaporeans or foreigners. It should be done whether or not the successful candidate came through the Jobs Bank. This will enable MOM to track what proportion of jobs in a particular company or industry was filled by Singaporeans or foreigners. This will help track those companies' compliance with the Fair Consideration Framework and will also provide the Government with more detailed data about what types of jobs have local skills shortages so as to plan better education and training policies. Second, employers are not required to provide any evidence that they fairly considered Singaporeans for the post. They just need to advertise on the Jobs Bank for 14 calendar days before applying for an Employment Pass. In other jurisdictions, including Hong Kong, employers are required to state justifications for employing a foreign candidate and the reasons why the post cannot be filled by locals before an Employment Pass is issued. Third, S Pass applications do not require prior Jobs Bank posting.”
“Which of our laws authorise surveillance of individuals who are not targets of security operations or criminal investigations? And lastly, what independent oversight, like the Courts or Parliamentary Committees, are in place to guard against abuse?”
“Mdm Chair, in 2013, a scandal broke out in the US over reports that the National Security Agency (NSA) had been Page: 146 collecting telephone data of millions of its citizens and had access to the servers of several technology companies, including Facebook and Google, to track their customers' communications. The scandal soon widened to Europe when it was reported that GCHQ, the UK spy agency, had tapped fibre-optic cables carrying global communications data and shared it with the NSA. Both governments justified this mass surveillance in the name of national security and insisted they were lawful. But many people were upset that they were unaware that their private communications were being monitored. Some questioned their legality and the insufficient oversight by their courts and legislature. Singapore is a technologically advanced country which places a high priority on security. Singaporeans who have been following these developments in the US and Europe may be concerned that they may be subject to similar types of surveillance here. The Personal Data Protection Act governs the collection, use and disclosure of individuals' personal data by organisations, but the Government is exempt from this Act. I understand and agree with the need for some surveillance for legitimate security purposes to keep our country safe, but I have several concerns. What safeguards are in place to ensure that surveillance on individuals, particularly Singaporeans, is done only for legitimate purposes, like security operations or criminal investigations? How are the data and intelligence protected to ensure that they are not misused or leaked by those who have access to them?”
“I would, therefore, like to ask: should the actions of China in the South China Sea infringe on the freedom of navigation and overflight for ASEAN members, including Singapore, what will Singapore do on its own, as well as in solidarity with ASEAN, to respond and protect our interests? Relations with Japan, Korea and Australia”
“Mdm Chair, recent years have seen an escalation of tension over territorial disputes in the South China Sea. China has been increasingly assertive in its claims to islands that are hundreds of miles from its own borders but within the Exclusive Economic Zones of our ASEAN neighbours – Brunei, Malaysia, the Philippines and Vietnam. China also claims waters within its self-declared "nine-dash line" demarcation which envelops almost the entire South China Sea. To assert its claims, China has been building airstrips and facilities and reclaiming land on and around these features. As The Economist put it: "The extent and speed of China's building boom on the disputed islands flout the spirit of the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties that signed in 2002 with ASEAN." Singapore is not a claimant to any of these disputes and has maintained that these disputes can only be settled by the parties directly concerned. I appreciate that Singapore seeks to build friendly relations with all countries, including China. However, I am concerned that China's extensive and robust territorial claims may, now or in the future, infringe on freedom of navigation and overflight for vessels and planes travelling to and from Singapore. This could impact our trade with the world, which is vital, and also our security. The Minister has said before in Parliament that only a united ASEAN can credibly play a central role in engaging major powers towards the common goal of promoting regional peace, stability and prosperity.”
“Madam, I want to thank the Deputy Prime Minister for taking the time to explain why he disagreed with our proposal for an early payout eligibility age. I want to clarify a few points just to make sure that the whole House is clear on what our proposal was. Firstly, we also did not propose the proposal in isolation. We were not saying just lower the payout eligibility age. To clarify, this is not the same as asking for an entire lump sum withdrawal at age 60. It is really just stretching out the period in which the payouts from CPF are given to members. So, instead of starting from age 65 until death, it is from age 60 until death. Secondly, it is just an option. We are not saying that everybody has to start at age 60. Page: 57 Thirdly, I did propose also that there should be more personalised public education on the CPF scheme, especially if our proposal is taken up. It must be explained to the members that there will be consequences for an early withdrawal. We did say that there will be a 6% to 7% decrease in the payout. So, the terms of the early withdrawal, early payout, will really only be attractive to those who really need the money at that point of time. As I explained in my speech, it could be because they are out of work and they cannot find work or they are not able to work for whatever reason. So, our main point is that life is unpredictable and we cannot presume to know the financial situation of every person at age 60. There might be some members who really have a need, too, and we should give them that flexibility.”
“Although rapid growth often stokes inequality, the solution should not be less growth, but a better formula for redistributing the benefits of growth. No formula is perfect, but Singapore has to be cautious and prepare for the possibility that – unlike resource-rich and larger economies – slower growth may not turn out to be the idyllic experience we imagine. By simultaneously drawing on surpluses, proposing a deficit and announcing a surprise rise in taxes on the high income, this Budget gives us a timely reminder of the stark realities we face. Mdm Speaker, I support this Budget. 2.43 pm”
“For instance, in areas, such as childcare, children's school fees and textbooks, the assistance should be enough so that the working members of the household can continue to function in the workforce effectively. As the latest household expenditure survey showed, the gap between average expenditure and average income for the lowest quintile is not small. In view of this, I would respectfully disagree with those who ask for less stringent criteria for allocating Silver Support. Giving, say, a few hundred dollars to everyone of a certain demographic group would spread the amounts out too thin. It is better to give to those who need them in a structured and precise manner. It is also important to develop clear rules for withdrawal of support, to allow for the prospect that some recipients at least may in time to come no longer need them. This is because there are many others whom attention should be given to in the competition for assistance. Page: 63 Despite the desire to have more social safety nets, this Budget is a reminder that they have to be funded through either surpluses or new avenues of tax. In conclusion, I feel that it is timely to take stock of our vulnerabilities as a small economy, in light of the frequent calls for a less hectic pace of growth. A small dynamic economy like Singapore may not slow down "well". It is not something we fully understand. The fiscal space to fund more social programmes ultimately comes from strong economic growth. Hence, we should continue to exploit the opportunities for better growth whenever they present themselves. That will require that we secure our footholds in new growth areas and this Budget is making a very good start on that.”
“My concern is that such rapid changes to the labour force participation rate of older workers will have significant consequences for our society and it may be better to allow these changes to develop slowly with an eye to their longer term benefits rather than to consider older worker participation as a goal in itself. Finally, I would like to laud the Government for raising personal income tax rates for the top income brackets. Here, I do believe that a direct linkage with prioritising social support for those in greatest need is an important part of a social compact that is one answer to how to even out the unequal gains from rapid growth. One way for the economy to find its footing through what I believe will be an extended duration of the current restructuring process is to ensure that the fruits of the growth that had been made possible through the earlier growth strategy are distributed more evenly. Even as the Budgets over the last five years have concentrated on steering the economy through this wide arc of restructuring, there has also been substantial attention paid in these Budgets to uplifting the low-income and disadvantaged through schemes like Workfare. Budget 2015 continues to provide more secure and targeted redistribution that is focused on benefiting the low-income. Despite the remarkable and welcome leap in targeted assistance represented by Silver Support, however, there are still many groups which will be left out. Those in the lowest quintile with young children or elderly dependents and, therefore, whose ability to hold down a job while performing challenging caregiving roles, are people who also deserve targeted assistance. Their needs should be met by ensuring their dependents are provided for.”
“It has already been widely acknowledged that the participation rate of older workers has been increasing over the last few years. This is undoubtedly already a significant policy achievement. A comparison of the labour force participation rates (LFPR) of Singapore, South Korea, Hong Kong and Taiwan reveals Singapore's rate among those aged 50 and above now to be the highest of this group. Singapore has also seen the largest increase in the labour force participation rate in this group over the last 10 years. Hence, there are at least two important policy questions to consider. First, is there scope for further increase, and second, what are the consequences of pushing this participation rate up even further, especially for the consequences of alternative roles that older Singaporeans already play? On the first question, we should note that the increase in the labour force participation rate of those aged 55 to 59 jumped 15 points over the decade from June 2004 to June 2014, while the one for those aged 60 to 64 jumped a staggering 26 points. This brings the labour force participation rate for these two groups very close to, although they are still lower than, those of Japan. On the second point, Singapore is still the type of society where multi-generational family structures, with its accompanying system of support, have been traditionally valued. And that type of arrangement has spill-over economic benefits: for instance, when grandparents look after the kids, women in the prime of their life can continue to contribute Page: 62 in the workforce.”
“In comparison, the Wage Credit Scheme, first announced in Budget 2013, will run much longer than that and – counting the Transition Support Package as a whole – will amount to an estimated S$9.1 billion by 2017, $7.3 billion of which will be expended in the first three years. The extent to which the total amount of these employment credits exceeds the Jobs Credit Scheme is too large to ignore. A survey of the state of the global economy shows that the strengthening evidence of late recovery from the Great Recession is generally interspersed with fresh signs of a number Page: 61 of political, financial, economic and conflict-driven risks. Given that the danger of a downturn is not negligible, we should conserve our policy options. There is also a third concern with excessive use of employment credits and, that is, policy overreach. Apart from the Wage Credit Scheme, we also now have the Temporary Employment Credit and the Special Employment Credit schemes. The Temporary Employment Credit scheme is explicitly linked to rises in employer CPF contributions, and means that taxpayers temporarily take on the increased payments. Given this explicit link and the fact that it is allocated the smallest funding, we may leave it aside as the least problematic of the three. That leaves the Special Employment Credit. The SEC is aimed at improving the employability of older workers; it was introduced in Budget 2011 as a one-off measure for three years. Just a year later, it was enhanced and extended for five years from 2012 to 2016. The payouts also leapt from the $100 million that had been estimated for 2011 to an estimated $497 million in each of the years of the extended period.”
“Hence, one possibility in going forward could be to adopt levy holidays, not as entitlements awarded for past performance, but tied to sustained and ongoing improvements. Madam, notwithstanding my support for the Budget, I believe there is at least one aspect of our restructuring policies which deserves serious reconsideration. Presently, there are three employment credit schemes in force: the Special Employment Credit (SEC), Temporary Employment Credit (TEC) and the Wage Credit Scheme (WCS). Given that such programmes distort the labour market, their extended use is a serious cause of concern. Although they do have the effect of shifting relative wages in favour of local workers, they also end up delaying the adjustments that businesses should make in order to complete restructuring. There is also a second problem with the extension of employment credits during times when employment growth is already healthy: it would limit the options available in times of real labour market weakness. Singapore's successful exit in 2010 from the recession was due in no small part to the innovation of the Jobs Credit Scheme (JCS). As we saw at that time, the policy timing was important, in both implementation and swift withdrawal. During the downturn in 2009, concerns were raised about the sustainability of CPF cuts as a counter-recessionary policy. Blunt or not, it remains one of the very few instruments available to policymakers. Employment credits are another in this limited arsenal and their over-use now could render them impotent when the need arises. The Jobs Credit Scheme was in effect for a mere 18 months, comprising S$4.3 billion spread out over six quarterly payouts, according to IRAS.”
“With regard to the foreign manpower controls, I believe it is not too early to begin looking ahead to a future when foreign manpower growth will firmly come under control and the use of foreign manpower should then stabilise at a sustainable level. The Government has already made it clear that the levies are not a revenue stream. I support this stance, because dependence on such disincentive schemes for revenue would be a source of weakness to the fiscal system. For that reason and in line with the forward-looking nature of recent Budgets, I would urge the Government to begin considering how the system of levies can be modified for the future. I do not agree, however, with those economists and business leaders who call for a reduction or refund of levies, to reward companies who have demonstrated improved productivity with less intensive foreign manpower utilisation. The reason for my disagreeing with this approach is that I believe the levies also serve another important role. It seeks to price in the social burden, such as to public infrastructure, of accommodating a large population of foreign manpower. But if the underlying implication is that such levies are Page: 60 purely punitive without recognising effort at improving performance, then I would agree that the system would automatically lose its relevance if left in its current form. Madam, the fundamental issue is, therefore, how to ensure that the recalibrated manpower policy continues to best serve the economy's needs. Instead of rewarding achievements in productivity and foreign manpower savings, the aim should be to adopt a formula which can secure such gains.”
“Page: 59 In the meantime, the productivity effort and the recalibration of foreign manpower have often been regarded as synonymous. They are actually distinct, I argue, and whether we like it or not, each must continue at as quick a pace as possible. There has been an unfortunate tendency to fault the manpower recalibration directly for the lack of progress in productivity improvements. This is unfair. We should instead consider the magnitude of the restructuring task Singapore is embarked upon. Going by available data for the first half of 2014, we are only seeing the first non-recession year in a decade where foreign manpower growth will come in slower than local manpower growth. A change this huge will clearly impact work processes and more time should be allowed for work performance to reach its potential. Mdm Speaker, given the scale of such a shift, the complexity of the manoeuvre – if I may borrow the analogy – is like steering a very large vessel. The sharper the turn, the wider the turning arc required. One of the greatest dangers is to begin acceleration without ensuring that the vessel is properly stabilised as it comes out of its turn. It is not unreasonable for the economy to require time to stabilise before it can accelerate to its full potential under the restructured regime. In contrast to some suggestions that the productivity targets themselves should be modified in light of the performance to-date, I believe the targets are not unreasonable. Instead, it might be better to be patient and allow the timeframe for their achievement to extend beyond the current decade. There are signs of real progress on productivity overcoming the resistance to change and the Government should firmly commit itself to the validity of the target as a long-term goal.”
“Going forward, I urge the Government to conserve such schemes for times of real need and, instead, redirect these resources towards providing even more of a role for social support. The surprise – but extremely welcome – raising of rates for top personal income tax brackets is a very important achievement of this Budget. Together with the advances in tax progressivity, conferred with negative taxes, they go a long way towards compensating for the regressive nature of broad-based indirect taxes we have in our system. While the rise in rates will not come into force for some time, I fully support the Deputy Prime Minister's point that they are a necessary feature going forward, if the calls from many quarters for more social safety nets are to be heeded. The current Budget is able to run a projected deficit by drawing on the benefits of surpluses. These surpluses are likely to shrink with slower rates of economic growth. Hence the Budget has identified five growth clusters for the future. These new growth clusters offer hope for recovering our growth momentum, but may not necessarily be at a base less hectic than we had a decade ago. Mdm Speaker, please allow me to elaborate on these points. Despite having undergone five years of restructuring, I believe we should accept that it is not unreasonable for productivity improvements to be slow in showing up. This is because the economic transformation that is needed strikes at the very core of the way Singapore's society and its businesses think and operate. We are nostalgic for the past but, at the same time, impatient for the future. This is true not just in our personal lives but in the way business and workplace norms are structured. It becomes a question of which we consider more important in moving forward.”
“Third, personalised public education should be conducted for all CPF members, in their preferred language or dialect, well in advance of their 55th birthday, so as to give them more time to consider their options and discuss with family members. And fourth, the basis for calculating the Silver Support quantum should be made public and it should take into account the current financial situation of seniors to ensure that the needy are not excluded. It should also be paid out monthly instead of quarterly. 2.27 pm Assoc Prof Randolph Tan (Nominated Member): Thank you, Mdm Speaker, for allowing me to join this debate. I strongly support this Budget. This is an expansionary Budget well worth celebrating. At the same time, these are challenging times. Page: 58 I applaud the Budget's strong commitment to both the ongoing productivity effort and the recalibration of the foreign manpower policy. I also applaud the Budget's renewed emphasis on the importance of targeted social support. Just as I believe the tightening two years ago of the criteria for Workfare Income Supplement (WIS) payouts was the correct decision to take, I believe that the coverage of the Silver Support scheme should be kept narrow for better effect rather than diluted by too wide a spread. I also strongly support the continued application of such negative taxes to further enhance the progressivity of the tax system to the advantage of the lower income. On the other hand, I am concerned by the fact that a key part of the Government's manpower policy is an overly heavy emphasis on using employment credits to tilt wage relativities in favour of local workers.”
“Can the Deputy Prime Minister share his basis for deriving the Silver Support quantum? Does it look at household expenditure and does it assume that all retirees receive additional forms of income, like children's contributions? Page: 57 Given the increasing cost of living in Singapore, I urge the Government to ensure that Silver Support is enough to cover retirees' basic household expenses and that it also increases over time to account for inflation. Second, while I agree that the Silver Support Scheme should provide targeted support, the evaluation criteria should take into account the current financial situation of the seniors and should not be so stringent that genuine cases end up being excluded. In particular, the "household support" criterion must not deny Silver Support to seniors whose children are unable to support them or whom they are estranged from. Needy seniors should not have to suffer for their children's inability or unwillingness to support them. My third request on Silver Support is that it should be paid out monthly instead of quarterly. Silver Support recipients are not working and receiving a salary, unlike Workfare recipients, yet they still have to pay monthly household expenses like bills, food, transport and rental. A monthly payout would help seniors in their cash flow management. Madam, in summary, I would like to reiterate the four main proposals in my speech. First, more flexibility should be given to CPF members to start receiving CPF payouts, as early as age 60, if they need to, so as to help those who are not able to find work at that age. Second, the CPF Payout Eligibility Age should be de-linked from the Retirement and Re-employment Age, to provide more certainty for seniors.”
“This should be conducted in a language or dialect that he is comfortable with and he should be allowed to bring a few family members to the meeting. It should be done at least three months before the member becomes eligible to withdraw his CPF. This personalised meeting should be done, on top of the public seminars that are available to CPF members. It will provide a channel for important information to be explained personally to the member and to give him an opportunity to seek clarification from the officer. The last matter I wish to raise concerns the Silver Support Scheme. While CPF payouts are usually enough to meet the retirement needs of seniors who have the Full Retirement Sum or more at retirement, there is a sizeable number of Singaporeans whose CPF payouts are insufficient to meet basic household expenditure. The solution for these individuals cannot be to postpone their CPF withdrawals or place further restrictions on their use of CPF and Medisave. This will only exacerbate their difficult financial situation. I am glad that the Government has acknowledged that individual responsibility through the CPF system has its limits and that it is time to provide a form of old-age support for needy senior citizens. While the details of the Silver Support Scheme are still being worked out, I would like to make some remarks on the scheme based on what the Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister has announced. First, the Silver Support quantum seems rather low, ranging from $100 to $250 per month. This is much lower than what even the poorest 20% of households spend each month on basic household necessities, which is $761 per month for all households and $317 per month for retiree households, according to last year's Household Expenditure Survey.”
“I am aware that there are many ways in which CPF Board tries to get its message out, including pamphlets, public seminars and even advertisements on YouTube. However, none of these ensures that a CPF member is fully aware of the choices he has to make at critical junctures, like at age 55 or 65. A letter is sent to CPF members just one to two months before they turn 55, to inform them that they can apply to withdraw their CPF. This may not give them enough time or information to consider their choices carefully. My observation is that the public education on CPF currently focuses a lot on how CPF benefits Singaporeans, or to clarify misunderstandings about CPF. The questions asked in the REACH poll are quite telling. They include questions like "If you do not meet your Minimum Sum requirement, do you need to top up the shortfall in cash?" and "Do you think you will receive a monthly payout from age 65 if you do not meet the full Minimum Sum?" Public education on CPF should be more tailored to individual members, focusing on the information and numbers that are directly relevant to them and the choices they have to make. We should not confuse people with numbers that are irrelevant to them, like the different Minimum Sum amounts and Drawdown Ages for different age groups. While the CPF website has a number of useful calculators, not every retiree is technically savvy enough Page: 56 to access or use them correctly. Therefore, I would like to suggest that before reaching the age of 55, every CPF member should be invited to meet one-on-one with a CPF Board officer, who should explain the details of the scheme, including how much he has in his account, how much he can withdraw, when he can withdraw, the choices of CPF LIFE plans and what his monthly payouts would be.”
“However, just because the Re-employment Age has been raised does not mean that everyone will be able to work until age 65, as I explained earlier. Furthermore, the statutory Retirement Age is now only 62. This leaves a gap of three years that a retiree will have to tide over, should his company not offer him re-employment until age 65. I would like to reiterate the Workers' Party's earlier calls for the Payout Eligibility Age to be de-linked from either the Retirement Age or the Re-employment Age. Even if the Page: 55 Retirement Age is increased, the Payout Eligibility Age should remain constant at 60. This will provide members with more assurance of when they are eligible to start drawing from their CPF, regardless of their employment status, instead of wondering when the target will move again. Madam, I would like to touch on the public education aspects of the CPF scheme. The CPF scheme is not easy to understand, regardless of one's level of education. The large amount of technical jargon, acronyms, figures and different conditions that apply to people with different birth years, all add to the confusion. There is a pressing need to increase and improve public education about the CPF scheme. The CPF Advisory Panel has also recommended that more public education on CPF is needed. A recent poll by REACH, the Government feedback unit, found that only 13% of respondents under 55 were able to provide the estimated monthly payout under CPF LIFE if one met the Minimum Sum requirement. With greater choices provided in the CPF scheme, it is important that CPF members are fully aware of the implications of their choices, including the lower payouts if they choose to start withdrawals earlier or withdraw a lump sum.”
“For example, they may have been retrenched and because of a skills mismatch or age discrimination, may not be able to secure another job. Or they may be labourers who are simply too old to do manual work. When I observed the young men who helped me move the heavy furniture in my home recently, I wondered how long they would be able to continue in that role and what jobs they will be able to do once they are not strong enough to carry such heavy loads. The Workers' Party, therefore, proposes lowering the Payout Eligibility Age to 60. This will give CPF members the flexibility to start receiving CPF monthly payouts earlier, if they need to, instead of having to wait until age 65. This was a call made by my colleague, the Member for Hougang, Mr Png Eng Huat, in May 2014. I agree with the CPF Advisory Panel's recommendation to give members flexibility to defer their Payout Start Age to as late as 70, with a permanent 6% to 7% increase in monthly payouts for every year that they defer. In line with this, under the Workers' Party's proposal, there will be a permanent 6% to 7% decrease in payouts for every year that members choose to bring forward their Payout Start Age. Members must be made aware that their monthly payouts could be significantly less should they choose this early payout option. Many Singaporeans have expressed frustration about the constantly increasing Payout Eligibility Age. It was 63 last year, 64 this year and will be 65 in 2018. It seems to be moving up together with the Re-employment Age. Perhaps, it is assumed that people are able to work until the Re-employment Age and do not need to draw down their CPF savings before that.”
“Apart from paying off day-to-day expenses, I feel confident of being able to manage my own money well and not squander it. However, the reality for me, and I think many other working Singaporeans, is that if not for the forced savings that CPF has imposed, we would probably have saved much less for retirement. As pointed out by Mr Donald Low from the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy in a commentary in The Straits Times last week, faced with a choice between an immediate reward and a larger delayed benefit, people often choose the former. Also, even if CPF members make an effort to invest their retirement savings after they are withdrawn, not many will have investment skills that are good enough to consistently beat the current 4% CPF Retirement Account interest rate in the long term. We also have to be on guard against swindlers who will try to find ways to persuade vulnerable elderly folks to part with their CPF money if they withdraw the full amount at one go. Therefore, while we understand Singaporeans' strong sentiments about the Minimum Sum "locking up" our CPF money, for the reasons I just mentioned, the Workers' Party will not be asking for CPF members to be allowed to withdraw all their CPF money in a lump sum, Page: 54 except under special circumstances. Having said that, there is still room for providing CPF members with more flexibility in determining when to start receiving monthly payouts from their CPF. Currently, members can start drawing down their CPF only upon reaching their DrawDown Age, now known as the Payout Eligibility Age, which will be 65 from 2018 onwards. Some CPF members may have genuine reasons for needing monthly payouts to start earlier than age 65.”