Halimah Yacob
Singapore
“Thank you. I think that is certainly a very good idea and that is what we want to do and wish to do, to have the integration of the facilities. As the Member said, it is to encourage inter-generational bonding and support. In fact, we have already started one in Mr Seah Kian Peng's constituency.”
“I thank the Senior Parliamentary Secretary for the clarification, and for his information, I have written twice to LTA. The answers have been negative. My question is, what is the alternative because the purpose of the overhead pedestrian bridge is for people to cross over but the elderly has difficulty crossing over?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I am really happy to hear about the immense investment in helping households cope with the rising cost of energy. There will continue to be households that, despite these assistance measures, will face difficulty in paying for their electricity bills.”
“Sir, I would like to ask the Minister: if the problem in Japan is not resolved within the next few months, what measures will be in place to assist sectors that are affected, notably, sectors like electronics?”
“Madam, I have two concise clarifications. My first concise clarification is to ask the Minister about the very low unemployment rate. Given this very low unemployment rate, does MOM have strategies in place to help people who want to find jobs, not just those who are already displaced but those who are currently employed?”
“Madam, on behalf of the House, I would like to thank the Minister, the Minister of State and the Senior Parliamentary Secretary for the very comprehensive and detailed responses given. This year, the Ministry of Manpower did not have the highest number of cuts. That honour went to the Ministry of National Development.”
The complete record
Every one of 1,190 lines we hold for Halimah Yacob, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 24.
“Thank you. I think that is certainly a very good idea and that is what we want to do and wish to do, to have the integration of the facilities. As the Member said, it is to encourage inter-generational bonding and support. In fact, we have already started one in Mr Seah Kian Peng's constituency. It will be an integrated facility, but that is because we have the premises. The opportunities are, therefore, for us to site the two facilities together. But we will certainly take into account Mr Christopher de Souza's views and we will proactively look at ways to site both the facilities together in order to support each other. Page: 1040”
“I want to thank the Member for asking the questions. On the first question, we intend to do three things. We intend to enlarge the scope of work of the Senior Care Associates, through skills upgrading, so that they can do a lot more work after the skills upgrading training through the WSQ. Secondly, we intend to deploy the use of more assisted technology, for instance, the use of hoist in moving seniors from the bed to the chair and so on. That also reduces the tedium and the menial part of the work associated with taking care of the elderly. The third part, as the Member has raised, is a question of how we deploy other resources we have in the community, for instance, back-to-work women, of housewives as well as retirees. What we intend to do and are looking at is how to break up the work that is being done at the Senior Care Centres, as well as in the Senior Activity Centres, to see whether we could then deploy, make use of housewives and retirees in this work, instead of just looking for full-time workers. On the second question about group homes: group homes basically aim to provide assisted living to encourage our seniors to stay independent and to support their integration into society. We have already opened one at Pipit Road in February this year. We intend to open another – it is on track – in December this year or early next year, 2013. We are also working with MND to identify sites to have more group homes, and also to put the Senior Group Homes as part of the planning parameters for MND when they are planning for development in areas. We have received very good feedback about the Senior Group Homes. Page: 1040”
“And we want to do better, so as to provide even better support to parents and to better prepare our children for the future. The Prime Minister's announcements at the National Day Rally are indeed a concrete reflection of this. They represent a new stage of development for our pre-school sector; a new milestone on a continuous journey which we have started years back. In navigating this journey, Sir, we value and take seriously feedback, and we will continue to do so. This includes inputs from parents, pre-school professionals, parliamentarians, members of the public and Mr Yee himself. We study and take them into account in setting directions, developing policies and implementing programmes. Often, however, such feedback and views, including those from experts, are mixed. Just over the past few weeks, we can see that some Singaporeans are of the view that the Government should nationalise and standardise the provision of pre-school, while others prefer a diversity of programmes and players so that parents have more choices. Some parents want more structured curriculum and programmes, while others feel quite the opposite. There is, Sir, no unanimous agreement on what is the best approach for Singapore. It is not an easy issue with clear solutions. We will consider the diverse feedback we receive and study other systems. We will decide based on our circumstances and the stage of development of the sector, and especially the interest and well-being of our children. That is of paramount consideration. This is what we have done in the past and will continue to do. 6.30 pm”
“This is a three-fold increase and many of the centres are spread out across all the HDB estates. All Anchor Operators charge fees that are below the market median. Few of these would have been possible without the scheme. Overall, Sir, this tiered approach has enabled us to improve the childcare landscape significantly. Today, we have a diverse range of operators, providing parents with choices. At the same time, we have a strong core of non-profit providers offering affordable, good quality services. We want to grow this core over time so that we can reach out to more low- and middle-income families, and ensure no child is denied access to good quality childcare. Page: 651 Moving forward, the Implementation Committee for Enhancing Pre-school Education is reviewing the design of the scheme. We intend to expand the coverage of the scheme by attracting and admitting more operators so as to bring benefits to more parents and children. That is one point that Mr Yee raised, and that is with regard to the fact whether having Anchor Operators affects the ability of the commercial operators to grow. Based on the statistics that we have, Sir, we have seen growth in both the Anchor Operator market, as well as growth in the commercial sector. But the Anchor Operator scheme is very important because we are using tax payers money. We have to make sure that we award it to those who are non-profit and provide a public service, who are able to contain fees and yet at the same time provide good quality childcare services to the public, particularly the low- and middle-income families. Sir, I want to say that notwithstanding these improvements, we know we can always do better.”
“Rental rates for these sites are also subsidised so that the operators can offer more affordable fees. Third, we have an Anchor Operator Scheme – a point alluded to by Mr Yee – where we provide additional support to non-profits who meet additional criteria and who commit to stringent terms and conditions. The additional support is to enable them to significantly increase childcare places that are both of good quality and affordability for the mass market, that is, those from low-to middle-income families. The basic entry criteria to the scheme are made known. In addition to development grants and subsidised rental rates, Anchor Operators also receive a recurrent grant to defray the costs of recruiting and developing good quality teachers for their new centres. In other words, whoever wants to take advantage of the Anchor Operator scheme and wants to receive additional grants and support, is entitled to do so. It is open to them, even if you have a commercial entity who feels that it wants to do that, can always set up a non-profit arm. And if they qualify and fulfil the conditions, they are also eligible to become an Anchor Operator and receive the additional support from the Government. In return, Sir, Anchor Operators are held to higher quality targets than the rest of the sector, and must commit to delivering their childcare programmes at affordable fees. Anchor Operators also need to be inclusive and secular, not catering to any one ethnic or religious group. They must also be financially able to sustain their operations and achieve sufficient scale, in order to meet Government's objectives over the long term. Since the scheme was introduced in 2009, there are now close to 200 childcare centres operated by the two Anchor Operators across the island.”
“We worked with training providers to increase training courses and places. Generous scholarships and bursaries were given out. Today, more than 80% of childcare centres have at least three out of four of their N2, K1 and K2 teachers with a diploma in pre-school education. We have also extended curriculum and systems support to pre-school providers. MCYS' Early Years Development Framework, together with MOE's Kindergarten Curriculum Framework, provides guidance to centres on designing quality programmes. MOE's Singapore Pre-school Accreditation Framework (SPARK) also helps centres evaluate and improve the quality of kindergarten-level programmes. Sir, Mr Yee has raised some concerns on our Anchor Operator scheme. Let me also take this opportunity to explain to the House how the Government extends support to the different operators in the childcare sector. Broadly, we adopt a three-pronged approach as follows. Page: 650 First, significant support goes towards the entire sector as a whole. We support all centres with measures to help raise quality and to develop a steady supply of trained manpower. These come in the form of programme and curriculum guidelines, quality standards, subsidised consultancy, training and scholarships, and resources on good employment practices. At the second level, Sir, we provide additional support to non-profit operators. We do this because non-profit operators have a social mission to provide affordable services to families and children and, in particular, extra help to those who have greater financial or other needs. This is in line with our objective of greater support for these groups of children and families. We do this through providing development grants to non-profit operators to set up centres in the HDB heartlands.”
“Parents can also utilise funds from the Child Development Account (CDA), for which Government provides a one-for-one matching grant, to offset the cost of childcare fees. With this combination of subsidies and financial assistance, a family earning $2,000 a month for example, may pay as low as $15 per month out of pocket at a typical childcare centre at a HDB estate. Mr Yee's reference to the trend in average fees in the industry may not provide a very good picture of affordability for the majority of low- and middle-income families since average fees are skewed by high-end centres. May I, Sir, point to the handouts, which show the trend in median fees for the industry and for childcare centres that operate in HDB estates. As you can see, we raised subsidies by $150 in 2008, the industry median fee for childcare increased by $120. So, parents are still $30 better off. If they use a centre in the HDB heartlands, they are about $80 better off even after taking into account fees over the years. For the lower income groups, Sir, they would have received additional subsidies. Nonetheless, we acknowledge that families face rising costs and there is room to do more. There is always reason for us to do more, whether in terms of accessibility, affordability or quality. This is not a sector where we want to say we have reached the peak. This is a sector where we want to seek continuous improvement, just like the education sector. As the Prime Minister has mentioned in his National Day Rally speech, we will look into ways to make childcare and infant care more affordable for low- and middle-income households. Let me come to the issue of quality, Sir. To improve quality, we raised the qualification requirements for kindergarten-level teachers and edu-carers of younger children.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, may I get your permission to distribute the handout? [Copies of handout were distributed to hon Members]. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I would firstly like to thank Mr Yee for his views and suggestions for the childcare sector. Obviously, this is an issue close to the hearts of Singaporeans. It is also an area where the Government – especially MCYS and MOE – has paid close attention and made significant efforts. Over the last few years in particular, we have invested in significant initiatives to provide parents with more accessible, affordable and quality childcare and kindergarten options. I think these are the three points raised by Mr Yee in his statement just now. Allow me, Sir, to briefly share some examples. Through the Child Care Masterplan introduced in 2008, we have improved accessibility. More than 200 new childcare centres were set up. Today, we have close to 1,000 childcare centres across the island, providing up to 90,000 places. This is an increase of about 40% over four years. Over the next five years, we will be providing another 20,000 childcare places to meet the increased demand. Page: 649 To make childcare more affordable, we raised the universal childcare subsidy in 2008 from $150 to $300. Sir, if Members could refer to the handout that I have distributed, they will get details of the enhancement that we have provided in supporting families for their childcare fees. More recently, we have enhanced childcare financial assistance for families with household incomes up to $3,500 and we introduced a per capita income criterion to allow larger families to receive more subsidies.”
“Even as the Ministry continues to ensure the more hazardous workplaces like shipyards and construction sites continue to improve their standards of safety to protect workers, they are now expanding their scope into covering other areas. They obviously need a lot more employees and staff to do the monitoring and enforcement work. In conclusion, Sir, I also support the wider coverage of occupational diseases under this amendment. Safety and health measures will now apply not only to those specific diseases listed in the schedule but also to any other disease that a worker contracts because of his exposure to any chemical or biological agents. The kinds of chemicals that are used in workplaces now have expanded considerably and some of them are really toxic. We need to ensure that the Act effectively covers workers when they are exposed to such hazardous chemicals. Having a list of occupational diseases alone is not sufficient. It is important that we have a "catch-all" provision to make sure that as new chemicals develop, workers continue to be protected under the Act. On this note, Sir, I support the Bill. 5.05 pm”
“A third possible cause, which was suggested by the President of the Singapore Institution of Safety Officers, is the more transient nature of the workforce deployed in the construction sector, not so familiar with the safety drills. Could the Minister update this House on the measures taken to address these issues and to improve safety at the construction sector? Also, as SMEs employ a large number of workers, what more could be done to enhance safety standards in these companies? My next point, Sir, is to ask for Section 15(3A), which Minister just explained, makes workers liable if they are negligent and their negligence results in accidents or injuries at work. However, I wish to emphasise that before workers are penalised for acts of negligence, it must be ascertained that they had already been given proper training and equipped with the proper tools and equipment to do their work. Otherwise, it would be unfair to penalise workers for negligence if they were not properly trained or equipped or advised on the safe processes at work that they have to comply with. Finally, this Bill will not involve the Government in any extra financial expenditure. I am somewhat concerned with this because the MOM's Safety and Health Department's scope of work would certainly increase as the Act now covers all the workplaces, yet Ministry feels that it is not necessary to have additional resources or staff, in order to monitor and ensure compliance with this Act. I would like to ask the Minister for his comment whether existing resources are sufficient to ensure the effective implementation of these new amendments.”
“Although I support completely this idea of extending the Workplace Safety and Health Act to all workplaces, I still must stress that concerted effort, and targeted and focused action must continue to be placed on those workplaces that are a lot more hazardous, particularly the construction sites and shipyards, because they pose a much greater hazard to workers' lives and limbs. Second, the new section 14A imposes two new obligations on principals. Principals will now have to make sure that the contractors they engage have the necessary expertise to carry out the work, and have taken adequate safety and health measures in the use of machineries, equipments, plants, articles or processes. What is unclear however is how this provision would apply to sub-contractors. Would the principals also be responsible for ensuring that sub-contractors employed by their contractors comply with the two new duties imposed on them? If the obligation does not extend to the sub-contractors, then we are back to square one because it basically means that the principals could outsource their responsibilities to the contractors and the objective of this amendment would be undermined. So, I would like to ask Minister for his views on that. Third, which is somewhat related to my second point, the construction sector continues to have the highest number of fatalities. Sixty percent of all work fatalities in 2010 occurred in the construction sector. Fatalities at construction sites made up 44% or about two in five of all deaths across all industries. Two challenges were identified for the poorer performance of the sector – poorly managed sub-contracting work and smaller companies with resource constraints.”
“However, Sir, I have a few clarifications to seek from the Minister. First, this Bill will extend coverage of the Workplace Safety and Health Act to all workplaces. This is a logical move and is consistent with the legislation in many other countries. Although not all workplaces expose employees to the same level of risk, as some are by the nature of their work, such as construction and shipyard, more hazardous. Nevertheless, it is wrong to assume that other workplaces carry no risk at all to workers. This coverage will now make it an obligation for all employers to assess the risks in their organisations and put in place safety measures to protect their workers. However, as this provision will come into effect soon, I would like to ask the Minister what measures are in place to educate the new employers who are now covered under the Act of their obligations. The Minister has outlined some of the measures undertaken but my own sense is that not many employers are aware that they are now covered by the Act and, in my view, if they are ignorant, how would they be able to comply with the law? Would there, therefore, be a more concerted campaign, for instance, to raise the awareness of the new workplaces that are now covered under this Act on their obligations? Sir, I would also like to ask the Minister whether he could indicate how many more companies and workers will now come under the Act with this new amendment.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of this amendment Bill. I think not many Members in this House know of the Spyros industrial accident. It was one of the worst industrial accidents in Singapore's history. But the message that came across very strongly to me was when as a rookie officer in NTUC, I had to handle a number of cases involving the injured workers. It was one month after the accident occurred and I was asked to give advice to a number of the workers who were injured because we wanted to know what options they should pursue – whether they should go under the Workmen's Compensation Act or it would have been better for them to file a claim under common law. And the image that I saw at that point of time was something that will stay with me throughout my life because it was one month after the accident, but you see these workers were still traumatised and in agony because their injuries were so extensive and they were really very confused. They did not know what was going to happen to them, how they were going to proceed with their lives. Sir, I think this Bill is truly important because we should never in any way compromise the safety of our workers. There should never be any way in which we cut the processes or try to save cost in order to make it cheaper for us to produce but at the same time that will compromise the safety of the workers. Since the Spyros incident, I am really very happy that the Government has put in place many new legislations, processes and policies to make sure that our workplace is a much safer place for workers. Workers go to work to earn a decent living and we owe it to them that they should go back alive and, most importantly, they should go back in one piece.”
“I thank the Senior Parliamentary Secretary for the clarification, and for his information, I have written twice to LTA. The answers have been negative. My question is, what is the alternative because the purpose of the overhead pedestrian bridge is for people to cross over but the elderly has difficulty crossing over? Granted that there are resource constraints in the use of public funds for installing lifts or escalators, there are maintenance difficulties and so on. What other alternatives are there to assist the elderly and the disabled to cross the road if the pedestrian bridges are not effective or sufficient?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I am really happy to hear about the immense investment in helping households cope with the rising cost of energy. There will continue to be households that, despite these assistance measures, will face difficulty in paying for their electricity bills. Sir, I would like to urge the Government to make sure that Singapore Power work with these families to give them time to pay off their arrears – some of them may have chalked up a lot of arrears – so that their electricity supply will not be disrupted.”
“Sir, I would like to ask the Minister: if the problem in Japan is not resolved within the next few months, what measures will be in place to assist sectors that are affected, notably, sectors like electronics? Secondly, if the problem in Japan is not resolved within the next few months, what is the impact on the current assessment of our GDP for the year?”
“Madam, on behalf of the House, I would like to thank the Minister, the Minister of State and the Senior Parliamentary Secretary for the very comprehensive and detailed responses given. This year, the Ministry of Manpower did not have the highest number of cuts. That honour went to the Ministry of National Development. But, nonetheless, the work of the Ministry really has been cut out, very complex, very challenging, as we move ahead trying to improve the lives of our particularly low-wage workers, improve wages by 30% and increase productivity by 2% to 3% per year. On that note, we certainly want to thank them once again. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The sum of $853,833,100 for Head S ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. The sum of $68,489,200 for Head S ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. Column No : 4501 Head Q – Ministry of Information, Communications and the Arts Arts and culture strategic review”
“Madam, I have two concise clarifications. My first concise clarification is to ask the Minister about the very low unemployment rate. Given this very low unemployment rate, does MOM have strategies in place to help people who want to find jobs, not just those who are already displaced but those who are currently employed? Because there is some sense of under-employment even among those who are employed. My second concise clarification, Madam, is directed at the Senior Parliamentary Secretary in response to his reply that the 5% to 10% course fee will be paid by the worker. For low-wage workers, this is important in order to ensure personal responsibility. My point is, if the worker does not even have that 5% to 10% of the fee, it is not that he does not want to assume personal responsibility but he does not have that money. So, he should not be treated the same like for a social assistance programme where he has to go to the CDC or other places to ask for sponsorship because that becomes a deterrent. Therefore, could this be considered differently from a social assistance programme?”
“Yes, Madam, I will bear that in mind. But we have very lengthy replies and I do need a little bit more time to digest some of the very long replies. The other point I want to raise is about employment credits. Again, do we need to wait another three years when the scheme runs out before the scheme is reviewed? Does the Ministry not want to give a very strong signal to employers that it cares about the long-term employment of older workers and that the Government wants to give a long-term commitment by making their scheme permanent, instead of just for three years? My third question is this: as I have said, the CET centre should not be just a public-based CET centre. It should be more of a company-based CET centre, recognising the excellent training programmes some of them have. We sound as if it is really heavily guarded. Could the Ministry give information as to how many company-based facilities have been recognised and funded at CET centres, and how many of their training programmes have been given WSQ qualifications? This is for the benefit of our workers, so that there is a transfer of real good knowledge, skills and capabilities that these training facilities through the companies provide.”
“It is a clarification, Madam. I would like to ask whether the Ministry is satisfied with 34,000 low-wage workers out of 400,000 workers only benefiting from the Workfare Training Scheme (WTS). Does the Ministry feel that there is scope to improve and could it then look at the suggestions I have made, in particular, making it such that the worker does not have to pay any course fees at all? My second question, Madam, is quite related to –”
“Madam, I want to thank the Minister, Minister of State and Senior Parliamentary Secretary for answering the questions, but there is a couple of clarifications I want to seek. Obviously, the WTS is seen as a major plan in order to achieve inclusive growth and help our low-wage and low-skilled workers upskill to better jobs. But out of 400,000 low-skilled workers, only 34,000 have benefited from the programme. This is, in fact, somewhat a very low number, compared to the large number of low-wage workers that we have. Does that indicate that there are really issues with regard to WTS that need to be addressed? On the various points I raised in my speech, which the Senior Parliamentary Secretary has said that they will be given attention to when the scheme is up for review, I would like to urge the Ministry not to wait until a certain time after implementation in order to review the scheme, but to do it now to see where there are ways to improve the WTS, which should be improved, in particular the 5%-10% course fees that the low-wage worker has to pay is indeed a disincentive. One may think that it is necessary to co-pay before one gets the training, but for the low-wage worker, working on a daily basis, earning his wages, that is indeed a disincentive. I hope that will be given priority in terms of review as well as priority in processing the applications for the award, for instance, to make it faster.”
“Sir, we have gone some way to help retain more women in the workforce and attract more homemakers to re-join the workforce but we need to do much more. What puzzles me is the fact that we have extensive Internet use in Singapore but leveraging on Information and Communications Technology (ICT) to work at home is so low. Only 1.3% of companies have put in place telecommuting arrangements. This very low figure reflects a lack of seriousness to create a more flexible work environment; yet many companies continue to complain vehemently about a lack of workers. Our low figure also compares unfavourably to the Nordic countries where the women employment rate is closer to 80%. This high participation rate is largely fuelled by flexible work. Sir, last year, the Minister announced the establishment of a tripartite workgroup to promote ICT-enabled home-based work. Could I ask the Minister what is the progress of this workgroup? Could I also ask the Minister what kind of funding support will be given to companies to encourage them to provide more home-based work using ICT? Also, when would this scheme be rolled out? The funding is important because otherwise it would be difficult for many companies to start without the expertise nor the capability, particularly the technology. Sir, we have also done a fair bit to promote inclusive and harmonious workplaces. We have a National Integration Workgroup on Workplaces to promote it. Could I ask the Minister what progress has been achieved in promoting harmony and inclusivity? How do we really measure progress? Are there any indicators that we use? Given the great diversity of our workforce, what are the challenges to achieve this ideal? 4.15 pm”
“During the recession in 2009, a lot of workers were sent for training because workers were idle, there were not enough orders and companies were more than happy to send their workers for training, particularly since they were getting very high funding under SPUR. And workers were prepared to go for training because they were very scared that they would lose their jobs because of the uncertainties at that time. But now that the economy has picked up, particularly we saw in 2010 as well as parts of 2009, there is greater reluctance on the part of the employers to send workers for training because there is also a very tight labour market. Orders are coming and they are trying very much to meet their orders. So there is a reluctance to send workers for training. Workers on their part also, because of the number of jobs that are available, there is less pressure that they feel in terms of the fear of losing their jobs and going for training. And also because of the better labour market, workers usually make use of their time in order to earn overtime. One really cannot blame them for that as well. But I think it is important that we keep up this momentum because, if we do not, then I think we will have a problem when the time comes and we need skilled workers, we may not have them, and the workers' employability will be affected as well. I urge the Minister to examine ways to keep up the momentum and even to review the current funding level so as to incentivise more companies and workers to give a stronger priority to training. What are the issues? Is it because the funding was better during bad times under SPUR, that was why more were sent? Or are there other issues involved? If it is funding, then I urge the Minister to look into it. Productivity growth”
“Worse still, the Government could be giving the wrong signal that older workers should be treated as a temporary resource not worthy of long-term investment and retention. There will be a cost to the Government but this will be more than offset by the benefit of keeping older workers productive and employed longer. Sir, my fourth point is my pet subject but a serious request of workers to the Minister. Please exclude the overtime and bonus payments for eligibility to WIS. I have raised this so many times but this is the repeated appeal of workers. I am putting it again to the Minister for Manpower. By including overtime, we are certainly penalising those who are hardworking, and we weaken, not strengthen, people's resolve to work. Update on the National Productivity and Continuing Education Council Sir, on the issue of productivity, it is important to emphasise not just labour productivity but also total productivity, which includes land, raw materials, capital, utilities among others. If we focus only on labour productivity, we will not be able to make the 30% quantum leap. No matter how brilliant a skilled worker is, if there is poor management, lousy tools and high cost in other areas, his productivity will be affected. But what we hear in the debate in this House is also the constant refrain and focus only on labour productivity. So I think this is a point worth mentioning and I would really like to hear the Minister's comments on that as well as how we will want to take a total productivity approach in achieving the quantum leap of 2.3% productivity improvement over the next decade. In conclusion, Sir, we need to keep the training momentum high.”
“So this acts as a disincentive for training after work hours. Many continue to find the lure of overtime work or a second job too strong for them to resist. Language is a big challenge too as most of the WSQ programmes are conducted in English, whereas the low-wage workers are more comfortable in their own vernacular languages. The Workfare Skill-Up Programme is meant to give low-wage workers a stronger foundation in basic literacy, so that they can continue with workplace skills training and enhance their ability to take on better jobs. But workers find the process rather long and tedious. For example, after taking the CAT or pre-emptive computer test, workers have to wait for about two weeks for the results. After that, there will be further waiting for their milestone award to be processed by the CDC or e2i. The time and effort can be a real struggle for low-income workers who have to juggle with their work and family needs. To make the WTS more meaningful, I suggest the following: (i) Provide 100% funding to motivate low-wage workers; (ii) Ensure that service contracts require companies to send their low-skilled workers for training. For a start, maybe the public sector can take the lead for cleaning or other service-related contracts; and (iii) Simplify the process for claiming the training allowance under the Workfare Skill-Up Programme. My third point, Sir, is the Employment Credit. I applaud the Government for introducing this scheme, but I urge the Government to convert this to a permanent scheme. I am really concerned that whatever good intentions the Government aims to achieve will be wiped out after three years when the scheme runs out.”
“First, our CET system is still very rooted to the idea of public-based CET centres. It is difficult for companies to get the training facilities funded in CET centres or get their training programmes WSQ-certified. This is a real pity as many of these company-based training facilities are world class and use leading edge technology. They could strongly complement the current public-based CET centres to give Singapore a uniquely enviable position where workers can acquire unique skills and get WSQ even through company-based training. Such company-based training facilities could help to churn out future-ready workers who are exposed to new materials, technology and processes. Recently, we just launched Rolls Royce WSQ and, in 2009, we launched WSQ for the wafer fabrication plants, which is a good start but we need many more of such examples. Could I ask the Minister to support the development of more such world-class company-based training facilities as CET centres and accredited WSQ? Second, last year, the Government launched the Workfare Training Support (WTS) scheme. WTS encourages low-wage workers to upgrade their skills through training, so that they can improve their employability and upgrade to better jobs. This is a good scheme but there are several challenges. Despite the higher funding, it is difficult to motivate low-wage workers to go for training. Inertia is only part of the problem as another challenge is lack of awareness and an effective way to reach out to them. Companies continue to be reluctant to send their low-wage workers, most of whom work in small companies, for training. Although the cost fees are heavily subsidised, some of the low-wage workers who live from hand to mouth continue to face difficulty in paying for the 5%-10% course fees.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the total sum to be allocated for Head S of the Estimates be reduced by $100. Sir, as we shift gear into productivity-driven growth, continuing education and training will become even more critical. Companies with a skilled and productive workforce will be able to compete much better globally. Workers with the relevant skills can stay employed and enjoy a better life. However, the training environment cannot remain static. It is dynamic and will have to take into account changing business and workforce needs. Our Continuing Education and Training (CET) system must continue to focus on helping rank-and-file workers upgrade their skills, especially the more vulnerable low-wage, low-skilled workers. At the same time, our workforce profile is changing as more than 50% are now PMETs and their needs, too, cannot be ignored. PMETs are the key drivers of value creation in our enterprises, but they are also at risk of having their skills become obsolete. Hence, I would like to ask the Minister to give a progress update on our CET system, including our two new CET centres. Would the Minister also give details on how MOM intends to expand the CET coverage to meet the training needs of the growing number of PMETs? An effective CET system also requires good training providers, but the quality of the training providers that we have today differs considerably and there is no consistency in the standards. We need to build up and strengthen the local industry and also attract many more world-class training providers to operate here. I would like to ask the Minister what measures are in place to improve the quality of adult educators in Singapore. Sir, I also have a number of suggestions to make.”
“Sir, we run a programme called Back to Work in NTUC and, under that programme, what we do is to try to assist home-makers to get back to work. We have so far helped 8,500 women. One of the recurrent issues faced by the women is that it is really not worth their while to go back to work because the salary they earn will all be wiped out by the childcare fees that they have to pay. Therefore, it is futile for them to go to work. That is the disincentive. I truly welcome the Ministry's increase of the income ceiling for families in need from the current rate of $1,800 to $3,500. Indeed, this will be very useful. I have three points to raise with the Minister. First, I would like to ask the Minister to remove other barriers because some others have also given me the feedback that they have to pay a deposit before they can put their child in a preschool, although they may be under KiFAS or CFAC. And that, by itself, is a disincentive because they do not have that deposit in the first place to pay the childcare operator. Secondly, could I ask the Minister to continue to make sure that childcare fees are affordable because childcare fees have been increasing quite significantly, and that is another disincentive. Whilst we increase the ceiling under KiFAS and CFAC, we should also keep a lid on childcare fees to ensure affordability. Thirdly, could I ask the Minister what is the progress in terms of building more childcare centres because the feedback from a lot of families is that they find it difficult to find a childcare place for their children? Total fertility rate and singlehood”
“[For vernacular speech, please refer to Appendix A*.] Madam, our mosques have successfully shaped a socio-religious life that is far-reaching and profound in line with MUIS' mission to build mosques as centres of Islamic excellence here. Our mosques have a unique vision, features and programmes that make the function of mosques here a very comprehensive one. Clearly, our mosques are not only places to congregate and worship but also centres of religious teaching, Islamic learning and social development of Muslims in Singapore. More encouragingly, our mosques not only develop the Muslim community but have also carried out successfully programmes and activities to foster inter-religious and inter-racial understanding in Singapore. Our mosques have for so long played the role of instilling harmony between multi-racial and multi-religious residents in Singapore. This is in line with the spirit of Islam. In order to continue this, it will certainly need the community's commitment and the support of the community's leadership. Our mosques must continue to be managed systematically and professionally. At the same time, we can conclude that the success of our mosques today reflects the development of the Malay/Muslim community itself. The openness of our mosques, the changes and improvements that we can see, all show that the Malay/Muslim community itself has changed, progressed, become open and are sufficiently confident and comfortable with its own identity as Muslims and members of Singapore's multi-racial and multi-religious society. Thus, may I know when will the construction of the two new mosques which have been announced be completed and, specifically, where will they be located?”
“Sir, primary school education provides the foundation for our children and it is important to help them maximise their potential. A key recommendation made by PERI is to convert all our schools to single sessions. I would like to ask the Minister what is the progress in implementing single-session schools? What is the status of the infrastructure upgrading in schools to enable this? What kinds of facilities will these upgraded schools offer? How will the Ministry deal with the increase in the manpower demand arising from single sessions? Do we have enough teachers, associates and other support staff to handle single-session schools? Sir, I would also like to know how will the Ministry communicates with parents on the objective of single-session schools? Some parents may look upon single-session schools as an extension of the child care centre. How can parents be educated to support their children in the single-session schools so that, together, they form a reinforcement in helping their children do better and maximise their potential? Finally, Sir, what can the children themselves look forward to in single-session schools? I really do hope that single-session schools will not be another reason to provide even more hours of cramming for the children but will instead focus on a more holistic education. Mother Tongue Languages Review Committee recommendations”
“If this were to happen, will we have a permanent underclass with serious ramifications on our One People, One Singapore ideal? Sir, these are important questions because social mobility through education has been the greatest leveller in our society. I would like to ask the Minister, how does our education system ensure social mobility? Does the Ministry track social mobility? What are the indicators and how do we compare with other countries? How do we ensure that education continues to remain affordable and accessible to children from low-income families? Education as a social mobility tool”
“Sir, a 2007 Newsweek article entitled "The Death of Social Mobility" highlighted the role of social mobility through education in helping the four tiger economies grow rapidly, but concluded that social mobility now has been affected by the rich-poor divide. An OECD report last year concluded that social mobility is greatest in countries with low levels of income inequality and stressed the correlation between family background and future earnings. At home, no lesser a person than the Minister Mentor had said that children whose parents are graduates perform better in school. Some primary schools are so popular that the applications far exceed the number of places available because parents believe that these schools would give their children a headstart in our education system. As priority is given to those whose siblings or parents are studying or have studied in the school, this means that the better educated, higher income parents – usually alumni of the popular schools – could more easily get places for their children. To increase their chances, such parents could buy houses around popular schools because of the 1-km rule, thus pushing up prices and making them even more inaccessible to the low income. Many MPs have come across frantic parents who want us to appeal for a place in popular schools because they think that it makes a difference to their children. I know even of a professional who has decided to volunteer his services once his newborn turns two years old. What happens then to children from low-income families with no connections and less resources? Will social mobility through education be a thing of the past? Will we see a greater stratification of our society?”
“I think the Minister did not respond to my point about the importance of upgrading the day rehabilitation centres. The Minister did mention that he considers the day rehabilitation centres as part of the seamless process of providing long-term care for the elderly, and also for ensuring that we can site the long-term care in the community and at home. But if you look at the current day rehabilitation centres, they are really inadequate because they only provide social services and a little bit of therapy. The day rehabilitation centres need to be upgraded to cover other services, for instance, nursing, medical care, or even if you need a manager to manage and help the family when they move from the hospital to the home. It also provides some respite and relief to the caregiver so that the caregiver can put those who are ill at the day rehabilitation centre and go to work, and not depriving themselves of a source of income. We do not need this problem. We do not have this issue being raised many times in Parliament about the need for caregiver allowance. I hope the Minister would consider that because the current centres are really inadequate.”
“The recent flexibility allowed in the use of Medisave for outpatient treatment was well received by many. However, many have given me the feedback that the limit of $300 is far too low. Some shared with me that the consultation and medication for three months for chronic illnesses alone could cost them more than $200 and this includes treatment at the polyclinics. After that, they would have to use cash, which they do not have. As a result, some may skip visiting the doctor. I have three points to raise. Firstly, I would like to ask the Minister whether he would allow Medisave to be used for health screening. Secondly, I would like to ask the Minister whether he could consider raising their Medisave withdrawal limit for outpatient treatment to a more realistic level, so that patients could have uninterrupted treatment. Thirdly, with rising healthcare costs, I would like to ask the Minister whether there is a need to increase the minimum required amount (MRA) which was set a few years ago, as our current MRA may not be adequate to meet our long-term needs.”
“I would like to ask the Minister to provide stronger support to caregivers by providing them respite from caregiving responsibilities, training as well as some financial support so that they are not left out and left behind. Third, Sir, I urge the Minister to ensure that healthcare is affordable to our elderly, as many suffer from chronic illnesses requiring long-term treatment and medication. With rising cost of healthcare, many are concerned that they will not be able to pay for their bills and, in this regard, I am glad to hear that the $10 million that has been set aside to help the elderly in mobility. Could the Minister provide more details on this? Finally, Sir, manpower is a big challenge in the healthcare sector. We are short of not only doctors but nurses, therapists and other healthcare workers as well. Could the Minister enlighten this House and what is being done to address this? Home care”
“Sir, this year's Budget talks about providing the best care for our seniors. I would like to ask the Minister how his Ministry intends to achieve this. Long-term care should be provided seamlessly, from acute hospital care to community hospital, nursing homes and home-based care. There are many gaps in the services that are currently available to our elderly. There should be greater focus on home-based care instead of hospital or nursing care alone. Sir, I have four suggestions to make. First, there is a need to provide an integrated home and community programme comprising medical, nursing and social services to the frail elderly who need intensive long-term care so that they can remain at home instead of being placed in a nursing home. The current day rehabilitation centres are inadequate as they provide only therapy and day-care services. Integrated care will include a wider scope of services with an addition of a multi-disciplinary team comprising nurses, therapists, case managers and healthcare workers. The team will work closely with the patient's doctors be they General Practitioners (GPs), polyclinic doctors or specialists in hospitals. Such an integrated home and community care programme would also help provide support to caregivers who can continue to work and get respite from caring for the elderly during the daytime. 4.00 pm Second, Sir, I urge for more support for caregivers who suffer from burnout, emotional stress and, worst of all, in many cases, loss of income and their own independence. This burden usually falls on the women who are often unmarried and unappreciated.”
“Sir, I have two clarifications to ask of Minister Lim Boon Heng. The Minister mentioned the importance of ageing-in-place and I completely agree with him. In this regard, I would like to ask the Minister, as a part of extension of that idea of ageing-in-place, whether Government will consider extending the foreign domestic worker levy relief to singles because the idea is to try and keep the older people in the community and at home. If we provide relief to married women but we do not provide relief to singles who are taking care of the elderly sick parents at home, then it is really not encouraging ageing-in-place or taking care of the elderly sick at home or in the community. The second point I would like to ask is: the Minister has mentioned that 42 constituencies already have the Wellness Centres, and the timeline for the remaining 42 constituencies will be in 2012. Considering the rapid pace at which ageing is taking place and the need to do something quickly and that a Wellness Centre is something that is not very difficult to set up, I think, in terms of resources, it will not be a tremendous impact on the Government, could I ask the Minister whether the Government could advance the establishment of the Wellness Centres to the other 42 constituencies from the 2012 deadline to earlier, if possible by this year? I think that will be really wonderful.”
“I want to applaud the Public Service Division also for agreeing with the union, not to cut wages of its employees by 10% at 60 years of age, in recognition of older employees' value to the public service. I urge the private sector to follow the public sector's lead, instead of waiting for the law to come into effect next year, and not to cut wages at 60 years of age. There is much that the private sector can learn from the public sector, including how to prepare the older workers for their re-employment and putting a system in place even before someone reaches 62 years of age. Sir, I would like to ask the Prime Minister for an update on the re-employment efforts in the Civil Service. How many have been re-employed after reaching 62 years of age? What adjustments were made to their wages and other benefits? How many were offered the Employment Adjustment Payment (EAP)? Talent in the Civil Service”
“Mr Chairman, we have heard a lot about efforts to boost productivity in the private sector but nothing much about such efforts in the public sector. The public sector cannot be just a passive bystander because its policies and actions will have an impact on the private sector, and some of the agencies are directly involved in boosting productivity efforts in the 12 sectors. It may not be so easy to measure productivity in the public sector but we still need to have clear measurables and outcomes. It is also important not only to focus on processes, cutting costs, automation and training alone but to encourage staff to imbibe innovation and to think out of the box in serving customers. The public sector should aim to provide the most delightful service to its customers as its goal. Sir, I would like to ask the Prime Minister what has been done to boost productivity in the public sector. How are public sector employees being prepared to adopt a more innovation-driven rather than just a rules-based mindset? In the past, we used to have the QCCs and WITs to engage public sector staff on productivity efforts. What structures are in place today? How is productivity measured in the public sector? What are the targets and outcomes? Boosting re-employment of older workers Sir, let me move on to my next cut. Let me first of all applaud the Civil Service for being forward looking, and adopting very progressive practices in the re-employment of older workers. The Civil Service has brought forward its implementation date to July 2011, instead of waiting until January next year, when the re-employment law kicks in.”
“Sir, finally, even though many agree that this Budget contains many goodies, and it has a positive message to encourage and increase productivity and develop the economy for the long term, allow me to emphasise this – we must need to continue monitoring so that inflationary pressures and the rise in cost of living will not be too burdensome or fall beyond the affordability of low-wage workers and the poor. At the same time, each worker must be encouraged to continue working and seize opportunities to upgrade themselves so that they can obtain better pay in order for us to progress together. Sir, this Budget will open up more room in education for our students. I urge our community, especially parents and students, to fully understand the opportunities provided and use it as best as possible. With that, Sir, I support this year's Budget. *Cols. 3007-3010. 1.58 pm”
“Mr Speaker, this Budget contains many good policies and it is generally inclusive in nature by ensuring that each citizen reaps the benefits from the economic recovery, while giving assistance and benefits to individuals from the low-income families to the middle income, students, women, senior citizens and the PMETs who will all face the inflation rate that is said to be between 3% and 4% this year. Sir, I really support the aspect where there is an emphasis on education and increasing job opportunities for elderly workers, women and the PMET group. This shows that while we try to reduce the current burden, like the increasing cost of living, we must still invest diligently to generate long-term growth. Sir, we must ensure that the national economy stay competitive and for that, the investment in our workers is critical. These steps, I feel, will help us overcome the income gap problem. If each employee works hard, willing to work longer and competitively, and if more than one family member brings income home for the whole family, they can continue to get a better salary and their cost of living will be more affordable. Sir, at the same time, there should be more support towards efforts to restructure the nation's economy in order to achieve higher productivity. This burden should not be solely carried by the workers as this is a combined responsibility. Sir, therefore, I feel that the incentive schemes for workers will not succeed if employers do not seize the benefits from other incentive schemes like the higher Productivity and Innovation Credit Scheme and the additional $1 billion towards the National Productivity Fund to encourage automation and improve work processes and skills training for workers.”
“In some countries, including developed ones, unemployment has reached very high levels, especially among the young. There is great restlessness and governments have little means and resources to assist their affected citizens. Sir, I believe that we, in the years ahead, will be facing a much more challenging environment. The global economic situation, including the global political situation, has also become a lot more uncertain and we certainly need to have a Government that is strong and continues to provide strong stewardship of our economy. And most certainly, this is a Budget, in my view, that will build strongly on our sound fundamentals and help us through the challenging years ahead. Sir, on this note, I support the Budget. Let me just say a few words in Malay. (In Malay): [For vernacular speech, please refer to Appendix A*.] Mr Speaker, I welcome this year's Budget, which is generous in nature but also well structured so that there is still prudence in spending. It is not easy since not many countries can do it. As part of their austerity efforts, many countries are forced to sacrifice many important areas, like education and healthcare, although by right both should receive more focus so as to help many people who were affected by the economic crisis in 2009. Our Budget not only emphasises these two areas but also manages to return $4 billion to the national reserve that was drawn out last year. Even so, the Government is able to set aside a further $3.2 billion to stimulate the economy and help those affected.”
“Sir, we can all agree that there are no magic bullets providing quick solutions to challenges such as the widening income gap, an ageing population and the skills gap, which are often intertwined, and which confront not only Singapore but the whole world as well. Also, when we talk of the low-income or the bottom 20th percentile, I suspect that this is probably not a stagnant group because as their incomes improve through skills upgrading or social mobility through better education for their children, they would move up to the higher-income level. However, we cannot also deny the fact that with an ageing population there might well be a segment within this group that could be stuck because they are retiree households with no income or households whose members suffer from physical or mental disabilities, for instance. They may or may not have families but their families, too, are struggling to meet their own needs. We certainly need more analysis and information about our low-income families but their immediate concerns are how to survive from day to day. This is the group that would also be the worst affected by the higher cost of living, and who would not qualify for Public Assistance. I think this group needs longer-term support, not just one off measures provided under this Budget, and I would certainly hope to hear some clarifications or comments from the Minister on this. Sir, in conclusion, I would like to say that our strong economic growth has not come about by chance. It was due to careful planning and management, shrewd and competence stewardship of our economy which has seen us enjoying one of the lowest unemployment rates in the world, an important pre-requisite to address this issue of inflation.”
“However, while on the one hand the Ministry of Finance (MOF) has injected a big amount into long-term care, it has continued to deny support for caregivers of the elderly sick who are single and who are doing their best to care for their parents at home, instead of sending them to the nursing homes or the community hospitals which would put a bigger strain on the Government's healthcare budget. I am referring here to the Foreign Maid Levy Relief, which is currently not applicable to singles. Under this Relief Scheme, only married women are eligible. So, a married woman who has grown up children but who need help to take care of her elderly sick parents can get this relief, which amounts to twice the foreign domestic worker levy paid in the previous year. But, the poor single woman struggling on her own to take care of her sick, elderly parents and needs just as much, if not more support, as she does not have a husband to support her, is not eligible for this relief. This is inconsistent and unfairly penalises singles who are filial and want to take care of their elderly parents at home. It is also contradictory to our healthcare policy, which is to encourage people to take care of their aged sick at home. I understand that the current objective of the Foreign Maid Levy Relief Scheme is to promote procreation but, surely, this policy is not cast in stone and should be reviewed to take into account changing demographic needs. I urge the Minister to extend this relief to singles, so that Government can achieve two policy objectives – promote procreation and encourage care for the elderly at home. My third point, Sir, is on helping the poor and low income, and the widening income gap.”
“Some countries, too, have such schemes which, to my knowledge, are long term and not just temporary. My concern is that giving employment credits for only three years would cause some employers to terminate the older workers after the three-year period is over when their wage cost goes up again. In other words, we are encouraging employers to look upon older workers as a temporary pool of workers instead of incentivising them to employ them for longer periods. So I urge the Ministry for Finance to rethink the Ministry's position on this issue and make the Employment Credits a permanent scheme and, therefore, issue a very strong signal to employers that it wants to support measures to make our older workers a lot more employable. I believe, Sir, that there is no loss to the Government by making this scheme permanent. On the other hand, by enabling older workers to stay employed, our economy will benefit from less reliance on foreign workers and greater self-reliance among the elderly. My next point, Sir, is on long-term care and I would like to talk about the review of the Foreign Maid Levy Relief. Sir, the Budget's focus on providing quality long-term care is timely and necessary because, from now until 2030, the number of residents aged 65 years and above will increase from 300,000 to 900,000. By then, one out of every five residents will be a senior. Hence, topping up Medisave and Medifund, and allocating $1 billion to the Community Silver Trust are moves in the right direction, showing the Government's resolve to provide quality long-term care for our elderly.”
“But this is obviously not the intention of productivity improvements. The objective is to help companies improve their productivity by increasing their output of producing the same output with fewer workers, especially foreign workers. Somehow, this message is not well understood. Sir, in the case of the National Trades Union Congress (NTUC), we have been working with about 200 companies under the Inclusive Growth Programme (IGP) to help companies tap into the National Product Fund (NPF) and boost their productivity. The IGP programme covers many sectors of the economy where low-wage workers are found. Through the IGP programme, workers are upskilled, processes upgraded, costs reduced and there is greater use of automation resulting in productivity increases. One of the criteria under the IGP for drawing down on this fund is the requirement that any productivity gains must be shared with workers. I think this is one of the concerns, a point that has been raised by many Members who spoke before me. Workers have had their basic wages increased or received additional bonuses through productivity gain sharing. This is the experience that NTUC has had with 200 companies under the IGP. This is a win-win approach and shows that productivity improvements are doable. Sir, having said a lot of good things about the Budget, there are a couple of points that I wish to raise and I hope the Ministry would take these into consideration. Firstly, Sir, on the Special Employment Credits. I urge the Ministry of Finance to make this scheme a permanent measure instead of a one-off scheme, as our population is ageing rapidly, and the challenge of keeping older workers employed will not go away after three years, and it will become even more pressing.”
“The increase is painful, but necessary if we want productivity and incomes to go up, and I am glad that the Government has given a clear signal that the levy will no longer be used as a tool to adjust business costs in bad times. In my view, this is the right direction as a yo-yo foreign worker levy policy which changes with the economic cycles will weaken employers' resolve and undermine our efforts. We create so many jobs every year, but creating jobs alone is not sufficient. We have to ensure that these are decent jobs that pay decent wages for people to survive and raise their families. People must feel that there is pride in working and that their efforts will be rewarded. Instead of viewing this negatively, I urge employers to make every effort to employ older workers and women, and redesign jobs to enhance the productivity of our low-income workers. It is easy to blame Singaporeans as being fussy, not prepared to do dirty work and not prepared to work long hours. But that is telling only one side of the story; it is not telling the whole story. There is a real need for companies to make more efforts to improve the quality of jobs and improve wages for low-paying jobs so as to attract and retain more Singaporeans. Companies should make better use of the various incentives given under this Budget, such as the higher Innovation and Productivity Credits and the additional $1 billion injected into the National Productivity Fund (NPF), in order to invest in automation, improve processes and upskill workers. Sir, I feel that there is also a misperception over the meaning of productivity improvements. The perception happens to be that with the levy increase, there will be a need for more Singaporeans to replace the jobs of foreign workers.”
“This is impressive, and I have received positive feedback from trade unionists and workers who also strongly applaud the 0.5% restoration to the employers' CPF contribution rate and the Workfare Special Bonus. Sir, in particular, I like the focus on creating job opportunities for older workers, women and PMETs. For older workers, the special employment credits plus the Workfare Special Bonus would create more employment opportunities for them. Our older workers, too, would find it worthwhile to continue working and strengthen their retirement nest egg, as a recent global survey indicated that quite a large number of older Singaporeans had indicated that they would prefer to retire at 60 years of age. I am also very heartened by the increase in the household income ceiling to $3,500 for low-income families to enjoy higher KiFAS and CFAC subsidies, when putting their children in childcare centres or kindergartens. I have raised this issue a number of times in this House, most recently at last month's Parliament sitting, as the existing ceiling of $1,800 is too low and unrealistic. The higher ceiling would encourage more mothers to go out to work, thus helping to strengthen low-income households. Sir, additionally, the measures to support PMETS, through more training programmes and higher subsidies for those taking part-time diploma and degree programmes, would help them to upgrade and remain employable, particularly for the older PMETS who find it difficult to get jobs after retrenchment. Sir, the increase in the foreign worker levy has raised concerns among employers.”
“Sir, I rise in support of this Budget. On the whole, it is difficult to find fault with this year's Budget, which is generous yet prudent, a rather difficult balancing act to achieve in any Budget. In many countries, prudence has translated into austerity drives, with severe belt tightening as governments try to rein in their expenditures in order to balance their budgets, even in critical areas such as education and healthcare, at a time when most people are still suffering from job losses and pay cuts arising from the 2009 crisis. In the United Kingdom, for instance, thousands of workers in the teaching and healthcare sectors may lose their jobs because of budget cuts and, obviously, as Members know, there is a big conflict now between the labour movement and the UK government. So, this is not a Budget to be highly dismissed as an election budget or gimmicks to win votes, as suggested by hon. Member of Parliament, Mr Low Thia Khiang. But I am also glad to hear that he also says that this is a prudent Budget because $4 billion is now being put back into our reserves that were drawn down last year. If the Government has not managed the economy well and there is no surplus, there is nothing to share even if the Government wants to do so and we will end up like many countries with severe cutbacks in expenditures causing tremendous hardship to our people. In our case, the Government could even return the $4 billion which was drawn down from our reserves last year, and expenditure in critical areas such as education has increased, and there is even a $3.2 billion Grow and Share package to share with Singaporeans and provide some relief from the rising cost of living.”
“Mr Viswa Sadasivan asked the Prime Minister (a) whether the Ministry would consider the recommendation by the Public Accounts Committee to spell out a whistle-blowing policy for statutory boards to adopt; and (b) whether there are Ministries or agencies that have such a policy or protocol in place.”