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 11 of 24.
“The first is the case of Mdm Chong Bee Neo who is 71 years old and who is employed as a general worker by Nelco Private Limited, an electronics company under the United Workers of Electronics and Electrical Industries which manufactures PCB boards. Mdm Neo has worked in Nelco for 13 years. Prior to that, she had worked in the Kiwi shoe polish factory for 38 years before it closed down. Nelco pays her a total of $1,200 and she enjoys the same benefits as other workers. When I spoke to her, Mdm Neo told me that she enjoys her work and her employer treats her well. I asked her how long she intends to work and she said that she would do so for as long as she is healthy. The other case that I would like to mention is that of Mr Kumaran Kunjoo, who is also 71 years old and is employed as a consultant in one of our unions, the Singapore Maritime Officers Union, which represents maritime officers. Kumaran has been an employee of the union since 1986, after he was retrenched by Selco, which went bust. He was a seafarer for 21 years before joining SMOU. In 2002, at the age of 67, Kumaran was retired by SMOU, and he was re-employed by the union as a consultant. With his vast experience and positive work attitude, Kumaran is a valued employee of SMOU. He told me that he would work for as long as he is able to as he thinks that he would become lazy and sick if he does not work. These two examples show that age is not a barrier to employment if both the older worker as well as the employer is prepared to make adjustments and, particularly, if employers are prepared to give the older workers a chance.”
“In my view, it would be more appropriate to cap the additional 1% at the existing Minimum Sum amount, as this is the amount which, by its own calculations, the Government deems to be the minimum amount needed for people to live on after their retirement. It is therefore only appropriate that the entire Minimum Sum should draw a larger interest payment. The Minister had mentioned that the formula will be reviewed after five years. I hope that the Minister would give this point greater consideration. Higher Minimum Sum draw-down age Let me now come to the higher draw-down age. One major concern of our unionists, widely reflected already by other speakers, which was again echoed at the recent NTUC pre-delegates conference, is whether there will be jobs for workers after 62. So long as there are jobs, our unionists feel that a later draw-down age is not a major issue, as people will continue to have an income to live on. However, if there are no jobs and the draw-down age is shifted, this would cause tremendous hardship. Workers' concerns are genuine as currently, only four out of 10 Singaporeans aged 60 to 64 are working, and healthcare needs grow with age. Many low-income Singaporeans do not have any other source of income to depend on if they cannot draw down their Minimum Sum at the age of 62 and they are unemployed. The NTUC has been working very closely with our tripartite partners to promote the re-employment of older workers. Through these efforts, 3,080 workers above 62 have been re-employed. I would like, Sir, to quote two excellent examples of older workers who have remained employed and their equally enlightened employers who are worthy of mention.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, this is an important debate that we are having in this House, as CPF reforms affect all Singaporeans and the outcome of this debate will determine how well prepared we will be for the future. Adequacy of retirement income I have a couple of questions to raise on the CPF reforms. First, I would like to ask the Minister whether the current reforms have adequately addressed the issue of adequacy of the retirement income. The Minister has spent some time explaining the new formula but let me explain what I mean. Singapore has long relied on the CPF as the only source of retirement income. Hence, the question that people would naturally ask is whether the change in the formula for computing the interest rate would enhance the returns on our CPF balances. The Minister has explained how the re-pegged SMRA rates will work which, together with the additional 1% interest rate, is meant to benefit CPF members even more. But what I think we need is also information about what kind of replacement rate this new formula will produce compared to the old formula so that we will have a better idea about the adequacy of our retirement income with these reforms, and the impact of the new rate of return on our CPF money. Generally, we measure the adequacy of our retirement income by looking at the replacement rate, which is the ratio of the retirement income to the pre-retirement income. The replacement rate depends on the GDP growth, the rate of growth of wages as well as the impact of inflation on the retirement income. I hope that the Minister could shed more light on this. The other point that I would like to raise is with regard to the capping of the additional 1% interest rate to $60,000.”
“Sir, I do not intend to press the Minister on the specifics of the Charter, but I would just like to ask the Minister, when he said that the Charter will result in a more rules-based ASEAN, what does that really mean? This is because, in the same breath, he also said that it will not be akin to the EU with its own common sets of regulations and rules. Does it mean that having the Charter being more rules-based will make it easier for us to resolve common areas of problems, such as the haze, for instance?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to ask the Minister supplementary questions. Is it a policy in the public sector to consciously source out those who are nearing the age of 62, before they reach the age of 62, to discuss with them about re-employment prospects? Or is it the policy in the public sector for the individual who is reaching the age of 62 to approach his supervisor to ask for re-employment? That is my first question. Sir, the Minister said that agencies are encouraged to offer re-employment. My question is this: the feedback we receive is that across the Ministries and statutory boards, the efforts seem to be not very consistent. Is there a mechanism within the Public Service Division to coordinate the efforts of the Ministries and statutory boards on re-employment of those above 62?”
“Finally, Sir, although this is not the subject of the amendments that we are discussing today, I agree that the recent changes announced by the Prime Minister at the National Day Rally will, to some extent, address the concerns of Singaporeans. The 1% increase in the CPF return is greatly welcomed. But most Singaporeans also feel that the most important consideration is whether or not they are able to continue working, particularly for those who have reached the age of 62 years. If they can continue to work, the 1% increase is certainly a great boost, and the higher Minimum Sum draw-down age is not a major concern. Hence, I think we need to work together very closely to address this concern of Singaporeans, particularly those of 62 years and above, over availability and access to jobs. In the NTUC, we have been working very closely with our social partners and we have worked with more than 200 companies to place 3,080 workers above the age of 62 in jobs. But we certainly need to do a lot more, as we can see that the numbers of those who are reaching this age is rapidly increasing. On this note, Sir, I support the Bill and I look forward to the debate in September on the other amendments. 5.20 pm”
“But the protection accorded only to those below 65 years of age is unrealistic, as people are now marrying later and living longer and therefore take a longer time to pay off their housing loan. I have seen residents who are in their 50s with young children, and if the coverage stops at 65, their family would suffer if they are incapacitated or die and they do not have a roof over their heads, especially if they are the sole breadwinners. As the Prime Minister had pointed out in his National Day Rally speech, we can now expect to live up to 80 years old and therefore need to provide for all our needs longer. It is opportune, in my view, in view of the current discussion of raising the CPF Minimum Sum draw-down age and the need to work longer to remove this restriction. The 65 years age limit was set when our retirement age was 62 years. Now that we are setting a higher retirement age, the Ministry should seriously consider raising this age limit, and I urge the Minister to look into this. My third point is on the need to educate CPF members on the intricate details of the CPF Act and the various schemes available to them. For example, with this amendment, CPF members can now top up the retirement accounts of their family members. If there is no campaign to educate them and raise their awareness, I fear that the take up rate for this scheme will be very low and we will not achieve our objective, which is to enhance the retirement security of those who are unable to provide for themselves. I would therefore like to suggest that the CPF Board launch a campaign to educate CPF members on the various schemes that are now available and how they or their family can benefit from them.”
“In view of the greater flexibility allowed to CPF members to top up the retirement accounts of their family members such as the grandparents, parents, spouse or siblings, allowing them to also top up the Medisave accounts of their family members should be a logical and necessary extension. Many older Singaporeans, especially women, do not have sufficient Medisave savings to last them for life, which is even more critical now since our life expectancy is about 80 years old. So, I would like to ask the Minister whether the Ministry could consider allowing CPF members to top up the Medisave accounts of their grandparents, parents, spouses and siblings. This is also one way for us to address the problem of many Singaporeans who are not covered under MediShield, a large number of whom are women. If there are no Medisave savings for them, then they will not have MediShield coverage, because MediShield coverage is automatic so long as there is Medisave savings. So there are compelling reasons why we should allow CPF members to use their CPF funds to top up the Medisave accounts of their family members. My second point is on the current age restriction for coverage under the Home Protection Insurance Scheme. Only those who are below 65 years of age are covered under the Home Protection Insurance Scheme, which discharges a member from liability to pay for his housing loan upon the death or incapacity of the member during the insured period. This is an important scheme that protects the homes of CPF members in the event of the death of a breadwinner or major contributor to the family income.”
“But there was no provision in the CPF Act which allows the Board to allow for an immediate transfer of the CPF funds of the CPF member to the CPF account of his ex-wife and she has to wait until he reaches 55 years old and even then, she will only get the amount ordered by the court after the Board has set aside the Minimum Sums for retirement and Medisave accounts of the member. In the end, there may be very little that the ex-wife receives despite the court order and the ex-wife and her children suffer grave hardship. In the event that the court orders the transfer of the matrimonial property to the ex-wife, there is also a problem. The ex-wife has to refund the ex-husband's CPF monies first before the property can be transferred to her as the Board has no powers to allow a transfer if this is not done. Again, this causes hardship, as the ex-wife usually does not have the means to reimburse her ex-husband's CPF monies. Hence, the amendment to the Act will allow the CPF Board, upon the order of the court, to transfer the funds immediately and the ex-wife does not have to refund the member's CPF monies before the flat can be transferred to her, provided that if she sells the flat, then she has to transfer the amount to her own CPF account. Again, this is a pro-family policy and will help to alleviate the hardship caused to many women and children in divorces who would otherwise be deprived of a roof over their heads. However, Sir, I have three issues to raise and seek the Minister's response to them. First, currently, a member is not allowed to transfer his CPF savings to top up the Medisave account of his family members. This is a point referred to by Dr Ahmad Magad.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of the Bill. I would like to single out two particular amendments, which are pro-family and which also strengthen support for our ageing population, for mention. Under the first set of amendments, CPF members can now use their CPF funds to top up not only the retirement accounts of their parents and spouses, but also that of their grandparents and siblings. The old law is restrictive as it allows a member to transfer money from his account only if he is topping up the retirement accounts of his parents or spouse but not if he is topping up the retirement account of a grandparent or sibling. To top up the retirement account of a grandparent, he has to use cash which is rather prohibitive. The old law also does not allow a CPF member to top up the retirement account of a sibling. This had made it difficult for those who want to provide for the needs of older siblings, particularly women who have little retirement savings of their own and who may not have any family or children to support them. So, I applaud this change which is pro-family and which will help to enhance the retirement security of older Singaporeans who are unable to provide for themselves. I also applaud the change under Part IIIA on division of fund-related assets in matrimonial proceedings. This amendment is progressive and will provide better protection for our women and children in divorce proceedings. This amendment was the result of a court decision in the 1995 case of CPF Board v Lau Eng Mui where the court ruled that CPF forms part of the matrimonial assets that are available for distribution in divorce proceedings.”
“Sir, I thank the Minister of State for the explanation. I would like to say that the Baby Bonus Scheme is a useful scheme. Nevertheless, it is a scheme which requires a person to top up before the Government will give a matching grant. Not everyone is able to come up with the money to top up and therefore it may have limited accessibility for some Singaporeans. Raising the child care subsidy of $150, however, will benefit everyone, including the lower income groups that we want to assist. I would like to ask the MCYS to seriously consider raising this $150 subsidy, because it has been a long time since the subsidy was last raised.”
“I have two supplementary questions, Sir. First, I would like to ask the Minister, as interpretation of human rights differs in the region, what kind of benchmarks or reference points will be used by this commission in order to assess the standards of observance of human rights in the region. Second question, Sir: will there be a mechanism put in place in the human rights commission for individuals or anyone in the region to make complaints of violation of human rights? Sir, the Minister said that this commission is likely to be only consultative. It will then lead to the question whether this commission will really be effective in monitoring human rights in the region, if it is only meant to be consultative.”
“Mdm Deputy Speaker, I think the Minister of State missed the gist of the first point I made. My point is that we are trying to make ourselves into an international/regional medical hub. And, obviously, we therefore want to align ourselves with international standards, especially that of developed countries. In developed countries, refractions are done by optometrists, and not opticians, which means that they have moved to higher standards. Should we not also be thinking about that, not immediately? I recognise that there is a dearth or insufficient opticians to provide for the needs of the population at the present moment. There are over 1,500 opticians and it is not right to break their livelihood. But should we not be moving towards higher standards in the future? Should there not be some signal of that from the Ministry of Health, because I see the current Bill as maintaining the status quo? What I am concerned about is: are we moving towards higher standards that we hope to achieve under this Bill? That is the point that the Minister of State missed.”
“Madam, I just want to seek clarification from the Minister of State for Health. The first clarification I would like to ask the Minister of State is whether he agrees that by having two Registers - one for optometrists and the other for opticians - there is already a recognition that there are different levels of competencies residing in these two categories of professionals, and that even with the enhanced training, this dichotomy remains. If this is the case, should we not then, as we are trying to internationalise our medical hub and as we are trying to aspire for higher standards, also try to align our practice with international practice or the practice that exists in the developed countries? We may not aspire today but we can certainly aspire for the future, in the sense that existing opticians - I know there are over 1,500 of them - certainly, we do not want to break their rice bowls and affect their livelihood. But should we not consider better standards for the future? Because we are already recognising this by having two Registers with different competency levels. Should we not move higher in line with the developed countries? My second clarification is: in MOH's view, how do we help the public so that they will not be confused when we now have opticians who can do refraction and opticians who cannot do refraction? They already have a big difficulty trying to assess whether those who are dispensing spectacles and contact lenses are competent or not, but now in addition to that, there are sub-set opticians and optometrists and there are opticians who can do refraction and those who cannot. Could the Minister of State clarify and enlighten how we do not further confuse the public? What are the blind sights of this particular strategy that you are having?”
“On this note, Sir, I think this is a very important and good Bill, and I fully support it. 3.39 pm”
“With more Singaporeans suffering from chronic diseases and with a rapidly ageing population, compounded by the onslaught of new technology such as the Internet and computer games, it is important for people, particularly those who are at risk, to have regular eye checks and to understand the importance of maintaining proper eye care. In this regard, I note that the Singapore Eye Research Institute, together with the NUS, has undertaken a study to examine the cause of the high myopia rates among infants and youngsters in Singapore. This is, indeed, an important move which, hopefully, could shed more light on why we have become a country with one of the highest number of myopics in the world and what other measures we can put in place to prevent a further deterioration of public health in this area. I certainly hope that more researches of this nature could be done. I would like to suggest, Sir, that we devote more resources and efforts to educate the public on the importance of regular eye checks and proper eye care, particularly among the young, in order to prevent myopia or to arrest the problem more effectively. There could be more concerted programmes in schools targeted at children and programmes in the HDB heartlands targeted at adults, particularly the elderly and those at risk. The elderly is, of course, a creeping problem now and I think the need for eye care health should also be addressed. A more pervasive programme on the proper use of computers at work would also be beneficial, particularly for workers who have to spend a lot of time doing computer work. I do urge the Ministry to look into this and work with our schools, grassroots bodies, employers, workers and other relevant organisations to have a more effective public health outreach programme.”
“And I want to really applaud the Ministry of Health as I think this is a very important and positive development. However, Sir, the real challenge lies in the implementation. I note that since 1996, we have had the Contact Lens Practitioners Act to regulate the contact lens practice, and to ensure that only properly trained practitioners are allowed to fit and dispense contact lens. Of course, this Act will now be subsumed under this Optometrists and Opticians Act. But, today, we can still find instances of contact lens being dispensed by untrained people in optical shops. I would, therefore, like to ask the Ministry of Health how it intends to enforce this Act, as there are now about 800 optical retail outlets in Singapore, a large number that would require a large enforcement machinery for this Bill to be properly enforced once it becomes law. A much wider issue, of course, is the sense of responsibility of businesses involved in this trade that they are not just selling a product, but a health accessory which, if badly fitted, can have a tremendous impact on the health of the user. But if this sense of responsibility is not yet deeply ingrained, then we do need an effective enforcement mechanism to ensure compliance and to improve standards of eye care in Singapore. My third point is on the need to educate the public. There is generally a low level of awareness in Singapore about the importance of eye health and ensuring regular and proper eye checks.”
“The patient was an undiagnosed diabetic. His vision and life were saved because of a proper eye examination. I am aware that opticians are already doing refraction and perhaps the Ministry's concern could be that we do not have enough optometrists today to separate the two functions. There may also be the concern about how this would impact on the livelihood of existing opticians. These are valid and practical concerns. One way to address these concerns is to allow existing opticians to continue to perform refraction and impose restrictions only on the new entrants to opticianry. This is also the suggestion, I believe, that has been made by the Singapore Optometrist Association which, I understand, has also voiced some concerns on this issue. I hope that the Ministry of Health could give us a better insight on why it decides to maintain the status quo and not take this opportunity, particularly considering the critical posi- tion that we are in - myopia, ageing and the number of chronic illness are very high - to upgrade and impose higher standards by ensuring that gradually, over time, refraction is only done by trained and competent optometrists. My second point, Sir, is to ask how this Bill is going to be enforced once it becomes law. The Bill provides for the appointment of inspectors to ensure that the law is complied with and only registered optometrists and opticians can do eye examinations and prescribe glasses. Once registered, the Optometrists and Opticians Board could ensure that they go for continuing education before they will continue to be issued with the licence to practise, an important point to ensure that our optometrists and opticians continue to maintain high standards.”
“I am not sure that this is a sufficient ground for continuing with the status quo. The primary consideration should be what is in the interest of the public and whether it is in their interest to continue to allow opticians to do refraction. A lot also depends on the kind of training that opticians undergo which we heard from the Minister of State will now be enhanced. But the question remains whether this is sufficient and extensive enough for them to do refraction, considering that some countries, like Australia and the US, even require a degree before someone can practise optometry. A trained optometrist doing a comprehensive eye examination will not only be able to evaluate a person's vision for spectacles and contact lens, but the optometrist can also check the person's eye health through screening for eye diseases such as glaucoma, cataracts, lid disorders, conjunctivitis and retinal disorders. As we have one of the highest rates of myopia in the world, which has just been confirmed by the Minister of State, a rapidly ageing population and an estimated one million people suffering from chronic illnesses, such as diabetes, hypertension, strokes and other chronic illnesses, obviously proper checks on eye health are important to prevent blindness and other debilitating eye disorders that will cost more to the Government and the individual to correct later on. For example, one optometrist shared with me about a 50-year-old man who wanted to get a pair of spectacles. The man claimed that he was in good health and not on any medication. However, when the optometrist did an internal eye examination, he noticed that there was bleeding in his retina. The optometrist referred him to an ophthalmologist who subsequently diagnosed diabetic retinopathy.”
“Hopefully, this Bill will help to enhance the image of our optometrists and opticians and generate a better understanding of their role in helping Singaporeans to improve their eye health. The importance of this Bill and the need for standards to improve cannot be overemphasised. Years ago, when I needed a new pair of glasses, I picked up one from an optician. Unfortunately for me, the optician was poorly trained and ill-equipped to do a proper eye examination before prescribing the glasses. As a result, I had to endure a few months of terrible headaches which I did not realise was due to the poorly-fitted prescribed glasses until I went for a proper eye check and was prescribed the correct glasses. I learned a painful lesson, but I am glad that there was no lasting damage. But we can never tell how many more people could have experienced the same problem and what is the extent of the damage to their health. Sir, I would like to raise three issues with regard to this Bill. First, in many developed countries, as the Minister of State had correctly pointed out, a distinction is maintained between the role of optometrists and opticians. In a nutshell, these countries do not allow opticians to do refraction, that is, basic eye examination procedures such as examining eyeball pressure, visual field and retina. The Minister of State has also explained that the reason why there is no such distinction under the current Bill and opticians can continue to perform refraction, which they are currently doing, is because of the considerable overlap in the practice of optometry and opticianry in Singapore. And the Ministry does not want to disrupt the way the public uses the services of these professionals.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of this Bill. This Bill to regulate the practice of optometry and opticianry in Singapore is necessary and is long overdue. Singapore has one of the highest incidences of myopia in the world. A local study shows that by age seven, about 28% of children are myopic. And as the Minister of State has pointed out, 40% of Chinese adults above the age of 40 years suffer from myopia, which is a high prevalence rate for our adult population. Yet, the practice of optometry and opticianry has long remained unregulated, leaving the public to make important decisions about their eyesight without any legal control. The situation is vastly different in many developed countries, such as the US, Canada, UK and Australia, which have long regulated the practice of optometry and opticianry in order to protect the public. But it is better late than never and I strongly welcome this Bill, which I hope will bring about the kind of improvement in standards that we have seen in the developed countries. Under the Bill, optometrists and opticians will now have to be registered, and they will also have to continuously upgrade their skills and capabilities to keep pace with new developments, thus ensuring that they maintain high standards of professionalism. In this way, the public can expect to have better standards of eye care, and optometrists and opticians will in turn be better recognised as healthcare professionals. In Singapore, there is not enough recognition of optometry and opticianry as a profession, let alone as part of healthcare profession. Often, optometrists and opticians are regarded as merely retailers of eye care products.”
“I would like to ask the Minister of State, when there are strong winds and heavy rain during such periods and the soil around the trees is loosened, whether additional checks are being done by NParks and also what precautions are then given to residents and passers-by when they come close to such trees.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to ask the MOS the following questions. MOE and MTI were informed only two days before the announcement was made. But upon being informed, could the two Ministries have requested that the university defer their communication to the students until an effective proper communication plan had been worked out? Because soon after the announcement was made, there was obviously utter confusion and there was not an effective communication plan. And in that communication plan, had the Ministry also asked the university to also indicate to the students what kind of assistance would be provided from the university's side, in terms of scholarship assistance, as well as on the Ministry's side, what kind of assistance would be extended, in terms of getting places for them in NUS, NTU and SMU? Because the impression given is that there was really no effective communication plan or strategy for the students when the news broke out to them and that had caused utter confusion and anxiety. Mr Gan Kim Yong: Mr Speaker, I can understand the Member's concern and the anxiety that she and the students were facing. The decision to close UNSW Asia was made by UNSW themselves and the decision to proceed with the announcement was also made by them. We were informed two days beforehand and, immediately, we swung into action and we gathered our local universities as well as several private education organisations to set up a one-stop shop at the UNSW Asia campus to help facilitate our students who were affected by the closure. I think this was the best way that MOE felt that we could extend a helping help to the students who were faced with this dilemma.”
“This is important as the greater liberalisation of the "S" passes from an initial start of 5% to 10% and then to 15%, barely two years later, would mean that employers now have greater access to younger and better educated foreign workers who can be employed on lower pay, for a longer period and from any part of the world. Sir, I support the need to have foreign workers to uphold our own local workforce to meet the needs of our economy, but I would, at the same time, like to urge MOM to monitor the situation closely so that our more vulnerable workers are not affected and also our efforts in other areas, such as promoting the employment of older workers and women under the back-to-work programmes, are not compromised. Finally, Sir, I agree with the amendment to paragraph 13, that a work pass holder shall not allow any other person to have possession of his work pass. But the law is unclear about what happens if it is the employer who insists on keeping his workers' work passes, as is usually the case as some fear that their workers will moonlight or abscond. Greater clarity on this would have been useful. I would also like to urge MOM to communicate and educate our foreign workers on the changes under this law and the new penalties and how it would affect them, so that they are not caught by surprise, and that the greater protection that is intended to be accorded by this Bill will reach them and benefit them. On this note, Sir, I support the Bill. 3.43 pm”
“The tripartite partners have been collaborating very closely in order to assist our older workers and low-wage workers through job redesign and skills upgrading. It is important that our foreign manpower policy augments these efforts and not weakens them, as the concern is that the easy availability of foreign workers may discourage some employers from embarking on these initiatives. We have seen the great increase in the use of cheap sourcing and contract workers, and this has generally led to a decline in wages of these workers. We have done a fair bit for our low-wage workers, particularly with the introduction of the WIS, but that is not the panacea, as having a job and earning better pay is the real, long-term solution for our low-wage workers. Sir, one common complaint that I hear from our women who want to go back to work is that there are just not enough part-time and flexible work options for them. This is one area where employers need to put more efforts and be more innovative in helping our women who want to work to return to the workforce or to help those who are currently in the workforce to continue working. I hope that the easy availability of foreign workers will not dampen our efforts to retain and attract women back to the workforce. Sir, the other category of Singaporeans that I am concerned about is the older PMETs. The picture is still not so rosy for them, despite what the statistics show. I welcome the WDA's efforts to introduce a new programme, called the Professional Conversion Programme (PCP). I would like to urge MOM to consider scaling up this programme to cover more sectors and reach out to more older PMETs who are facing the squeeze.”
“They can work for up to six months and are not restricted to specific types of work. They are also not subject to minimum salary requirements, as mentioned in the MOM's press statement. Although the intention is to encourage more foreign students to come to Singapore and sink their roots here, the issue is whether this greater liberalisation of foreign students coming here to work, coupled with the new definition which I alluded to earlier on, will open the door for cheap labour in Singapore. In fact, I think that the law should provide for the reverse, ie, anyone being employed in Singapore as a student, trainee or otherwise, should be considered as employees so that they are covered under the Employment Act and are paid salaries before work passes can be issued to the employers. Broadly, Sir, our strategy in employing foreign workers to augment our local workforce is a right one. Last year, although we created 176,000 jobs, we were not able to get Singaporeans to take up all the jobs and, as the Minister mentioned just now as well as on various occasions in the past, about 450,000 jobs would be created over the next five years. As a result, last year, almost half the jobs had to go to foreigners. Whilst I support this flexibility, I would also like to suggest that the Minister continue to monitor the impact of this policy of greater flexibility in the use of foreign manpower on our more vulnerable workers, specifically our low-wage workers, the older workers and the women who are currently out of the labour market. The last two categories were also touched upon by the Tripartite Committee on Employability of Older Workers.”
“Hence, our broad approach and strategies in managing foreign manpower is on the right track, and this Bill will further strengthen and enhance our position. However, I have a number of observations to make and some clarifications to seek from the Minister. I notice that a new definition has been inserted under section 2 of the Act. A new word "employ" has been inserted. The word "employ", as defined by the Bill, means to "engage or use the service of any person for the purpose (a) of any work; or (b) of providing any training for that person, whether under a contract of service or otherwise, and with or without salary". I would like to seek a clarification from the Minister on the exact meaning of this provision, as it seems to be very broad, particularly the words "engage or use the service of any person for the purpose of providing any training, whether under a contract of service or otherwise, and with or without salary". This provision can be interpreted to mean that it is acceptable for an employer to bring in foreigners as trainees, without having to employ them under contracts of service and without having to pay them any salary. If this is the interpretation, then there are serious concerns of the potential for abuse and whether this would open the door for really cheap foreign workers to come in as trainees, to the detriment of local workers. I hope that this is not the intention of the law, and it would be of great help if the Minister could clarify this point in this House. This clarification, Sir, is also important in view of the recent announcement made by MOM that, with effect from 1st December 2007, undergraduates and graduates from overseas will be allowed to work here for short stints.”
“Sir, I rise in support of the amendments proposed under the Employment of Foreign Workers (Amendment) Bill. The amendments have a two-fold purpose: firstly, to consolidate the various legislative authority for all work passes under the Employment of Foreign Workers (Amendment) Bill and, secondly, to increase the penalties for selected offences, introduce new offences and enhance the powers of Employment Inspectors to facilitate enforcement orders. The increase in penalties will ensure that those who violate the Act will be sufficiently deterred, as otherwise the Act will lose its effectiveness and offences will continue to be committed with impunity. We certainly need a strong regulatory regime in order to provide better protection to our foreign workers, otherwise our image and ability to attract global talents will be affected. Overall, the amendments will provide a more coordinated and coherent approach in regulating the employment of foreign workers. Under the current regime, some aspects of the regulation are governed under the Foreign Workers Act and the other aspects are governed by the Immigration Act, which is under the ICA. This is not only confusing for companies and workers, but I am also sure it increases the complexity in regulating foreign manpower on the part of MOM, the primary agency in dealing with workers of all nationalities. Sir, Singapore's development today would not have been possible without the contributions of our foreign workers. They have contributed much to our efforts to develop into a world-class, dynamic and globally competitive workforce, ranked as the number one workforce by BERI for many years.”
“I would like to ask the MOS whether there are any programmes in place in schools, not only to train the counsellors and the teachers, but also to raise awareness amongst students about the challenges and problems that students with psychotic problems face, because the feedback I get is that such problems do carry a stigma and some of these in the schools can result in the student being isolated, marginalised or picked upon, and that does not help in their rehabilitation. So I think a much broader-based awareness problem is necessary to be put in place for teachers and students as well. Are there any plans to do that or are there already programmes of this nature in schools? RAdm [NS] Lui Tuck Yew: I think the areas that we are actually paying greater attention to right now will be dyslexia, autism as well as, for example, other behavioural problems which are more common based on the incident rates compared to what we know of psychosis. The full-time school counsellors are still an early element in terms of their introduction into the schools and certainly, we are working towards making the full use of this capability and resource in the schools to further educate our school children in all these different signs and symptoms that they should look out for, as well as to also help them understand how to better work with some of these children who may display such signs and symptoms over time.”
“I want to thank the Minister for his explanation. Because of this shortage of beds, there is a concern that patients could be turned around very quickly. I would like to ask the Minister to give an assurance that those who need treatment will be kept long enough in the hospital. That is the concern on the ground.”
“Sir, I would like to ask the Minister, pending the completion of the two hospitals which the Minister mentioned, how does the Ministry intend to deal with this shortage of total beds, whether the measure the Minister mentioned just now is sufficient to meet the shortage of beds in the subsidised wards?”
“Sir, on the whole, this Bill would improve the quality and standard of dental care services in Singapore. And, therefore, I support the Bill. 3.45 pm”
“But they cannot use their Medisave or that of their children to pay for the cost of making dentures, which can be quite costly for the average elderly to pay out of their own pockets. I would like to suggest that MOH update or review the current allowable usage of limits for Medisave use for dental services. Sir, the population in Singapore is ageing very rapidly. One worry is that the elderly in Singapore tend to give dental care a lower priority than medical care. A study conducted by the Department of Preventive Dentistry of NUS in 1992 on the elderly who were in institutional care supports this finding. There does not seem to be a more recent research, but international research on this in more recent times supports the same finding. The study examined the existing arrangements for financial support of dental and medical care to elderly persons living in 68 long-term care facilities in Singapore. The results showed that a significantly higher number of homes, 93%, assumed responsibility for the provision of medical and dental care. A significantly greater proportion of them offered inhouse medical care, 42%, compared to inhouse dental care, only 5%. Sir, we all agree that oral health is integral to an elderly person's general health and quality of life, and basic oral health services are an essential component of primary healthcare. There is therefore a need for us to ensure that dental care services are better designed so that there is a geriatric focus, and all students doing dentistry or receiving training as oral health therapists are taught about geriatric care. I hope that the Ministry will pay closer attention to this so that our elderly would also have access to quality dental health services.”
“I understand that, since September 2005, dentists need to complete 70 hours of continuing development programme over a two-year period and that, by September 2007, annual practising certificates will only be issued to dentists who fulfil this requirement. Sir, while I support this move, I have received feedback that older dentists who are in semi-retirement and who are not working full-time are worried with this requirement as they find that 70 hours are too long for them, considering that they do not work full-time. I would like to ask whether the Ministry can be more flexible in implementing the continuing professional development programme for such dentists so that their training hours could be shorter, or the 70 hours could be spread over a three-year period, instead of a two-year period, so that they will not lose their practising certificates. In this way, we also do not lose their years of skills and expertise which are valuable. Sir, next, I wish to touch on the use of Medisave for dentistry services. I have received feedback from both patients and dentists who feel that the current provisions allowing Medisave to be used for approved dental procedures are very restrictive on two counts. First, the type of procedures for which it can be used is restrictive and should be expanded as dental technology has advanced so rapidly. But Medisave use is still restricted to the system in place 25 years ago. Second, the fees should also be revised, as the current table of fees is also 25 years old and may no longer be realistic. For example, with a rapidly ageing population, the need for dentures is more pervasive, especially among elderly patients.”
“I think it is important in the public interest, as well as in the interest of the oral health therapists themselves, to clearly define what would be the scope of work of oral health therapists so that the public is aware and understands what service they can expect from them. Oral health therapists are also now subject to the same discipline and penalties as dentists, stipulated under the Bill. Therefore, Sir, it is in the interest of the oral health therapists also to know what they can or cannot do in order to prepare themselves. Sir, the other point which the Bill does not address is the problem faced by many oral health therapists who are prohibited from providing treatment to patients above the age of 18 years. Last week, I had the chance to speak to some oral health therapists and they feel that this restriction limits their career development and scope of work as they could only provide service within our schools and they have no market value beyond that. The dentists in private practice will not find it practical to employ them since they cannot assist the dentists to treat patients who are above the age of 18 years. So if the intention of the Act in putting oral health therapists under the Dentists Act is that they can expand their scope and they can also practise in the private sector to help to reduce the cost for patients, then I think if this restriction is not removed, it will have limited application and impact. Sir, I support the continuing professional development programme. Our dentists must keep pace with rapid changes made in scientific knowledge, dental practice and the development of new materials and technologies. The voluntary programme has not worked. Therefore, a compulsory programme has to be put in place in the public interest.”
“In the old days, they used to be just pulling out your teeth. But now, it is a lot more sophisticated. They are not able to differentiate between the different types of specialists, whether it is orthodontists or periodontists, or whatever, that you may have. How to prevent confusion and ensure that people are able to make informed choices as to the level of care that they need? It is necessary to educate the public on the Dental Specialists' Register. I would like to urge the Ministry to look into this and come up with an appropriate education programme for the public. Sir, I also support the proposal to register and regulate oral health therapists, such as dental hygienists and dental therapists, who usually help the dentists but can also on their own do the routine chores associated with the practice of dentistry. I feel that the use of oral health therapists, subject to the various conditions stated in the Act, would help to reduce the costs to patients as there are some tasks that do not require the intervention of the dentist. As this is already done in other countries and as oral health therapists have already been widely used in our schools, registering and regulating them is a correct move. It would also help to promote greater professionalism and growth of the profession. However, there are two gaps that the Bill does not address. The Bill does not define the job scope of the oral health therapists. With some ambiguity, will we have a situation where the oral health therapists may even end up doing the work of the qualified dentist although they may not be qualified to do so?”
“Sir, however, there are two issues that we need to address. First, there is a concern that the establishment of the Dental Specialists' Register and the registration of specialists would result in higher fees for patients. As dental care services in Singapore are primarily provided by private practitioners, this is a genuine concern that needs to be addressed. Without a Dental Specialists' Register, it is more difficult for specialists to charge higher fees because, to the patient, he is just like any other dentist. But with the register and a clear recognition of their status as specialists, the fear is that specialists will push up their fees. Also, what we need in Singapore is to promote right siting of dental services. If there is no need for the patient to engage the services of a dental specialist, then it is a waste of resources and an over-consumption if patients start visiting specialists, instead of dentists, even for less complicated treatments, not to mention that this will also drive up cost. One way is for the Ministry of Health to publish the list of specialists as well as their fees for the various dental treatments. I hope that the specialists would also do the same by putting up the schedule of fees in their clinics as well. In this way, the public can compare prices and can also decide whether they want to seek the services of a specialist or a dentist with the clear understanding on the different fees that they may be charged. Sir, the second issue is one of awareness and education. Public awareness of the existence of different types of specialties and the field of dentistry is extremely limited. To them, a dentist is someone who is medically trained to deal with all problems associated with the gums and teeth.”
“As a result of such initiatives, a 1994 survey showed that a child at the age of 12 had only one decayed, missing, or filled tooth and that 97% of Singapore's population at age 18 did not lose any permanent teeth as a result of tooth decay. Despite our good progress, one area that I feel deserves closer attention is how to better provide for the dental care needs of a rapidly ageing population, a point that I will revisit later. Sir, let me now touch on some of the specific areas covered under the Act. I support the various measures instituted under the Bill to tighten control over discipline in the practice of dentistry, that is, increasing the fine to $50,000 and establishing an Interim Orders Committee. Although some dentists have expressed concern over the higher fine, this must be looked at in its proper context. Dentists who are honest and exercise their professional duty of care need not worry. But tighter discipline would generate greater public confidence and act as a better deterrent for errant dentists. Sir, for the first time, the Bill proposes the setting up of a Dental Specialists' Register which is already in place for the medical doctors. About 25% of the 1,250 registered dentists have undergone some form of specialised training. But there is no formal system of accessing and recognising those who have the qualifications and expertise to function as specialists. The register will thus help Singapore to develop and grow specialised dental practice which is required for the management of complex dental cases. It will also provide patients and the public with the proper level of care appropriate to their needs as they can more easily identify dentists who have specialised skills and expertise in specific areas of dentistry.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of the Dentists (Amendment) Bill. This Bill is necessary and timely. It will enhance the standards of professionalism in the practice of dentistry and further raise the quality of dental care services that are provided in Singapore. Improvements, such as the Continuing Professional Development Programmes and the Dental Specialists' Register, will also bring the practice of dentistry in line with that applicable to the medical doctors and also the practice found in many developed countries, a plus point for Singapore in our efforts to build up Singapore's reputation as a medical hub and to attract more foreign patients under Singapore Medicine. Sir, Singapore has a good standard of dental care comparable to international standards. Among the population, especially younger Singaporeans, there is a high level of awareness about dental hygiene. Research done in 2003 showed that 45% of Singaporeans visited their dentists once every six months. Singapore's key approach in maintaining dental health is through prevention. Our school dental programme provides a very useful service. Every day, in our primary schools, all the kids will line up and be made to brush their teeth after recess. I was told that this is still the practice done in some schools, although some schools have discarded that practice. This is a good practice as it certainly helps to increase awareness and instil the habits of good dental hygiene among young children in the early days when such habits are not yet well established among our population.”
“It was also during Mr Lim Siong Guan's time that we had our first public sector union-management gathering in 1997, which is a practice that we have continued up to today. The public sector union-management gathering provides a platform for the NTUC and the public sector unions to regularly discuss and engage the PSD and the public sector management from the Ministries and statutory boards on HR policies and issues in the public sector, and has laid a strong foundation for the development of good LMR in the public sector. Sir, in conclusion, if, as mentioned by Minister Teo, the public sector could, through competitive wages, help to retain able men and women in the public service and duplicate many more Permanent Secretaries of Mr Lim Siong Guan's calibre and character - I know that Mr Lim has retired - then this is something that is good for our future. 2.22 pm”
“Just to quote you some examples. On work-life balance, our civil service is one of the earliest to adopt family-friendly policies, such as extended maternity leave for young mothers and paid sick leave for mothers to tend to sick children, long before the Employment Act was amended to provide the two days' paid sick leave to parents in the private sector. Our civil service also has schemes allowing women officers to work part time or flexi time and was the first to adopt the policy on equal pay for work of equal value, way back in the 1960s, even before Singapore officially ratified International Labour Organisation Convention 100 on this in the year 2002. I hope, of course, Sir, that we will see more female Permanent Secretaries, but the current record of four from a base of zero is not too bad. In fact, because of its reputation, I sometimes receive request from young school leavers looking for jobs in my constituency who specifically request for work in the Government service or who are disappointed when they could not secure a civil service job and want to appeal for a second chance. So, far from the impression that many have, the civil service is still an attractive, exciting and challenging place to work. Sir, in the course of my work, I also had the opportunity of meeting very enlightened senior civil servants, such as Mr Lim Siong Guan who not only understood very well what is important for our economy and growth and how to ensure that our civil service remains efficient and effective. He also understood very well the concerns of the average Singaporean and the need to take care of the civil servants even as the civil service charged ahead to prepare for new challenges.”
“So, I would like to urge the Public Service Division to do a thorough review of the jobs in the public service to assess whether there are jobs which now have to be redesigned so that the staff on those schemes could do higher-level jobs and enhance their market value. Some examples are the Corporate Support Service and the Operations Support Service, which could be upgraded to the higher-level jobs. This is something which we had raised a few years ago and I would like to urge the PSD to give this greater urgency and priority. One of the comments about the public service is that other than the Administrative Service, promotions for the other schemes of service are far too slow compared to the private sector. Recently, the Ministry of Education made a very smart move by conducting a promotion exercise, which is essentially a catch-up exercise. Under the enhanced career structure for teachers, the MOE promoted a bumper crop of 10,850 officers. Some benefited from faster promotions while others benefited from the new additional career grade of GEOs 1A3/2A3, that was created. These are additional promotional grades as the next higher grade is too far for many to cross. I think, Sir, that this is a good move to motivate and retain staff, and I strongly urge the rest of the public service to study and implement this as well. Sir, I have highlighted some issues pertaining to the current service pay revision and have also made some suggestions for improvements. Having worked closely with the public service, primarily as adviser to the public sector unions, I must emphasise that, overall, in its human resource management policies, our civil service can pride itself as being a fair and progressive employer, whether in the area of staff welfare or staff development.”
“It is important, in my view, to ensure that those schemes of service without relevant market equivalents are also adequately compensated. The Minister had explained that the Public Service Division would look at the qualifications of the officer in such cases to determine how much wage adjustments to pay to those without market equivalents. In my view, this is not enough. The Government should also look at the job size of the officers and the complexity of the jobs, taking into account the knowledge and experience that they have in performing certain jobs in the civil service. The nature of the work in the civil service is different from that of the private sector. There are jobs, such as officers doing ICA work, where it is not possible to find the market equivalent, but these are jobs critical to Singapore's security. Hence, we need to be fair to them as well and ensure that they receive fair pay adjustments. Sir, as market comparisons are now increasingly being used as a benchmark for salary revisions in the public service, it is imperative that the jobs in the public service do not remain static but are constantly reviewed and redesigned so that officers in all the schemes of service could continue to enhance the value of their work and will stand an equal chance of earning better bonuses and wage increases. This is important because it is not fair to the staff if they have been asked to do the same job for the past 20 years, and then one day when market comparisons are done, they are told that the market value of their jobs is lower than others and therefore they deserve less bonuses and wage increases.”
“Our concern is that the effectiveness of the performance management system in the public sector today varies across Ministries and statutory boards, and has to be improved. According to one unionist, statutory boards do not share their corporate KPIs with the unions and staff until only very recently. But there are also examples of good performance management systems practised in the public sector. The PUB Employees' Union has confidence in its appraisal system, as the management engage an external consultant, discuss extensively with the union and the staff, train the supervisors and even a few years after the implementation of the appraisal system, the consultant continues to do annual evaluations to ensure that the system is complied with and functions well. It is important that the positive experience of the PUB Employees' Union is multiplied across the public service. There was an interesting column in the 2nd April 2007 Financial Times entitled "Why the annual appraisal fails to make the grade", where the columnist describes the appraisal process as a process usually entered into in a spirit of embarrassment, false optimism and weary duty. I hope that this is not how the public service management system is perceived. If more and more public service pay is to be pegged to performance, I would like to urge the Public Service Division to do a lot more work in this area to improve the performance management system across Ministries and statutory boards. Sir, let me now touch on market adjustment. One principle that we are seeing being more clearly established now is that an officer's wage increase will now be tied more closely to market demand.”
“Since Minister Teo made the announcement on 2nd March this year that there will be a salary revision, expectations have been raised. Civil servants are expecting adjustments to their basic pay. Hence, it is important that the basic principle of how the adjustment will be made is clearly explained to both the civil servants as well as the public. The public service has a flexible wage system, and the adjustment this year is primarily in the variable component, and not a fixed component of the civil servants' salary structure, except maybe for only a few schemes of service which will get their basic pay adjusted. Another key consideration is that, unlike the salary revision exercise in 2000, the exercise this time is different in that the adjustment will not be the same across the board. Rather, the salary adjustment will depend on market demand and performance of staff. This means that the variable component that is pegged to performance has increased, and this makes it all the more important for the public service to have an effective performance management system. In essence, Sir, we can agree that if the public service is to improve its standards, it needs to reward people based on performance and not on their mere presence at work or based solely on seniority. Nevertheless, for a performance-based system to work, it is important to have in place an objective, fair and transparent performance appraisal system that generates confidence among public service staff. For this to happen, the targets must be clear, discussed with the staff and achievable. There must also be a system in place where managers are properly trained to appraise their staff and give regular feedback on their performance.”
“I think their concern is not unwarranted. Many civil servants today who joined service years ago have reached the maximum on their scale and have not been receiving wage increases. Prior to the year 2000, they could expect to look forward to NWC wage increases. But since 2000, NWC wage increases were paid only in the form of the Annual Variable Component (AVC) which was split into two parts and paid in July and December. In the meantime, the cost of living has gone up. Sir, this has been particularly difficult for the public service staff in the lower divisions, such as Divisions 3 and 4 and the daily-rated employees. The Amalgamated Union of Daily Rated Workers has asked me to remind the Government not to forget about the DREs - the lowest-paid workers in the public service. On average, a DRE who has worked for more than 20 years earns only about $1,000 a month inclusive of allowances, which are paid only if they fulfill some traditions such as punctuality. Almost all the DREs today work two jobs to make ends meet. This is the group that, despite economic growth, is still stuck with low wages, as they face the same challenge of stretching incomes caused by globalisation that afflicts all our low-wage workers. Many have gone for training but there is a limit to how much the cleansing jobs that they perform can be revamped. I would like to urge the Government to pay special attention to the lower divisions and our daily-rated workers in the salary revision so that they are not left out. Sir, I have listened carefully to the Minister's statement. I am glad to note that the salary adjustment, which will be paid primarily in the form of bonuses tied to performance and market demand, will benefit everyone in the public service.”
“So, even if the starting pay is adjusted, its concerns over job security are not addressed, then I think the public service will continue to see a higher turnover among new recruits. Sir, let me now focus on some aspects of the salary revision and its impact on civil servants. Our public sector unionists have raised some issues and concerns. They felt that thus far, the focus has been only on the pay of the top civil servants. They are worried in case the salary revision will benefit only the very few at the top and the graduates, based on Minister Teo's express concern that the graduate scheme is seeing a higher level of turnover. The very top civil servants form only a very small percentage of the 64,000 civil servants that are spread across 15 Ministries and who help to make the system work. Our public sector unionists understand the need to reward and retain our top talents, but I believe that the rest of the civil servants too deserve to be treated fairly and should be given a decent pay increase. As one public sector unionist reminded me in a meeting that we had last Thursday, we must look at the public service as a total human being where every part of the body performs a function. It is not only the brain that matters. Even if a person has a wonderful brain, without the hands, legs, eyes, nose and ears, that person cannot function effectively. So we need to pay the top civil servants well but we must not forget the rest of the public service, without whom our public service will be crippled and cannot function well. The best policies will be ruined if poorly-paid demotivated, disgruntled counter staff at the Ministry is rude to the public, or if a similarly poorly-paid demotivated and disgruntled lower division staff fails to implement policies effectively.”
“Having dealt with the public service in the course of my union work, I can vouch for the fact that the public service of today is a far cry from the service of the past, in terms of the quality of the staff and the standards of performance. There are now many dreaded acronyms among civil servants, such as PRP, which is Performance Review Process, where someone who receives an E rating is given a certain period to buck up, failing which he will be terminated. Then there is the SGS - the Special Gratuity Scheme - where someone who has stagnated in his performance and is blocking the career path of others is politely asked whether he could do something better in the private sector instead of continuing in his job. And if he so agrees, he could leave through the SGS. Then there is, of course, the equally dreaded best sourcing, where jobs could be outsourced to the private sector once market testing shows that it is viable to do so. The civil servants know that if they do not perform, not only will they be deprived of performance bonuses but they may also be asked to leave the service. So the public service today is no longer an iron rice bowl, where people are kept in service no matter what happens. Sir, in fact, one of the complaints about the public service today among new recruits is that it lacks job security. The public service today employs people on contracts, even for jobs which are not short term. This is something that the public service, in my view, may want to review as it unnecessarily creates uncertainty particularly among new recruits - the group that has the highest turnover. If the reason is to test people before confirming them, then the good old probation system can still perform that function.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, anyone listening to yesterday's debate will get the impression that this whole salary revision is only for the Administrative Service officers and the political office holders. I would like to stress that there are 64,000 civil servants, and they too make important contributions to the work of the public service, and this pay revision would also cover them. This will be the main focus of my speech today to give the perspective of the public sector employees on this pay revision. Sir, the public service pay was last revised in 2000, after the service suffered an exodus of staff to the private sector. Hence, I agree with Minister Teo that it is timely and relevant to do this revision now before we see a repeat of that exodus. It is important for the public service to pay its officers competitive salaries in order to attract and retain its fair share of talent. Being the largest employer in Singapore, its policies on wages and human resource have a significant impact on the private sector. Witness the complaints from the private sector whenever they perceive in the past that the public sector was paying better bonuses, which they felt pressurised to match in order to retain their employees. Hence, the public service has also been mindful not to be seen as the leader when it comes to the payment of salary and bonuses to its employees. But this cautious approach has also resulted in the public service losing people. If the public service does not have its fair share of good people, service to the public will be affected. It would also not be able to live up to the rigorous demands of policy making in an extremely competitive and challenging environment.”
“I think the difficulty for patients who are seeking downgrading is also because the process of means-testing sometimes requires them to produce the salaries of all their children. Sometimes, you have elderly patients who do not even know where their children are staying because their children do not visit them, and they may be too scared. I have a case of a resident who is too scared even to ask his children for their payslips. So these are the difficulties. If the hospital could exercise some flexibility and humanity in such cases, I hope the Minister would consider that also.”