Ho Geok Choo
Singapore
“I thank the Minister of State for the comprehensive response. Just one question: the public had indeed been expressing reservations about eating seafood and I think we are also seeing Singaporeans shunning Japanese restaurants for fear of contaminated seafood. How safe is seafood imported from elsewhere and in Singapore now?”
“Thank you, Senior Minister of State. I have two supplementary questions. First question: short of sounding ageist, would the Ministry consider introducing an age quotient into the qualification criteria of this grant as such a move would encourage young couples to own a home and start a family of their own?”
“Sir, I would like to ask the Minister for his comments on how the political crisis in the Middle East and the nuclear crisis in Japan will have an impact on our energy needs. In view of these developments, what are Singapore's plans to go nuclear and what are our alternative sources of energy?”
“This is an example of mismatch. First, it highlights the need for course counselling for the individual to ensure that the training to be pursued is relevant. Second, it shows that employers in certain sectors are not ready or willing to accept PMETs who have formal management training.”
“Chairman, Singapore serves as a global and regional hub for several international companies. In the borderless global economy, accounting practices are being outsourced.”
“Mr Chairman, Singapore's 1961 Water Agreement with Malaysia expires on 31st August. As the date fast approaches, can the Minister update on Singapore's water situation and plans for self sufficiency? Mr Chairman, I would also like to find out what other plans does the Ministry have to strengthen the habit of saving water.”
The complete record
Every one of 857 lines we hold for Ho Geok Choo, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 18.
“Thank you, Senior Minister of State. I have two supplementary questions. First question: short of sounding ageist, would the Ministry consider introducing an age quotient into the qualification criteria of this grant as such a move would encourage young couples to own a home and start a family of their own? Question two: what is the profile of the recipients and the take-up rate for the HDB grants?”
“I thank the Minister of State for the comprehensive response. Just one question: the public had indeed been expressing reservations about eating seafood and I think we are also seeing Singaporeans shunning Japanese restaurants for fear of contaminated seafood. How safe is seafood imported from elsewhere and in Singapore now? How are we going to educate our public on the safety of seafood imported from Japan and the surrounding countries?”
“Sir, I would like to ask the Minister for his comments on how the political crisis in the Middle East and the nuclear crisis in Japan will have an impact on our energy needs. In view of these developments, what are Singapore's plans to go nuclear and what are our alternative sources of energy?”
“With the sudden influx of foreigners to Singapore in recent years, Singaporeans are feeling a sense of anomie. One Singaporean tells me that every second person she encounters on the MRT is a foreigner, and that train carriages and public buses are a cacophony of incomprehensible tongues from far-flung outposts. No doubt productivity, growth and connectivity to the world are important for Singapore but what can the Government do to improve its engagement with citizens so that they once again feel that the slogan "One People, One Nation, One Singapore" means what it used to mean to Singaporeans? Mr Chairman, the Government has explained several times that Singapore needs foreigners to expand its talent pool; to work at jobs which Singaporeans are not keen to take up; to top up the population and increase the low birth rates. While the Government's arguments are sound, I am concerned about how it is communicating with the people. Has its ability to communicate been lost in a mounting stream of immigration visas? Mr Chairman, the Government's message to the people seems to be that foreigners mean higher GDP growth. The Government needs to improve on its message that Singapore, as home, is much more than cold economics. What more can the Government do to make our citizens feel Singaporean again? New immigrants and national identity”
“Mr Chairman, Deputy Prime Minister Teo Chee Hean announced on Tuesday that MOM is driving the push to establish Singapore as the HR centre of excellence in Asia, together with the EDB and the Singapore Management University (SMU). In addition to the Human Capital Leadership Institute which MOM is establishing, we should build a repository of Asian case studies in human resource management. In fact, through the Asian Human Capital Award organised by MOM, HR practices can be documented and kept in this repository. This collection can serve as a rich source for courseware development and made accessible to CET Centres dealing with HR training. This would be one more feather in Singapore’s cap. The Asian Human Capital Award competition has been running for the last two years and amassed a good number of HRM cases which, if put to good use, will benefit Singaporean companies. To grow this repository we need resources to manage it and I would like to urge WDA to champion industry partners to take on this project. Mr Chairman, establishing an HR Outsourcing Hub for SMEs is another prong in the strategy to help build Singapore into a regional HR centre. SMEs are too small to have their own HR departments and a central agency to help them with HR functions which will allow them to focus on other aspects of their business. The Government said last year that it was contemplating such an entity. What is the progress on this to date? Mr Chairman, I declare my interests as President of Singapore Human Resources Institute (SHRI) and Chief Executive of Human Capital Singapore.”
“This is an example of mismatch. First, it highlights the need for course counselling for the individual to ensure that the training to be pursued is relevant. Second, it shows that employers in certain sectors are not ready or willing to accept PMETs who have formal management training. In this regard, what is the progress of the WDA’s online self-service portal for individuals to help them monitor and plan their own training, to obtain information on demand in the various professions, and to ascertain the right type of training courses for themselves? What about employers? Take the hotel sector as an example. Deputy Prime Minister Teo also said that the Singapore Hotels Association’s Productivity Steering Committee had published recommendations on best practices and solutions related to systems, work processes, automation and technology. Sadly missing on this list are recommendations on improving the industry mindset. What is being done in this respect?”
“What plans does the Ministry have for financial education for the public, making them aware that higher returns are associated with higher risks? Mr Chairman, I wish also to ask about the Ministry’s plans for public education on retirement funding. Less than half of those who turned 55 last year, met the required CPF Minimum Sum requirement after including a property pledge. How many Singaporeans meet this requirement without having to rely on a property pledge? Mr Chairman, a small number has worrying implications for asset monetisation as the population ages. PMETs Mr Chairman, I would like to know whether the Working Group which the Government has formed to review the existing CET system has looked into the feasibility of a Skills Account for every Singaporean. The Skills Account was an idea that I had mooted last year to encourage PMETs to take responsibility for their own training. How far has the Ministry progressed in its review of establishing this account? In addition, I believe training has to be guided on an integrated approach adopted for it to enhance a person’s employability. Some older PMETs have dropped out of the workforce because they are unable to clinch a job despite the retraining they have undergone. I know of a 48-year-old lady who attended a WDA professional conversion programme for hospitality managers, which involved a 15-month course leading to an executive master’s degree in hospitality administration, with a concurrent full-time internship. However, most managerial positions in the hotel industry require at most a diploma, but more importantly five to 10 years of industry experience. She has been unable to land even a formal interview despite the numerous job application letters she has sent.”
“Mr Chairman, it is gratifying that the Government has announced the Special Employment Credit to help employers hire older workers. However, this credit is proposed only for employees already covered by the Workfare programme. There is a group of middle-aged or older citizens who would like to work but have difficulty finding for a job. They feel disenfranchised. Several blame age discrimination. Solutions to the underlying problems of hiring older workers need to be explored. For instance, for the older PMETs, the problem could also be academic over-qualification. Most potential employers feel that the better qualified candidates would not stay long in junior positions but they are also unable or unwilling to offer more senior positions to these candidates. The Government could promote coaching clinics to teach employers how to restructure jobs for older employees and manage an older workforce. Apart from this, perhaps a tax credit may be given to motivate employers to hire older employees whose pay would not qualify them for Workfare. Their skills and experience would be relevant, particularly now when manpower is tight. At the same time, there must be recognition that helping older Singaporeans look for a job requires more targeted effort. It is no longer a mass recruitment exercise, such as through staging a job fair. It would be a shame to let such talents stay unemployed. Financial education Mr Chairman, with the global financial crisis over, it is time to consider what needs to be done to ensure that situations like the Lehman Brothers mini-bond fiasco do not recur. Prior to the crisis erupting in 2008, many investors had bought structured notes which offered higher interest rates than ordinary bank deposits, but which later turned toxic.”
“Chairman, Singapore serves as a global and regional hub for several international companies. In the borderless global economy, accounting practices are being outsourced. Singapore is blessed with an excellent financial regulatory framework and skilled accounting practitioners and is an excellent choice for the setting up of a global accountancy hub. I will be grateful if the Ministry could provide an update on its initiatives to transform Singapore into a leading global accountancy hub. What is the outcome of efforts to attract accounting professionals? What is the supply and demand situation for accounting professionals in the current job market? How is the sector managing the salary pricing of these accounting professionals? Chairman, I am also keen to know the proportion of business derived by Singapore-based accounting firms from overseas last year. Of the overseas business, what proportion was derived from China and India, compared to other countries in the region?”
“Mr Chairman, I have three clarifications for the Minister of State. First, I would like to check how the litter count survey will be used to mitigate the littering problem in Singapore. Second, is there a more robust grading scheme for food stalls than what is currently being used since many people feel that food stalls should either be graded a pass or a fail? And, third, what is the implication of the mandatory time-stamping on the food caterer and the consumer?”
“Mr Chairman, Singapore's 1961 Water Agreement with Malaysia expires on 31st August. As the date fast approaches, can the Minister update on Singapore's water situation and plans for self sufficiency? Mr Chairman, I would also like to find out what other plans does the Ministry have to strengthen the habit of saving water. In this regard, with more cars and condominiums in Singapore in recent years, how is the Ministry emphasising water conservation among car owners, car washers and managers of condominium swimming pools and the public at large? Last year, I had raised the issue of cleaning homes the waterless way using wet wipes. The Minister had said that MEWR will look into it. Can I have an update on this as well? 2.00 pm Eco-homes”
“Mr Chairman, I would like to seek a clarification with Minister of State Lee Yi Shyan. The Minister of State has shared how paper processing and procedures have been streamlined for more effectiveness in the agencies. I would like to ask what special programmes have actually been implemented in agencies to empower service providers in agencies to be more flexible and to take initiatives beyond and to go beyond provided guidelines.”
“SMEs and productivity Mr Chairman, in helping SMEs, it is good to see five trade bodies here set up the Enterprise Development Centres (EDCs) to train their members to innovate and be more productive. Sir, have these efforts reached their target group, especially the smaller SMEs? How effective have the EDCs been in helping SMEs step up their productivity drive? The SMEs, which are trade body members, are more likely to be able to leverage on the network advantages mentioned by Deputy Prime Minister Teo Chee Hean. Which brings one to question how many SMEs do not belong to a trade body and thus are not as plugged-in to the economy and Government initiatives as those who are. For those outside the network, what impact do they have on productivity in Singapore as a whole? I acknowledge that the Government has been tireless over the past year in launching productivity initiatives. Some SMEs, though, feel that the Government should not introduce too many new productivity programmes but should instead make it easier for them to adopt existing schemes and to allow them time to show results. Apart from the Productivity and Innovation Credit scheme introduced last year, SMEs are also offered a battery of other schemes, some with similar sounding names. The range is bewildering to individual businessmen. What can be done to tidy up this web? Orchids”
“Mr Chairman, Deputy Prime Minister Teo Chee Hean said on Tuesday that Singapore would stress a culture of continuous improvement and learning in the productivity drive. One missing element here is empowering our people to think of alternative means of reaching the same results. I know of a HR professional with more than 20 years of experience abroad as a consultant at a well-known bank whose application for certification as a consultant was stalled by the secretariat staff just because he could not show that he had chalked up 1,000 hours of consulting work in Singapore prior to the application. His application was automatically rejected. An appeal was made. This HR professional was one of the pioneers of the Management Services Division (MSD) of PSD. He was asked to show evidence of his consulting work with MSD and Ministry of Finance some 30 years ago. Obviously, MOF was unable to help as they do not have the records. It was only through intervention that this HR professional was asked to appear before interviewers who, upon seeing him, were very apologetic and immediately sorted out his application. Mr Chairman, I think there is a gap between what the administrators understand of their role and the expectations of the policymaking body. The more important point really is that it would appear that the administrators are not empowered to think from the inside out. They are satisfied to just go by the rules and that is how rigidity sets in. I hope the Government will launch a campaign on thinking from the inside out, so as to encourage, firstly, service providers to go the extra mile to resolve problems and, secondly, employers to empower service providers to accommodate alternative but equally effective ways of doing things.”
“Mr Chairman, Minister Mentor Lee mentioned recently that Singapore is too tiny and its talent pool too small to produce a world-class manufacturing giant of the Fortune 500 class. However, Mr Lawrence Leow, President of the Association of Small and Medium Enterprises, feels that Singapore can work towards producing companies for the global stage outside manufacturing. In this area, Singapore has its stars. An example is tenCube, which produces anti-theft software for mobile platforms and which was sold to McAfee. tenCube received initial support from EDB and SPRING Singapore. Mr Chairman, we need to look at ways to transfer the successful experiences of such companies to SMEs in Singapore. SMEs in Singapore are constantly looking at growing their business beyond this island. They need export credit insurance and loan guarantee support. In this regard, what is the progress to date on setting up an export-import bank in Singapore to help local SMES grow overseas? In addition, I would like to know how well aware SMEs are of BrandPact, which is a joint initiative by SPRING and IE Singapore to help companies in their branding strategy so that they can improve margins and break into new markets. How do we measure BrandPact's effectiveness? Productivity – ramping up progress”
“To minimise such cases, there is already a seven-day cooling period for homeowners before they confirm the sale of their flats. I suggest that HDB also requires at-risk HDB owners to attend an advisory session before they are allowed to sell their flats. At present, HDB officers already meet sellers and verify their eligibility to sell their flats. At these meetings, the officers can counsel at-risk flat owners about the wisdom of selling their only home. The officers should ask pragmatic questions about how the owners plan to buy their next home. These suasion methods will help such families think harder about the intended flat sale. Those who have already sold their flats face the prospect of becoming homeless because they have little recourse to owning another HDB flat. I propose that HDB, on a case-by-case basis, allow such households a shorter debarment period and a subsidised loan to help them re-apply for another flat. In such cases, HDB can stipulate the minimum occupation period be at least 10 years. In the meantime, such households need housing. They may not qualify for HDB rental flats and they cannot afford to rent from the open market, or flats in the Interim Housing Programme might not be available. I propose that the HDB rent out some vacated SERS flats to these families until their housing situation is sorted out.”
“Mr Chairman, the Budget proposes a Special CPF Housing Grant to help low-income families make a first-time purchase of a BTO flat, on top of the Additional CPF Housing Grant and a subsidised loan. I am pleased to see that as housing prices rise, the Government is expanding subsidies to maintain affordability. While I applaud this leg-up which the Government is giving to low-income families, I would say that grants alone do not address the underlying reasons why some households cannot afford to buy their own flats. A holistic approach has to be taken by a number of Government agencies to help those less well-off. The HDB needs, too, to address construction costs. Otherwise, we would be handing out more and larger grants, chasing ever-higher costing flats. Mr Chairman, I have to voice my concerns, too, that grants could lure low-income families into believing that they are financially ready to buy their own homes when they might not in fact be. The risk is that they could over-stretch their finances and fall into loan arrears. Thus, I find it heartening that HDB is tackling the problem another way – which is to continue to supply smaller flats to provide more affordable housing choices. HDB is building 3-room flats and 2-room flats under the BTO scheme. Would the Government tell us the take-up rate of such flats among low-income families? How successful is this scheme with low-income families? Ineligibility for subsidised housing Mr Chairman, several families sold their HDB flats in the property boom for profit and they now find they cannot afford another flat after using the proceeds. They are not eligible for a subsidised HDB flat for a period of time. What is the number of households currently in this situation?”
“For too long, we have been challenged by this image problem in the retail, hotel and catering sectors. Efforts like the Singapore GEMS Up movement have produced only a whimper. We have to do more to boost these jobs. We can consider job enlargement for such positions. We can allow employees in these fields more discretion about how they can go about their jobs so that they would feel more fulfilment. Sir, a chain is only as strong as its weakest link. Maybe, for a community as a whole, we do not say often enough that everyone's contribution is important to the economy no matter where he or she stands in the value chain. Even our taxi companies have a role in contributing to productivity in Singapore. Imagine the gains to productivity when taxi companies eventually improve the name that they have made for their cab-booking service! Sir, I am happy with this Budget, particularly its inclusiveness and provisions for promoting Singapore's long-term growth. It evokes for me the lyrics of the song "Count on Me, Singapore". One part of the song goes: We have a goal for Singapore, we can achieve, we can achieve. You and me, we'll do our part, stand together, heart to heart. Yes, I am confident that everyone in Singapore will buckle down to show the world what more this little island can be. On this note, Sir, I support the Budget. [Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Matthias Yao Chih) in the Chair] 4.31 pm”
“The half a percentage point increase in employers’ CPF contributions, the raising of the CPF salary ceiling and the hikes in foreign worker levies are a burden on companies, especially SMEs. Just as our businessmen are rubbing their hands in glee, believing that they can start counting the profits that are rolling in now that the good times are back, they are slammed by these increased costs. Granted, the Budget offers greater tax deductions and new rebates to businesses, but there is little in it that helps smaller companies deal with costs above the before tax line. In particular, as the Finance Minister has acknowledged, SMEs may not benefit fully from the corporate tax rebate. While the Budget proposes that SMEs can claim a cash grant of up to $5,000 in lieu of the tax rebate, the Government can consider offering a higher grant to help SMES. I acknowledge, too, the generous grants and rebates offered to individuals and households. But, again, there is not much in the Budget that addresses the underlying costs. For instance, while the Government will provide a special CPF Housing Grant to help low-income families own their homes, what is the HDB doing to lower the costs of new flats? The Government has said that the proposed hikes in foreign worker levies are a signal to businesses to take productivity seriously. It says that the increases are not an attempt to get employers to substitute local employees for foreign workers. Nevertheless, some employers will make attempts at substitution. Those who do so are likely to bemoan the fact that they cannot find Singaporeans to fill the openings. Singaporeans do not want jobs in the retail, hotel or catering sectors because they perceive such jobs as beneath their stature.”
“How is the effectiveness measured? In addition, how does the Government plan to measure the effectiveness of extending the Productivity and Innovation Credit for expenditure on R&D done abroad and ensure that this liberal scheme would not be abused? Some business people I have met say that the progressive increase in foreign worker levies is being introduced at too fast a pace. SMEs, especially, will need more time to wean themselves off their dependence on foreign workers. This is especially so as it was not so long ago that the Government had been relaxed about letting in foreign manpower. While the Government has said that the levy increases will weed out weaker companies, I advocate that before we let some firms fall off the cliff, we should make an attempt to pull them back from the edge because some may be worth saving. Compounding their difficulties, some SMEs say that it is difficult for them to take advantage of the PIC scheme because they do not have the critical mass to embark on automation. For such SMEs, it is important to focus on re-design, training and shifting the mindset of workers. But in this regard, I sense that the PIC scheme is stuck at the consulting stage. Consulting firms – which themselves are SMEs – are tasked with helping businesses improve productivity. But the road to offering advice is paved with obstacles. The consultants have to first market their services and perform business diagnostics to get a picture of their clients’ operations before they actually get down to proffering advice. This preliminary work requires resources. In other words, the consulting firms need start-up support before they can help SMES. Many Singaporeans see this Budget as one which will drive costs up.”
“The Minister of State for Trade and Industry Mr Lee Yi Shyan said on 16th February that the challenge for most SMEs was – and I quote from the Straits Times – "not one of lacking of will but not knowing how to upgrade, innovate and improve productivity." The productivity drive is a journey which requires drivers in several lanes to move forward at the same time. This means that the public sector itself, which is the largest employer in Singapore, has to increase productivity too. The Government may even have to wear the hat of a coach to teach SMEs how they can go about improving productivity. Targeted coaching clinics may have to be held. In this respect, I am glad to hear that the Government is supporting the construction firms with the Construction Productivity Roadmap. What is there for the retail and catering sectors where the scope for productivity gains is regarded to be huge? In working towards higher productivity, we need to ascertain whether and how much we are on track. Businesses will need to put in place yardsticks and the means to assess actual progress. Do businesses know how to do this effectively? For instance, how do employers measure the change in performance of those who have undergone training? More so, how will the Government get employers to supply productivity data so that we know we have not gone off tangent? Companies already squeezed for manpower need to expend resources to gather statistics. I urge the Government to consider providing an incentive to motivate companies to collate and report productivity data. In this regard, while I am happy to note that the Government will double the size of the National Productivity Fund to $2 billion, what has been the effectiveness of the fund since it was introduced last year?”
“She said that this went against every grain of what she had been led to believe about productivity drive in Singapore. She said that she started doubting the Government for its messages about productivity which conflicted with actions allowing in more foreign workers. Sir, while I am somewhat concerned too that we might see a repeat of 1985 when Singapore tumbled into a recession because of escalated manpower costs, I would say that, by leaps and bounds, I am more confident instead that the outcome this time would be different from that in the mid-1980s. Why? Because the starting point this time is productivity gains, with wage increases to follow. This is unlike in the '80s when higher wages were not accompanied by higher productivity. The Government has steeled its resolve to raise productivity and this is evident from the comments made by several Ministers since the Budget address. For instance, Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong said on 22nd February that there would be no turning back on the policy, unlike in the past, when the Government relaxed the entry of foreign workers. He said: "This time, we cannot make a U-turn. This time, we cannot relax." Singaporeans, too, should rise up and ensure that there is no U-turn in the productivity drive. Companies play a crucial role here. But what is productivity? What is the baseline or reference point? As I mentioned in last year’s Budget debate, in its basic definition, productivity is about more output and fewer resources. Productivity can be increased through automation, mechanisation and streamlining work processes and even re-designing the workplace layout. These all read well on paper, but what do we actually have to do to attain the 30% real income growth?”
“Finance Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam in his Budget Speech said: "We can only achieve this if we grow our economy, upgrade our businesses and invest in raising skills, craftsmanship and the quality of service in every job." The Government is putting money where its mouth is. It is increasing support significantly for companies to invest in workers’ skills and productivity and to help Singaporeans upgrade. For instance, the Government will raise subsidies for Singaporean adults who pursue their first degree or diploma on a part-time basis at any of the polytechnics, universities or CET centres. Singaporeans should also note that the Government plans to cut reliance on foreign manpower. All these moves will benefit Singaporeans because the workforce is going to be very tight. This means that employers will have to offer more attractive benefits to woo employees, like higher pay, improve healthcare plans and a better work-life balance. Does this mean that manna will be falling from the sky? No, Singaporeans understand that there is no such thing as a free lunch. On their part, they must seize the day and apply themselves. Otherwise, the upward pressure on manpower costs will drive employers overseas. Some Singaporeans may think the current drive to push up incomes is deja vu for them. They may think it is similar to the prelude to 1985. They question Singapore’s commitment to productivity. One middle-aged executive I am acquainted with who went through the 1985 economic downturn – which was an experience she hoped she would never have to face again – told me that she had been at a loss as to what to think about the influx of foreign workers in recent years.”
“Sir, I propose that a further step can be taken in that the Government can match middle-aged or older citizens, who are seeking a job, to employers who need manpower. This function can be performed seamlessly by the Community Development Councils (CDCs). This is because the CDCs were tasked during the last economic downturn to help those who had lost their jobs to find new employment. With the economy now booming again, fewer are seeking the help of the CDCs, whose attention can now be shifted to older citizens – PMETs or otherwise. Sir, I believe that the current tight labour conditions offer the best opportunity to start taking concrete action to help older citizens who wish to continue working. As the population ages, this issue will only grow more urgent. While Singapore recently amended the law to increase the retirement age, it has to be emphasised that older workers who are unemployed are not covered by the new Retirement and Re-employment Act. In the process of helping older workers secure employment, Singapore will learn too how to manage an older workforce. And there will be spin-offs. The expertise we gain in managing older employees can be exported. On the intangible side, the mental stimulation which work provides may help Singaporeans maintain cognitive health. Sir, the Government has set the bar high when it says that it aims to raise incomes by 30% in real terms over this decade. When I heard the Finance Minister announce the 30% goal, inwardly, I could hear groans from businessmen. Their concern would be that this target might stir unrealistic pay expectations among Singaporeans and drive up costs. But Singaporeans will see that the regimen is going to be very different now because the Government has outlined how we can leap over the bar.”
“Having them and ensuring that they are brought up well is performing extended service for the nation – with an Operationally-ready Date (ORD) that is 16 years and more into the future. Yes, it could take at least 16 years before the stay-at-home spouse is "operationally ready" to re-enter the workforce. Sir, another group of people in Singapore for whom more help can be given is the sandwiched class. The Government has generously announced tax rebates for those who earn more than $20,000 a year and, at the same time, raised the CPF salary ceiling to $5,000. These changes will make a big difference to the sandwiched class. Yet, I wonder what else can be done for this class, particularly, as those who are not working will not be able to benefit from salary-linked breaks. One example is to link the foreign maid levy relief to household income. This relief should be gender-neutral and be extended to male taxpayers with a non-working wife and dependant children. Another example is to grant incentives to motivate employers to hire citizens aged over 45 who are currently unemployed but who, if employed, would enjoy a pay which does not qualify them for Workfare. This group of citizens might have dropped out of the workforce to look after their children and subsequently face difficulty in securing a job because of their age. Their skills and previous working experience would be relevant to the economy, particularly now when manpower is tight. Therefore, I am happy that the Government is providing enhanced training support for PMETs by improving the capacity and quality of Continuing Education and Training (CET) programmes and making it more affordable for PMETs who wish to upgrade or obtain new skills.”
“It hands out not only short-term grants but also extends help for Singaporeans to move up the income ladder over the long term. In particular, I would like to highlight that when we aggregate the new Children Development Credit scheme, top-ups to school committee funds and other existing educational grants and bursaries for students, education in Singapore is almost free. Sir, while this is a pro-people Budget, I would like to suggest though that more can be done for an important but silent segment of our society. This group comprises housewives or house husbands who are the rock on whom families depend. I would like to propose an initiative that can be called Homemakers’ Enterprise. Under this, the working spouse pays the other spouse who stays home to mind the children. Homemakers can then declare the pay received and claim tax breaks under this enterprise. Naturally, if their monthly pay is less than the Workfare income ceiling, the homemakers, like the self-employed, should be entitled to bonuses or additional credits under the Workfare Income Supplement Scheme. Couples can opt for this Homemakers’ Enterprise or for the existing spouse relief of $2,000, whichever gives them a better overall fiscal position. Alternatively, the Government could provide a top-up directly to the homemaker, with the amount linked to the number of children the homemaker looks after, until the kids reach the age of 16 years old. This would recognise what the homemaker has given up – which in some cases could be a high-paying job – to perform National Service. Children are precious resources in Singapore.”
“Sir, I commend the Government on returning to a position of fiscal surplus in Financial Year 2010. I further take off my hat to the Government for its very responsible and prudent decision to return $4 billion to past reserves from which drawdowns were made in previous years for the Resilience Package, particularly when there is no legal or constitutional obligation to return the money. I would also like to thank the Government for abolishing the radio and TV licence. For most people, the difficult part about having to pay the fees was the need every year to remember to make the payment. Despite the fee having been scrapped, I hope to continue to see good-quality local TV productions like "The Pupil". Please tell us that scrapping the fee will not mean more imported "B" Grade soap operas! Back to the Budget debate, I salute the Government for a very carefully crafted Budget which gives something to everyone. It is definitely not an election Budget as Mr Low Thia Khiang calls it. To me, it is far more than a hongbao Budget, because a hongbao suggests a show of largesse by the Government. A hongbao suggests that the Government is giving away money because it has money. Instead, I would call this a caring Budget because its details show the attention the Government has devoted to ensuring that the Budget encompasses everyone. This Budget is not just about giving away goodies. It provides for everyone sharing in the country’s success in a focused way. This Budget provides for the entire cross-section of the population from the young to the aged, and from special-needs children to the elderly who need long-term care. This Budget promotes inclusive growth.”
“The Minister of State for Community Development, Youth and Sports (Mrs Yu-Foo Yee Shoon) (for the Minister for Community Development, Youth and Sports) : Mr Speaker, Sir, MCYS currently provides subsidies for student care fees under the Student Care Financial Assistance (SCFA) Scheme for families with household incomes of up to $2,500 per month. The subsidies range between $60 and $180 per child. About 2,600 children currently benefit from the SCFA Scheme. We have no plans to introduce more subsidies beyond the SCFA, as student care fees are still generally affordable.”
“Thank you, Minister, for the comprehensive response. Sir, I have two supplementary questions. First, what can be done to help retirees and low-income households when the population in their district surges and food prices in hawker centres and wet markets go up? Secondly, would the Ministry consider having hawker centres in all housing estates? Assoc. Prof. Dr Yaacob Ibrahim: Sir, as I mentioned in my reply, in terms of assistance to retirees and low-income families, there are many schemes administered both by MCYS, CDCs and even at the local constituency level. The best solution is really for us to find ways to assist them and point them to the various schemes which I am sure the Member is familiar with. I will not have to reiterate all the schemes administered by MCYS. Thus far, from our experience, most retirees and low-income families do avail themselves of the help which is available on the ground. To the Member's second question as to whether we can assure that there is a hawker centre in every housing estate, the Member would know, we have stopped building hawker centres. The point is that if you look at the spread of hawker centres that we have in Singapore, there are sufficient numbers across all localities for people to avail themselves of food at affordable prices. SUBSIDIES FOR FEES AT STUDENT CARE CENTRES 15. Mr Lim Biow Chuan asked the Minister for Community Development, Youth and Sports whether the Ministry will consider providing subsidies for parents who send their children to student care centres.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I have one supplementary question for the Minister of State. We used to have productivity campaigns. Would the Minister of State consider reviving this campaign for different areas, such as food preparation, busing table and retail sales?”
“Not all sectors benefit alike as the economy grows; and within each sector, such as manufacturing, not all segments enjoy growth. Therefore, I am glad to hear the Minister of State for Manpower, Mr Lee Yi Shyan say in Parliament yesterday that the Government plans to increase training capacity to cater to 250,000 PMETs by 2015. I am also happy to see that the Manpower Ministry has been publishing since 2008 its annual Labour Market Highlights containing information on executive and non-executive jobs in demand in several sectors. While I appreciate that the effort involved in collecting the data is massive, I would like to suggest that the guide be published on a half-yearly basis to better serve job hunters. Madam, finally, in ensuring that all Singaporeans can share the fruits of our country’s prosperity, the Government needs to carry out an education drive too, at the national and district levels, to press the point that Singaporeans have to do their part by accepting that there is a continual need to upgrade their skills. A mindset change programme and campaign on "It's my choice because I am inspired to upskill and upgrade" so that every Singaporean plays a part in closing the income divide. Let us do well together so that, instead of looking at others from outside, we will be the ones that others look up to. On this note, I support the motion. 5.07 pm”
“Though poor, the residents are pragmatic and demonstrate pride to want to improve themselves. Again, Workfare offers this opportunity. Boon Lay grassroots leaders plan to go beyond financial factors to study issues like learning difficulties, truancy and behavioural problems. Boon Lay grassroots leaders will find out from the ground what measures are likely to work to resolve the children’s problems. The aim is to help under-privileged kids achieve their potential and pull them out of poverty. Such multi-hands approach is the signature hallmark of the Singapore culture, one that emphasises on self-reliance and resilience. Madam, helping low-income households cut expenses is another way to alleviate their burden. I propose that the relevant agencies scrutinise their billings to see how expenses can be lowered for the less well-off and, perhaps, provide them with financial counselling. It is not uncommon at MPS to discover that the bulk of their income goes into handphone bills and Courts furniture. Madam, new technologies can help consumers cut their power bills. An example is the energy-saving bulb, but it is generally more expensive than the incandescent bulb. I propose that a study be conducted to ascertain how to tap new technologies to alleviate the burden on households. For instance, the Government could consider subsidies for low-income households to convert to energy-saving bulbs which are also more durable than the incandescent bulbs for the entire household. Madam, for all-inclusive growth, we need to take a step back to identify people – including PMETs and those who live other than in three-room HDB flats – who may feel that they have no part in the robust economic recovery.”
“In this regard, I am heartened to hear the Finance Minister, Mr Tharman Shanmugaratnam, said on Monday that the Government would take another look at the Community Care Endowment Fund (ComCare) in the next Budget to provide more buffer for the needy. ComCare has disbursed over $210 million helping more than 160,000 cases since it was launched in 2005. Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong highlighted last month that the Government had worked hard on its re-distribution measures such as improving the Public Assistance Scheme, building up Medifund, and introducing Workfare. Madam, indeed, the Government has in its arsenal a multitude of assistance programmes to ensure that no one is left behind even as Singapore prospers. The assistance programmes and the organisations that provide the aid have abbreviations that are a jumble of almost all the letters of the alphabet, such as, CET, Jobs Credit, PCP, SPUR, WDA and WSQ. With the current healthy economy, we have breathing space to take a more strategic look at what to do next. To start off, I suggest that a post-mortem be performed especially on the many help schemes introduced during the 2008 to 2009 financial turmoil. This will allow all, including the people, to see how much the Government has done, which programme has been effective and what can be applied again in another economic downturn. Madam, as children are the future of our nation, we need in particular to understand how youngsters in low-wage households are being affected by their difficult straits. To this end, I am pleased to say that Boon Lay grassroots leaders are taking steps to review the problems of under-privileged children in the constituency. Being one of the poorer constituencies, we have many so-called latch-key children.”
“Mdm Deputy Speaker, with the Singapore economy booming again, I propose that the functions of the Community Development Centres (CDCs) be re-aligned to match low-income Singaporeans to better-paying jobs. At present, CDCs provide direct job-matching services for unemployed residents seeking work. The CDCs now also highlight training opportunities for low-income workers to improve their chances of getting a job. These courses should go further to help workers secure better-paying jobs. Helping Singaporeans to move up the ladder is important because the rich-poor divide is expected to grow as globalisation intensifies. Those who have the relevant skills and knowledge will do well as knowledge, skills and competencies are the best passport to break through the poverty trap and to move up the salary ladder. Minimum wage will not help to inspire the desire to build up individual capabilities. Workfare is as good as minimum wage, if not, far superior than minimum wage. Workfare provides a potential pipeline of development for the individual to move up. Madam, an analogy is canned sardine fish and smoked sliced salmon. Smoked sliced salmon, like minimum wage, is fashionable food but does not fill the stomach and is costly affair. Canned sardine fish, like Workfare, is practical solid food with many uses and because it is more economical, more can benefit from it. Madam, this motion calls for all-inclusive economic growth so that all Singaporeans may share in the fruits of the country's prosperity. I feel that the CDCs helping Singaporeans in new ways could go distance in achieving these objectives. In bridging the rich-poor gap, the CDCs will continue their role of securing help for deserving cases through the relevant Government assistance schemes.”
“We cannot rely on augmenting labour shortages through the foreign labour pool as we need to keep a careful watch on the local-foreign composition in our society. A foreign worker who is not familiar with local culture and workplace norms is certainly not able to match up in terms of ability when compared to an experienced older worker who has been with the organisation for an extended period. That older Singaporeans are willing to continue to work past retirement is indeed a privilege that Singapore must be thankful for. I was very glad to note the highlight of Singapore Airport Terminal Services’ new wage formula for managing compensation in the Straits Times recently. Rather than allow employers to exercise an automatic pay cut post-retirement, I think best-practice should dictate that compensation should be tied to job performance of the employee regardless of age. We already have in place a restructured organisational philosophy that favours on-the-job performance rather than tenure for remuneration. I think that insisting on the pay-cut post-retirement certainly does not commit well with the performance-based evaluation system. I hope the Minister will send a strong message to employers that the re-employment of retired workers facilitates organisations’ ability to sustain their labour force and productivity, and that we will continue to encourage employers to keep loyal employees who will contribute meaningfully to the workplace on fair terms. Job experience is an invaluable asset that is very difficult to replace. 4.09 pm”
“From my understanding, the Bill details re-employment as a new contract, and benefits therefore would be recalibrated for the re-employed worker. What are the implications of this on holiday leave, health and other benefits? Related to this is the specified salary adjustment for post-retirement workers. I understand the rationale for reduced compensation for re-employed workers as the Bill seeks to alleviate the stress of manpower costs on employers. But it worries me that a structured guideline set out in the Bill may send an unintended message that older workers are less productive, and therefore deserving of less remuneration. And that is not fair. While an older employee may function a little slower due to physiological limitations, I think that they more than compensate for this with their wealth of work experience. Where the occupations are not reliant on physical strength and agility, why should an employee aged 63 suffer a pay-cut and reduction in benefits when his productivity and contribution may be even better than when he was 61 or 62 years old? Inherent in this flawed rationale that if employers had to extend employment of workers beyond retirement, this is an imposition on employers' resources. That is not necessarily true. With our sustained low total fertility rate and a fast-greying population, older Singaporeans who can continue to contribute meaningfully to the workplace cannot be thought of as liabilities. They are a critical and essential segment of the workforce, and their contributions to overall productivity is valuable and irreplaceable. As the Singapore population continues to age, older Singaporeans are an indispensable part of the Singapore labour force.”
“Yes, I agree that an employee cannot have become less capable on his 62nd birthday than the day before when he was 61. The employee, on his part, has to accept that re-employment is likely to mean an eventual restructuring of his compensation package and job function. An employee, who has a positive mindset can appreciate that there is fair play in the way his re-employment has been structured. Thus, re-employment can be a win-win for both the performance-minded employer and the older employee. On this note, I support the Bill. 4.03 pm Assoc. Prof. Paulin Tay Straughan: Thank you, Mr Speaker, for this opportunity to share my thoughts on this very important Bill. The continued employment of older and experienced employees is an important development that will contribute significantly to economic and social stability in Singapore. I rise in strong support of this Bill, which mandates the re-employment of workers post-retirement. However, I have two primary concerns which I hope the Minister can comment on. First, regarding the criteria for eligibility of re-employment. May I ask the Minister if he can provide clear guidelines on what constitutes satisfactory work performance. Related to this, can the Minister provide details of the appeal process should employees fail to meet eligibility criteria for re-employment? What help will be rendered to those who want to continue working but fail to meet the re-employment criteria? How can we help these workers to continue to be self-sufficient? My second concern relates to the terms of re-employment for post-retirement. It is a very complex Bill and I may have misunderstood some of the details and, if so, I appreciate it if Minister can clarify.”
“The money earned from the additional period of time not only helps them to maintain their current living standards but also provides an extra buffer to their CPF and Medisave savings. In its public education, the Government should set out its case in a holistic manner, linking the need for Singaporeans to work longer to their desired retirement lifestyle, the remuneration older workers can attract, and their productivity. These elements need to be explained alongside yet another factor – the inflow of foreign manpower and how that can be managed alongside the employment of older workers. Sir, to motivate more to work till they are older, the Government could emulate those countries which hand out more pension money to those who retire later. In this respect, I would like to ask the CPF Board if it has plans to give older workers a higher interest rate on their CPF contributions, received from the employment beyond the age of 62. Or does it intend to come up with other incentives? Sir, yet, winning Singaporeans over to the idea of working longer is only half the battle. No amount of legislation can completely meet the goal of getting employers to hire older workers unless employers embrace such workers. The right mindset has to be inculcated throughout the company, from the CEO down to the young Human Resource clerk. Sir, in this regard, I am heartened that the Association of Small and Medium Enterprises (ASME) says that most of its members have no issue with re-employment. ASME president, Lawrence Leow, is quoted to have said that in offering re-employment, a company needs to look at how a person performs, instead of cutting his salary once he turns 62.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to raise a few salient points with regard to the Bill. Sir, neither the Act nor the proposed amendments provide for the re-employment of older workers who currently either wish to switch jobs or do not have a job but are looking for one. This is a gap in the legislation for the employment of older workers. This is clear from clause 4(d) of the Amendment Bill which defines "re-employment" as "the employment of an employee by the same employer on or after the date the employee attains the specified age". Mr Speaker, we need to look at ways to protect the interests of all older workers, instead of just those who are content to continue working in their existing jobs. Older workers do have a hard time job hunting. The media regularly carry reports of workers above the age of 50, finding it difficult to land a job, despite the requisite skills and qualifications. Second, I notice that the Amendment Bill mentions three ages: 62, 65 and 67. With reference to clauses 6 and 9, does this mean that an employer is obliged to re-employ an employee who is between 62 and 65 years old and if he does re-employ the staff, he has to continue to do so up to when the employee reaches 67? Sir, I see ambiguity here because I feel that employers who want to continue hiring someone beyond 67 will do so anyway while other employers may simply stop re-employing a worker once he hits 65. In this respect, I wish to highlight the need for intensified public education about why the retirement age has to be increased. To be candid, Sir, we need to educate Singaporeans that a higher retirement age benefits them more than the Government.”
“These sessions should be attended by the divorcee together with his new prospective spouse. Sir, as these declarations do make an impact on individuals and families and especially on the low-income families, would the Ministry consider punitive measures against those who make false declarations? Sir, I would like to add to the recommendations for pre-marriage counselling targets to include cases where the groom is Singaporean and the bride, a non-English-speaking foreigner. The counselling should be extended to Singaporean women and their prospective foreign husbands who do not speak English. As globalisation intensifies, there would be several such cases of Singaporean women marrying men from other countries. These foreign men need help to assimilate too, particularly into their new extended family and society. Sir, I would like to ask the Ministry what programmes does the Ministry have which help ensure such assimilation? I share the view of my colleague before me. Times have changed and these days we do find role reversals where the woman brings home the bacon while the man stays home as house husband. In such a case, when the couple divorces, the man deserves consideration to receive maintenance payments. Sir, I would like to know the Ministry’s stand on this matter. On this note, I support the Amendment Bill. 5.03 pm”
“Sir, as for allowing arrears reports to be lodged with a Credit Bureau, I note that the Bill is silent as to when the black mark is to be removed against the defaulter once he makes good the arrears. To be even-handed, the Bill should stipulate that any reporting to a Credit Bureau be made within a specified period of the date of the relevant Court order. This will limit room for mischief on the part of disgruntled claimant who files the Credit Bureau report even after maintenance payments are no longer in arrears. [Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Matthias Yao Chih) in the Chair] 5.00 pm I am heartened that the Bill provides for mandatory post-filing counselling for couples with children. I would like to suggest that, instead of allowing for judicial discretion in this, the counselling sessions be made mandatory. A time period should be stipulated within which couples should present themselves at these sessions. The sooner these are scheduled, the better. The aim is to minimise acrimony, sharpen the couple’s awareness of the toll that divorce can have on their children and to reinforce to the couple that they are still responsible for their children, whichever side has custody of the kids when they split up. The Bill imposes an obligation on re-marrying divorcees to declare maintenance debts although this should be information which the re-marrying divorcee should volunteer as part of his duties to his new bride without the law having to step in. But if the law has to do the prodding, then it should go all the way where the divorcee should be required to declare the existence of any maintenance order – not just arrears in maintenance payments. The maintenance and custody obligations of the divorcee can be discussed at pre-marriage counselling sessions.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the comprehensive measures set out in the Bill concerning maintenance payments appear disparate when it comes to their implementation. To streamline them, I support the proposal for the establishment of an administrative centre for maintenance payments to help others trapped in the nightmare of unpaid maintenance payments. Turning to specific enforcement measures, the Bill provides for the Court to order recalcitrant men to provide a banker’s guarantee (BG) but the Bill can go one step further to help the claimant by requiring the defaulter to furnish a second BG – without the need for a fresh Court order. This second BG serves as a replacement the instant a claimant is forced to present an existing BG to the bank. That a woman has to turn to the Court which then orders that a BG be furnished to her indicates the likelihood of another default in maintenance payments by the former spouse is higher than in cases in which a BG is not issued in the first place. Sir, on the subject of community work orders, I recognise that they have nuisance value when applied to defaulters in Singapore who have money in the bank but who do not pay up. Yet, unless the defaulter is extremely wealthy, I would say that late interest penalties – which can hit the pocket – serve as a bigger deterrent than community service. I urge too that remuneration be considered for defaulters who are financially strapped but the money paid to the defaulter goes directly to the claimants. Tasks that are suited to this scheme include those of litter warden and utilities metre reading.”
“Thank you, Minister of State for the comprehensive response. I have one question: with the Government slowing down the influx of foreigners, have our economic growth targets changed? What alternative strategic plans do we have to attain those targets?”
“Mr Speaker, I would like to ask the Minister three supplementary questions. Would the Minister consider commissioning a survey which would allow policymakers to assess how low interest rates are affecting ordinary households? Has the Government done a survey to see what companies, themselves, are doing to prevent prices from rising too quickly especially businesses engaged in daily consumables and transportation? What can the Government do to help these businesses?”
“As mentioned earlier, barring discussion on important topics, the reduction in speaking time is sensible and it would allow more Members to participate actively before legislation is passed and speak up for their voters. The capping of speaking time would put more discipline on speakers and help them to stay focussed and prepare their speeches well. This amendment will enhance the proceedings and avoid protracted parliamentary sittings. Sir, on Standing Order No. 48, the amendment to allow Members to speak in any or any combination of the four official languages in their speech is not only timely but would help for a smoother delivery of speeches by backbenchers as some points could only be put across best in the vernacular language. Sir, I welcome the changes. Although I support the amendments, I would like to request that future Standing Orders Committee should have a larger representation of backbenchers as the feedback received from them would be more representative in making future amendments to the Standing Orders. Sir, in support of this amendment, I am glad that I have delivered my speech within the 10 minutes. In any case, though the current time limit is 30 minutes, I have seldom gone beyond 15 minutes. So, I believe the 20-minute limit will not have any negative impact on Members. On this note, Sir, I support the amendment.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, the Standing Orders have undergone several changes over the years and these changes have helped refine the parliamentary procedures. Sir, I believe backbenchers, like myself, are thankful for the refinements over the years as they strengthen the process and improve the participation of Members of Parliament (MPs) and engagement of Ministers. I applaud the proposal pertaining to conduct of MPs in the Chamber. Sir, it is important that we demonstrate in this august Chamber exemplary behaviour, our respect and consideration for our fellow Members when they are speaking and for Parliamentary proceedings. On the proposal to reduce the speaking time, Sir, I agree that the quality of a speech is not determined by the length of the speech. I agree that the time limit for speaking in this august Chamber is generous as compared to other Commonwealth countries, like in the UK, where the limit is 15 minutes. But I would like to request that more leeway in time be given to serious issues which require in-depth discussion and clarifications. Sir, the 20-minute time limit for MPs and 40 minutes for Ministers should not be cast in stone and a grace period should be exercised at one go as and when necessary by the House. Such flexibility would not only enhance the quality of the proceedings but also allow for a more robust and enlightened exchange of views. As elected backbenchers, we must fulfil expectations of voters, exception to the rule, with an element of flexibility, will assure voters that, when necessary, extra time will be given to important issues. Over the years, the number of Members in this august Chamber has increased and, with recent changes to the Constitution, it is set to increase even further.”
“They are likely to fall into two broad categories: those who come from families who cannot afford it, and those who come from families who do not value it. In the case of the former, the MCYS has help schemes in place to ensure that no child is deprived of pre-school education because their family lack the financial resources. To get this group back on track, the answer is to ensure that information on help schemes is broadcast widely and the various agencies who work with low-income families are on hand to identify these families and provide the requisite assistance. In the case of the latter, where parents do not value pre-school education and choose not to enrol their children in pre-schools, making pre-school compulsory really does not address the issue at all. Here, the barrier is not limited financial resources, but rather a divergence in values regarding childhood and education. Making pre-school education compulsory will not address this disparity and it will not change the mindsets of these parents. The differential perspectives and commitment parents have on education will continue beyond the pre-school years. I agree that we should continue to invest in quality pre-school education. I also agree that no child who wants to attend pre-school should be deprived the opportunity, but I do not agree that we should make pre-school education compulsory. Sir, I support the amended motion. 4.35 pm”
“We cannot eradicate inequality. A child whose parents embrace the merits of investment in education will always be better off than kids who come from homes deprived of such a conducive environment. The only way to level this sort of inequality is to move these disadvantaged children into a different family altogether. But I do agree with Mr Sadasivan that we must address the disparity in family background and work hard towards institutionalising policies that help children from disadvantaged backgrounds to stay on course. I believe the key to this is to invest in primary school education. To this regard, the Ministry of Education has made an important move to transform Primary 1 and 2 classes into smaller groups for effective mentoring and learning. We will now need to attract capable and effective teachers to nurture these young minds, and provide primary school teachers with adequate training and other resources so that they can attend to the needs of children who are behind their peers in reading and writing skills. We must also continue to evolve a more compassionate education system that allows late bloomers and those who falter along the way to rejoin the mainstream. Once again, the key is to attract enough talented and capable people to invest their careers in the teaching profession. I believe when we are able to provide each and every class with a group of excellent teachers, then every child, regardless of the stream he or she is in, will have an equal chance of succeeding. Mr Sadasivan has highlighted that in every cohort, there is a small group of children who do not have the privilege of pre-school socialisation.”
“Thus, my second reason for disagreeing with making pre-school mandatory is because uneven reading and writing skills and capabilities among young children in Primary 1 can be levelled as long as primary school education is done right. The work of Katherine Magnuson, the study I cited, and her colleagues in the United States points to the importance of small class sizes and good teachers. Therefore, the key to ensuring a level playing field for primary school education lies not in a mandatory earlier start at pre-school level, but rather in the solid foundation that a good primary school education offers. Finally, the third reason I disagree with the arguments presented in Mr Sadasivan's original motion has to do with my appreciation of social inequality. Inherent in the original motion is the posit that we can eradicate inequality among young children by making pre-school education uniform and compulsory. Unfortunately, I think the head start privileged by those who come from families with more resources is a lot more complex than that. Even if we made pre-school education compulsory or standardised the curriculum, we will not be able to take away the benefits of cultural capital that children from privileged families enjoy. If we made pre-school compulsory, those with more resources will simply send their children to enrichment classes after compulsory pre-school, and many would start their children’s formal education even earlier. If we perpetuate the belief that an early start helps sustain academic excellence, then the question of how early is early enough will continue to haunt parents who are determined to push their children to the very front of the starting line. In the end, if we are not careful, our children will bear the cost of losing their childhood.”
“In this discourse, we have to decide when formal education starts, for that is when the State’s responsibility commences. In our education system, that would be at Primary 1, when the child is entering his/her seventh year. By making formal education compulsory, it also means that the State has to specify clearly what the expectations of formal education entails and there must be a certain level of policing conformity to content delivery. Currently, the pre-school landscape is vibrant and operators provide a healthy variety of options for children to grow through play. The aim of pre-school is slanted towards growing soft skills and encouraging interaction through play. There should be little emphasis on formal content learning and testing for we are working with very young children who are between four and six years old. Mr Speaker, inherent in the original motion is the concern that children with the benefit of pre-school socialisation will receive a head start compared to those who do not attend pre-school. Also, the vast variety of pre-school experiences may place children at different starting points when they commence formal education at Primary 1; thus, Mr Sadasivan's concern with perpetuating inequality. But I would argue that this is not necessarily the case. A recent study published in Early Childhood Research Quarterly in 2007 on learning patterns suggests that most of the pre-school-related gap in academic skills at school entry is quickly eliminated for children placed in small classrooms and classrooms providing high levels of reading instruction.”