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 18 of 18.
“To further enlarge the entrepreneurial talent pool, the Government can also award scholarships for higher studies to top students, based on their aspirations to become entrepreneurs. Returned scholars could be asked to work in Government or GLCs for up to five years, after which they could be released to the private sector to pursue their dreams, perhaps with some help from industry and Government. Indeed, in our midst in this Chamber, we have a reverse trend in Minister of State Ng Eng Hen, who started a successful medical practice in the private sector and is now drawn into the Government to contribute. But this is a good thing to happen for Singapore, because it demonstrates that if we can nurture the private sector, with the creame de la creame, we will always be assured of a minefield to roost our golden goose. MOS Ng, please do not think that I am showering you with flattery, but I only wish to emphasise a point to all. Some may argue that good entrepreneurs need not be from the brightest and the best. I would argue that if Singapore wants to produce a few winners and another Sim Wong Hoo, then it must cultivate the brightest and the best. By and large, the majority of our entrepreneurs can be the mums and the pas of our heartlanders, but in uplifting the entrepreneurial culture and quality, there is no denying that we also need the best. We tend to have a pre-qualified definition for success - all the 5 Cs. But let me relate an incident my entrepreneur friend told me about. One morning, she drove her daughter to school, something she had not been doing for a while. The principal, who knows her as a successful entrepreneur, was surprised to see her and asked her why she was not at work.”
“Sir, the President, in his Address to this House, emphasised the need for us to strengthen the spirit of entrepreneurship and risk taking, as a platform for Singapore's future competitiveness. May I also add that we will require as many of our best and brightest to take up this challenge, if we are to succeed in building this platform. And to this end, our Government must once again take the lead. The Government must correct the current imbalance in the distribution of local talent between the public and private sectors, to boost the spirit of entrepreneurship and risk taking in Singapore. Ironically, it has not been seen to take the risk of doing this, while exhorting the virtues of risk taking. The best and brightest among our young are still being educated and nurtured, at great public expense, for safe jobs in the comfort zones of Government service and GLCs. Worse still, many of able body and mind, who eventually retire from service on mandatory grounds, are re-absorbed into the service. The Government must practise more of what it is preaching on this issue. Notwithstanding the problem of a limited local talent pool, the Government must be bold enough to allow the private sector a larger share of this pool. For example, retiring officers, who are still fit for re-employment, can be encouraged and facilitated to start new businesses or become active equity investors in businesses. A good many of these talents can be drawn from the top brass of our Armed Forces. Instead of giving them the security of a second career in the cocoon of the Government and GLCs, why not encourage them to become risk takers and wealth creators, in line with our objective of strengthening the spirit of entrepreneurship?”
“Otherwise, we will keep running on the same spot and we will be non-starters. Another way is to organise these PEMs to take up overseas postings under a subsidised funding scheme. We can prepare and encourage this group of PEMs to venture overseas. From my understanding, many companies in China require expertise and experienced operations managers to help them run their businesses. In these companies, they actually employ a lot of young MBAs, but these companies still feel that they lack experienced operations managers. So, this is one area where we can actually help our PEMs. This group of PEMs can actually become the nucleus for the eventual emergence of portfolio managers. They could form an "outsource industry" to meet the needs of businesses. Such an industry could thrive and flourish in the New Economy, and help to make Singapore more cost competitive. Sir, I would also like to propose that some form of minimum legislation be put in place to protect PEMs. They are not covered by the Employment Act. So they have no recourse to the Ministry of Manpower if they are treated unfairly by their employers. The Conciliation Service Unit, set up by MOM after the 1997 downturn, offers some consolation, but is not sufficient to help settle a retrenchment or termination dispute. Perhaps it is timely to consider a review of the Industrial Relations Act, to make provision for the aggrieved executive to be represented in an Arbitration Court, for termination and dismissal issues. To be sure, Sir, I am not seeking redress for executive union representation. To do that will be to hamper the flexibility of doing business in Singapore. Our desired outcome is to have minimum legislation to protect the rights of every stakeholder in Singapore.”
“My friends questioned my move to champion the cause of executives, reminding me that my father, a retired Labour MP and a founding member of the NTUC, had battled the plight of workers. But, Sir, this cohort of our workforce is fast increasing, and they do not enjoy the slew of financial assistance and rebates handed out by the Government to the workers, which I fully support. Sir, I shall be calling upon the Government to appropriately do more in some areas and less in others, as befitting the role of Government in both good and bad times. The Government has allocated a $178,000-grant to SPEC to conduct job placement and other training schemes for this group of people, but I think more can be done for retrenched executives. Sir, I would like to suggest another way to help this group of people, especially those who are above 40 years old. It is difficult for them to find re-employment, because of employers' preference for younger workers. One alternative to re-employment would be for the Government to help them become self-employed. PEMs have a wealth of knowledge and expertise, and many years of valuable working experience to offer. The Government can facilitate the PEMs to offer their services to SMEs or other businesses that the Government would like to support. The Government can encourage companies to employ the services of PEMs by granting a subsidy, but for only a limited period of time. DPM Lee had given his view on subsidies yesterday. My take on his comment is that giving subsidies is tantamount to robbing Peter to give Paul. In this instance, I would like to persuade DPM Lee that in certain situations, it is necessary to jia-you, to get the car going. For my Malay colleagues, it means tambah minyak kereta.”
“Singapore is severely lacking in land and other natural resources which tend to push up our costs. Our workforce, traditionally hardworking and disciplined, must be flexible and realistic to retain what is left of our competitive edge. Workers must realize that unemployment is here to stay. As Singapore transits into a KBE, we face the challenge of structural unemployment. I understand that for a country to achieve KBE status, at least 65% of its workforce has to be in the skilled category. In Singapore, our skilled workforce only constitutes 59%. In our race to reach full KBE status, we may have to fill this gap with foreign talent. This will only worsen the problem of the structurally unemployed issue, as it takes time to retrain people for new jobs that require new skills. Those affected must therefore be prepared to turn to less pleasant or lower skill jobs, traditionally shunned by Singaporeans. Others, including professionals, may have to learn to be innovative and become self-employed, and offer competitively priced services. Bearing the full brunt of this vicious cycle are the executives. In 1997, I was approached by several, whom I call the PEMs - they are, basically, the professionals, executives and managers - who had lost their jobs during the financial crisis. Many of them are casualties of the dotcom bust and ongoing restructuring of our finance sector, highly skilled and trained. But they are a vulnerable group, with no avenue to seek redress. PEMs comprise a sizable 40% of the total retrenched workforce. I decided to put my support behind this group and initiated SPEC, a co-operative of PEMs.”
“The fourth hails for solidarity in change efforts. Economic gypsies Now, workers have to be prepared to embrace the role of economic gypsies. I term it that way because market volatility and shortened business cycles will mean workers have to change their jobs and work environments ever so often, to stay employed. Singapore now faces increased international competition for foreign capital, investments, and export markets. This is a result of the liberalisation of the former communist bloc countries such as China, Russia and Eastern Europe - who also have a lower cost base. We are also beginning to lose our traditional competitive advantage. Knowledge and technology have become cheaply available and portable in the KBE. Our growth rate can be expected to be halved from the heady days of near double-digit growth. Workers' earnings will consequently be affected. Frog in heating water Merely adapting to change is dangerous and misleading. It is like a frog in water that is slowly heating up. The frog will keep changing its body temperature to suit its surrounding. Contented, the frog goes off to sleep. But bliss turns to disaster, eventually it gets boiled alive. So people must do more than just adapt to change. They must jump out of their changing world, take charge and dare to venture into new territories. Ensuring viability of our businesses in the new economy From the workforce, let us now turn our attention to businesses. To survive and remain competitive, businesses cannot afford to carry surplus capacity on a long-term basis, without matching growth periods. They must be allowed to shed excess capacity, be it manpower or otherwise, in a timely manner. Businesses today face pressures of competition to reduce costs and will invest only in cost effective locations.”
“Mr Speaker Sir, I join my colleagues in support of the motion thanking the President for his Address. Sir, I am reminded by what you said about being the last few to speak. Indeed, in the last few days, Members have dealt with daunting issues that Singapore faces. I have also been advised by well-meaning MPs and Ministers included. But as the debate goes on, I should strike off issues raised accordingly. I realise that as at end of yesterday that indeed, I am left with very little to say. In fact, every evening for the last four evenings, I have been revising and updating my script. Yet, I still come to the same thing. I have decided that there is nothing wrong to have more of the same, so long as the more reflects diversity of perspectives. Therefore, Sir, I will be coming from the perspectives of challenges and opportunities in these trying times. This is a time of great change and challenge for Singapore. Singapore today is faced with the greatest threat to its competitiveness than any other time in its history as an independent nation. After September 11th, we must be more security conscious. The threads of our multi-racial society must be strengthened. As we strive to remake Singapore, we must embrace dramatic transformations that will ripple across many sectors of our society. A seemingly endless wind of change ahead, but behind it all, lie abundant opportunities. So how can the workforce stay relevant? And how can Singapore remain competitive? To combat the challenges and build on the opportunities, I would like to propose four key points. The first deals with stakeholders, namely, the workforce, the business community and the Government. The second looks at boosting entrepreneurial culture and spirit. The third calls for building a tradition of charity.”