Kwek Hian Chuan Henry
Singapore
“Deputy Speaker, Sir, I thank the Minister of State for this comprehensive response. I would like to check whether MND is open to providing more funding to AVS. Ten years ago, I made a speech on NParks, and I noted then that NParks' annual budget is less than half of that of an acute care hospital.”
“Chairman, I have three short clarifications. Given that condominium prices and wages have risen over time, can MND share a timeframe or timeline when the income ceiling review will be concluded? Is it in a matter of months, or is it when some threshold conditions are met?”
“Chairman, I thank MND for responding to our cuts and I seek leave to withdraw my amendments. [(proc text) Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. (proc text)] [(proc text) The sum of $8,640,058,800 for Head T ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates.”
“Our Public Service Media companies are our national assets. I hope MDDI can share how it plans to secure our future. I notice I have 18 more seconds, so I want to add in a final point. I noted we are asking MDDI to do a lot of cybersecurity, national Public Service Media on IT services and AI development.”
“As the Bill empowers OSC to identify users and disclose that information to purported victims, what safeguards are there to prevent misuse of that disclosed data for reverse doxxing? In closing, Speaker, Sir, this Bill makes our online space safer, especially for our youths.”
“Mr Speaker, I support this Bill and the suite of changes it makes. Given its breadth, I will focus my remarks on three areas: one, tackling global scams and online crimes while protecting innovation; two, a calibrated approach to accountability for 14-to-17-year-olds; and three, improving proportionality by resolving the inflexibility of…”
The complete record
Every one of 459 lines we hold for Kwek Hian Chuan Henry, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 5 of 10.
“After much discussion with business leaders, I have concluded that the key to successful transformation is in the leadership, especially at the TAC level. The conventional wisdom is that TACs in certain industries are more likely to succeed, such as those with a small number of large and dynamic players, especially focused on manufacturing and exportable services; those in industries that Singapore is already competitive in, or those in new industries that the Government seeks to grow. However, we are beginning to see successful transformation in more matured part of the economy. Two prime examples are our food manufacturing industry, as well as our heartland enterprises. And in both of these, there are common critical success factors. One, they have a strong TAC with a capable secretariat comprising of seconded civil servants who have served in economic development agencies. Two, these TAC represents sub-industries rather than the broader business sector, and this gives the TACs focus and clarity in their mission. Three, there is strong Government support, especially from Enterprise Singapore. Therefore, now that there is a clear formula, I think it is the right time for the Government to replicate this success in the other parts of the economy. Unfortunately, the reality is that TACs are of uneven quality, because many of them have their roots in business networking. A large number of them do not have effective secretariat capabilities, let alone the ability to partner with our economic agencies to forge new grounds. As such, I believe the Government should go big to upgrade various sub-industry TACs, including seconding capable industry officials there, and help them strengthen their relationship with the businesses they serve.”
“The Pro-Enterprise Panel, which is helmed by the Head of Civil Service and distinguished business leaders, understands the complexity of governance, especially including inter-agencies coordination, or interaction between agencies and businesses. Many of these complexities can only be described as "wicked" problems. Now, if the Pro-Enterprise Panel is given the funding and access to the Open Innovation Platform, I strongly believe we can come up with even better and faster solutions to cut red tape while ensuring governance. I also hope that in future speeches, we can hear from the Deputy Prime Minister about more success stories created by the Open Innovation Platform, because process transformation by the Government can do much to spark growth and productivity. Next, let me talk about strengthening the Government’s partnership with the businesses, especially mature businesses. At this point, let me declare my interest as Advisor to the Federation of Merchants Associations, which helps heartland enterprises transform and grow. Since 2016, Singapore has achieved much through our Industry Transformation Maps, and have sharpened Singaporean’s competitiveness. This can be shown and seen through the anchoring of many impressive inward investments, and through the rapid restructuring of industries affected by COVID-19. Many of these successful industries have enterprising leadership centered around their trade association and chambers or TACs. These TACs partnered with our economic agencies to imagine and implement their industry’s future. However, there are still many parts of our economy which are only seeing limited transformation.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the COVID pandemic has tested our generation – people, workers, business, and the Government – in many ways. It has also brought out the best of our Singaporeans in terms of teamwork, creativity and spirit of enterprise. Within months, we came together to re-energise, re-organise our society and re-imagine our economy. As we begin large-scale vaccination this week in Singapore, we can start planning for the post-pandemic future. We should also tap on this newfound teamwork that this generation has forged – especially between the Government and the private sector – for the betterment of our people. Today, I would like to speak about two ways to do so: one, accelerate government transformation by tapping on creativity and the capability of the private sector; two, accelerate the economy by beefing up our trade association and chambers in the matured parts of our economy. Beyond this, I will also speak about enhancing seniors’ livelihood through micro-jobs. Let me first speak about tapping on the private sector for government transformation. This is an issue close to my heart and I spoke about this multiple times in Parliament. I am delighted to see that over the years, the Government has taken on some of these suggestions, to inject private sector talent into the the Government and to tap on private sector insights to reduce business red-tape through the creation of the Pro-Enterprise Panel. As such, I am heartened to hear the Deputy Prime Minister announce the Open Innovation Platform, which facilitates the matching of problems faced by companies and public agencies, with solution providers from the private sector. To accelerate this process, I would like to further propose that the Open Innovation Platform be opened up to the Pro-Enterprise Panel.”
“I would like to end with a quote from Elon Mask, "We are running the most dangerous experiment in history right now, which is to see how much carbon dioxide the atmosphere can handle before there is an environmental catastrophe." So, let us get to work.”
“We can complement this carbon offset industry by developing Singapore into a leading and trusted professional services hub for emissions and carbon accounting. We can encourage leading standards bodies such as the VCS and Gold Standard to set up centre of excellence to shape and promote standards, in partnership with our accounting and professional services firms as well as tertiary institutes. This will create green-collared jobs that many young Singaporeans aspire for. As we develop our carbon accounting, it is also important that we evolve the regulation of our financial markets to encourage proper disclosure and risk assessment arising from carbon emission. Leading financial centres like Hong Kong and London are moving fast on this. MAS recently announced Environment Risk Management Guidelines is a step in the right direction. I hope MAS can actively get our FIs to disclose more to the public and encourage them to conduct environmental risk training programs for senior management and board members, and persuade our FIs to stop financing of coal power plants. Lastly, MFA can also draw on these expertise to hopefully play a bigger role in shaping the global climate change policies, and push for transparent and effective global rules, including in the area of cap and trade, which could benefit Singapore, should we go big on developing overseas carbon offsets. To conclude, Mr Speaker, I would like to thank Mr Louis Ng and MSE's Government Parliamentary Committee (GPC), Young PAP, the VWOs and industry members I spoke to, especially people like Climate Conversations and Green Swans.”
“The means of doing so, the technology of doing so, is already there. By that, I mean planting trees. Indeed, can Singapore be a big player in reforesting our region, or even the rapidly diminishing Amazon rainforest? If Singapore or our GLCs come in, in a big way, perhaps backed by MAS' green bonds, we can shape this nascent industry which currently operates without robust standards. In fact, I see much corporate demand globally, as international companies are rising to the occasion. They are wanting to go net-zero because this is what their customers and stakeholders expect. Just look at the recent announcements. Black Rock, which controls $9 trillion assets, is asking all companies to disclose a plan for how their business model will be compatible with a net-zero economy. Microsoft wants to be carbon neutral by 2030. Salesforce.com pledge to conserve or restore 100 million trees. Large companies now understand they risk being global pariahs if they do not make significant reductions, regardless of the country specific emission reduction targets in their host countries. If as a country, Singapore go big into carbon offsets through overseas reforestation, we can create value and then that could then pay for carbon offsets for the other half of the remaining emissions in Singapore. Some people will say that carbon offsets overseas do not accrue towards our national targets. It is true, but I would say that there is nothing wrong with helping other countries meet their tough targets, especially when we all know the lack of watertight reporting under the Paris accord means that the real emission situation is probably and definitely much worse than reported as progress.”
“In particular, I hope we can come up with a determined effort to reduce emission from our petrochemical industry. We can also revise our Green Mark incentives, to reduce emissions for both new and existing commercial buildings. While I am cautious about increasing carbon tax amidst the COVID-19 pandemic, it is clear to me that over time, our carbon price must trend towards the international norms. Four, create an open and transparent process on climate change debate, as I mentioned in my opening speech in the debate on the President's Address. To Singaporeans, open and transparent process is just as important as an effective outcome. The Government can open up our plans more regularly, to share to people what we are confident to achieve and to also seek collaboration from everybody, in areas we have less confidence in achieving. This process will encourage and increase trust. Lastly, I would like to talk about how we can contribute beyond our Paris accord commitments. A number of Singaporeans and climate change believers have strongly suggested that Singapore should achieve net zero as early as possible. In fact, I also heard some of my Parliamentary colleagues mention it today. I understand where they are coming from. As a Government, we are mere custodians of Singapore for future generations. We have a moral obligation to leave behind an inhabitable earth. But we also have an obligation to the livelihoods of our people. So, let me state the obvious – Singapore is probably one of the least efficient countries to be a carbon sink. But I strongly feel that we can do more to live up to our moral responsibility and go beyond halving our emissions. How? Well, as a country, we can go all out to develop carbon offsets beyond Singapore.”
“We must also not rush to import too much renewable electricity now, so that we at least have headroom left – by that, I mean the option of importing more renewable electricity later on – so that we can continue to improve our lives and livelihoods immediately post 2030, because of the hard limit I spoke earlier about being overly reliant on imported electricity. Two, I hope we can continue to invest and explore all technologies and infrastructure. The Government is doing a lot now including carbon mineralisation, investments in the hydrogen economy, encouraging Electric Vehicles or EVs. But the technology path ahead is not so clear for Singapore. Therefore, we should hedge our bets by exploring even unusual renewable sources, such as geothermal solutions; by exploring hydrogen based fuel cell car and biofuel options, instead of just relying purely on EVs because that would tax our electrical system and by actively investing in critical energy infrastructure ahead of time, such as, in the future, a liquified hydrogen import terminal, so that the industry has viable alternative renewable energy imports. We must also be open to ideas, innovations from not just large renewable companies, but also from innovative non-incumbent players too. And create sandboxes for new ideas to be piloted. Because this is one sector where new players have consistently made an impact. And we can weaved all this into an integrated policy and technology road map much like the visionary Reinventing Fire plans that the US and China separately did through the America's Rocky Mountain Institute. Three, we can put in even more incentives beyond what we have pledged previously, to help our industries, achieve efficiency.”
“I am glad to hear many inspirational speeches in this Chamber, including from Workers' Party and Progress Singapore Party. Inspirational speeches inspire, but they are not sufficient. For something as important as climate change, we must go beyond saying "do more, do more". Specifics matter, especially on concrete matters on that, in its entirety, can allow us to meet this ambitious targets. What I hope is that, when we propose ideas in this Chambers, they are grounded on realities especially technological realities and informed by consultations of stakeholders from all walks of life and that we explain it to our people in plain simple terms, the trade-offs. Be it giving up on national securities when we import too much low-carbon electricity or higher cost of living or losing one's livelihood or let us say, less BTOs for young people. Only when the policy is debated and discussed in this manner, can we fully expect Singaporeans to buy in what we decide in this Chamber. Now, let me next talk about how we can halve our emissions and preserve our livelihood at the same time. To achieve this, I believe we should focus on four things. One, pace ourselves. As explained earlier, there will be a crunch in low-carbon electricity immediately after 2030, until technology matures. Therefore, when we grow our industries, we must start treating electricity as a scarce growth constraint, much as we treat foreign manpower today.”
“And given our lack of renewable energy locally because of our intermittent sunlight, we must rely on imports which means either import direct low-carbon electricity imports or low-carbon energy imports like hydrogen. So, electricity or hydrogen. But, yet, and that is an important point, there is an upper cap on how much we can import electricity from overseas through submarine cables if we are to maintain our energy resilience. As we speak about this issue, let us ask ourselves, can we realistically expect half of our electricity to come from overland or submarine cables? If something goes wrong with those cables, it could take months to fix them. What happens when we need to turn on the switch? In fact, our energy resilience is at stake. At the same time, the possible low-carbon import – hydrogen, is far from ready. It takes many years to develop hydrogen based energy infrastructure and transportation. Will hydrogen be ready by 2030? By ready, it does not mean ready in the lab but ready in terms of infrastructure, in terms of ships that can ship liquified versions of it. The answer is, in my view, no. Therefore, if we expect our emissions to decrease steadily immediately after 2030, in the immediate years, before affordable low-carbon power generation options are ready, low-carbon electricity will be Singapore's growth and societal constraint. Will we see a contentious debate on who gets the first dip on scarce low-carbon electricity, much like the issue of how foreign manpower divided Singapore in the past decade? We will be facing stark trade-offs then unless everybody, Government, industry, people, civil society start moving now. And at this juncture, let me make a broader point.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I stand in support of the Motion. Today, I would like to speak on how we can achieve our ambitious target of peaking emissions in 2030 and then halving it by 2050. I also urge Singapore to do more, by building a carbon offset industry overseas. But to start, Mr Speaker, I would like to highlight our coming carbon emission dilemma that we, a country without much fossil fuel or renewable energy, face in the coming years. Broadly speaking, at the primary level, 40% of our emissions today comes from power-generation, 40% from industry and 15% are from transportation. Over time, as we change from cars to EVs, emissions from transport will be folded into power generation. And if, which I suspect it will, our industries continue to electrify, they will swap fossil fuel for electricity. This means that over time, at the primary level, the power generation will account for the vast majority of our emissions. Yet, even as we reduce the emission, we must assume electricity demand will grow as we seek to improve our people's lives and livelihoods. Therefore, our top challenge is how to have sufficient low-carbon power generation capacity, which must supply most of our future energy needs. Getting there by adapting our natural gas power generation infrastructure is not easy. The industry experts I speak to inform me that even the new natural gas power plants can yield a 4%-5% efficiency gains, far less than the 50% target. Carbon and capture and sequestration techniques is too expensive in its present form for natural gas power plants, given the fact that the carbon emissions from natural gas plants are too unconcentrated to be efficient. We could, of course, go nuclear. But I doubt Singaporeans will be comfortable with that.”
“Whether we decide on permanently codifying the temporary measures introduced by the IRDA amendment Bill, then lies in our assessment of whether these reforms are deemed to have fulfilled their objective of improving the business climate for small and medium enterprises – not just during this COVID-19 period, but beyond. To that end, it is imperative that we embed the tools to evaluate the efficacy of the law even as we begin to roll it out in earnest. At the simplest level, this would entail complimentary collection of relevant data on firms that avail themselves to the simplified regime versus those that decline it. In a similar spirit, more systematic sector-by-sector tracking of the performance of small firms deploying further provisions should also be undertaken. Notwithstanding these additional points of feedback, I do support both Bills.”
“Mdm Deputy Speaker, I believe that the aim of these series of simplified bankruptcy procedures and resolution mechanisms is to reduce the burden that small business owners face at a time where they may be facing significant distress due to COVID-19. While it is important that such firms be allowed to fail when the economy is operating far below potential, as is likely the case in Singapore today, over zealous persecution could wipe out the income of the firm's erstwhile workers which would otherwise have been available to spend on the economy, which may end up in turn, prolonging the recession. However, it is also equally important that we understand what the trade-offs we are making are. Excessively forgiving bankruptcy procedures can delay foreclosures on non-performing loans, enabling firms that would otherwise fail to keep operating. Such zombie firms, as Minister Edwin Tong clarified, can be detrimental to economic vibrancy and can inhibit the growth of other non-zombie firms, as the experience of Japan in the 1990s amply demonstrates. On the flip side, there is substantial evidence that appropriately designed restructuring procedures can encourage entrepreneurship, especially for small business owners who would otherwise assume their firms' debts as personal liabilities. Less onerous insolvency legislation can also promote opportunity-seeking and innovation orientation. As we transition our economy towards a knowledge and information-driven one, the continued refinement of IRDA would play an important role in cultivating a culture that is more willing to take on calculated business risks.”
“While I understand this allows secondary officeholders to act in the stead of the Minister should he or she be otherwise predisposed, we should be mindful that it also raises the risk of potential inconsistencies, as I have just shared. I would like to suggest that we allow an independent institution such as the Courts, to be the adjudication authority instead. Alternatively, the Minister could provide a clear public explanation for every waiver that is granted. As I alluded to previously, it is difficult to be certain ex ante whether the specific parameters used to define micro and small enterprises – the beneficiary targets of the IRDA Bill – are reasonable. I appreciate that the existing qualification criteria were not chosen in an arbitrary fashion, but it is also useful to recognise that the definitions for what constitutes a small enterprise differs worldwide. The 30-employee threshold specified in the Bill, for instance, would encompass medium sized businesses in Australia but constitute only small firms in the EU and US. And it would be a micro enterprise in Somalia. That said, my point is not so much that definitions differ. Rather, given the inherent difficulty of establishing what constitutes a micro and small enterprise, and by extension, the nature of the firms which may be able to endure more complex restructuring and dissolution procedures, it may be valuable to consider the possibility of a tiered set of bankruptcy rules that apply to micro, small, medium and large enterprises, consistent with the likely complexity of the operations. Relatedly, it may be worthwhile considering qualifications subject to simply just satisfying one or two, rather than the set of all criteria.”
“While this stipulation can expedite what could well be a flood of assessments, it also presumes the accuracy of the official Assessor. This introduces a clear asymmetry in the power dynamic between the two relevant parties. Perhaps a potential route of appeal with an alternative, independent Assessor, applicable to special cases, could be considered. At the very least, the circumstances by which the Adjustment Relief Assessor may permit the presence of legal representation should be spelled out. As written, the IRDA Bill currently concurs significant discretion to the Executive to alter jurisdictional parameters by which the Act applies. In some instances, such discretion is well justified and increases operational flexibility. For instance, section 250F details specific eligibility criteria for firms' acceptance into the simplified winding up programme, but also allows for these values to be substituted by the Minister by order in the Gazette. Since it is difficult to ascertain whether these values, such as the threshold for sales turnover is set at $10 million, are optimal, the added flexibility is most welcomed. However, in other instances, the discretion affords a very wide berth without clear justification for such leeway. In particular, section 72H and 250H allows the Executive to freely overturn acceptance and eligibility requirements. This could open up avenues for potential error, thereby, undermining confidence in the application of the Act. Moreover, the language of the Bill does not limit the authority only to the Minister but also to all political officerholders, such as the Second Minister, Minister of State or Senior Minister of State and the Parliamentary Secretary or Senior Parliamentary Secretary.”
“One is left to wonder how this cap of four months was actually chosen, given that it is not closely related to the specific phases and disruption periods that were identified by policy. Perhaps more relevant, it is not so much the maximum number of days for which a delay is allowed but rather why there is no equivalent minimum. Here, I am keenly aware that I always seems to be harping about minimums these days. Since the circuit breaker period coincided with a forced cessation of a wide range of economic activity, it strikes me that the moratorium should afford a default of a 55-day floor, which is consistent with the circuit breaker period. Importantly, while larger firms may well be able to accelerate their work schedules to meet or exceed unanticipated delays, smaller firms simply do not possess the economies of scale or scope to do so. Of course, if delivery is possible within a shorter window so much the better. But allowing for a default, returns some bargaining power back to the small businesses which were forced to disrupt activity due to no fault of their own. The other benefit of such a default is that small and micro businesses that possess limited understanding of the realignment framework can easily grasp the principle that an automatic extension of the contract terms for the duration of the circuit breaker period applies via this default. This brings me to the related issue of how small firms will navigate the complexities of revised legislation. In particular, sections 68 and 69 simultaneously remove the right of appeal while limiting the ability of assignees to obtain informed advice in the Adjustment Relief Assessment process.”
“19 pm Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim (Sengkang): Mdm Deputy Speaker, I will speak about the proposed amendments to the COVID-19 (Temporary Measures) (Amendment No 3) Bill, calling it the realignment framework of 2020 and the Insolvency, Restructuring and Dissolution Act or IRDA of 2018, in tandem. The underlining objective of both amendments to offer streamlined procedures for renegotiation, restructuring and potential termination of contracts, especially for smaller businesses, is well founded and both timely and pertinent in light of the disruptions introduced by the COVID-19 pandemic. I only wish to raise a few points – mainly on the scope of each Bill's coverage but also wish to take a step back and highlight the key big picture issues on the implications of a less onerous bankruptcy resolution regime for entrepreneurial culture, that the IRDA amendment Bill inevitably identifies. The realignment framework stipulates that contracts signed prior to COVID-19 be made available to possible renegotiation or termination with a moratorium period pertaining to affected agreements. This is eminently sensible given the forced stoppage to economic activity imposed by the circuit breaker and other COVID-19 containment measures. Construction contracts, in particular, are afforded a stay of up to 122 days for delivery. Madam, while I am certain that this duration was chosen carefully, it is unclear to me why the period is 122 days. Following Minister Desmond Lee's speech, my rusty Math now sees that it is basically four months. But by my count, the circuit breaker and Phase One lasted for 73 days; while that of Phase One to the start of the Bill is 136 days.”
“This is because bank loans to SMEs generally require a personal guarantee and it is frequently born by the directors. Personal consequences include: (a) not being able to serve as a director of another company for a period of three years; (b) not being able to borrow more than $500; (c) not being able to travel without permission; (d) credit bureaus also to keep the bankruptcy records for three years. The sum is greater than the parts. The result is that for several years at least, directors of many firms – the leaders of these badly hit industries – will not be able to raise funds and take an active role to transform their sector again. Given that COVID-19 was something that was thrust upon these sectors, I hope our Government can, at least on a temporary basis, reduce the consequences for the directors of these badly affected sectors. In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, we can and must do more to give more time for our badly affected sectors to work out the crisis. In business, insolvency is always a distinct possibility. But in these worst hit sectors, what we are seeing for SMEs is a mass extinct event, an unpredictable collective disaster not easily foreseeable. There will be a whole lot of hurt coming our way. For the business leaders facing imminent personal bankruptcy, it can be a soul-crushing process, a destruction of a lifetime of hard work. For their families, it could mean changed lives forever, not to mention many years of financial distress. For their workers, it may mean a period of hardship until new jobs can be found. It is our duty, as Members of this House, to do more, to prevent and reduce the pain. Notwithstanding my points, I give my full support for both Bills. 5.”
“That means running the risk of imported cases as the situation deteriorates in many parts of the world. To counter balance the risk, we are continuing with strong curbs in the events, entertainment and high-end F&B activities. Firms in these sectors are paying the ultimate price of our collective efforts to fight COVID-19. They deserve more time to work with creditors to find a way forward. Five, many of our national retraining and reskilling efforts are under strain from the recent spike in unemployment and we need to give them more time to ramp up. By forestalling bankruptcies and insolvencies, we can buy MOM, WSG and E2I more time to help displaced workers find new opportunities. Let me now focus on my second suggestion – temporarily removing some of the penalties of bankruptcy for the directors of badly hit sectors, so that they can meaningfully contribute to the re-birth and restart of their respective sectors. The rise and fall of companies are part of any economic downturn and restructuring. In a normal downturn, when old firms fade away, new firms will seek new opportunities funded by new capital and the economy will rise again. But for the badly hit sectors, what we have is not a normal downturn. This is a mass extinction event, especially for SMEs – a global killer so to speak. Of course, many of these sectors, especially the SMEs, will need to do things differently, or at least continue operating with restrictions for a prolonged period of time. But when conditions allow for re-emergence of these sectors, when the green shoots emerge, Singapore could face a shortage of our top entrepreneurial and managerial talent, namely top business leaders who serve as the directors of businesses. The personal consequence of insolvencies to the directors are severe.”
“However, there are compelling reasons to restore Part 2 for our worst hit sectors. Let me give a few reasons. One, as we move towards Phase Three, many of these badly hit sectors could become financially viable again as safe-distancing measures get redefined. With support, many insolvent companies in these sectors may not need to go down that path. Two, while the past six months have created a valuable breathing space, a large amount of effort and time was spent on clarifying the terms, such as the rental relief details and on refining the powers of the assessors. It is only until recently – based on my conversations with the SMEs – that creditors and debtors are better able to work together to support SMEs through this crisis. So, extending the runway will be beneficial and in Singapore’s best interests. Three, for the badly hit sectors, our economic agencies will need more time to identify the way forward, to find higher ground for companies in those sectors. As an example, a clear way forward for some well-managed companies in these sectors would be to re-capitalise or to pivot to a new direction. But we have to ask ourselves are we giving the present Government schemes sufficient time to take effect, to allow them to make this happen? Is the equity funding part of our business eco-system ready to step up? Do investors or white knights have enough time to complete their due diligence? I believe that more time is needed for the Government to work with these sectors to reinvent themselves. Four, we have a moral obligation to do even more to support these sectors. Even though we now have low number of local infections, we have extensive safe distancing measures because we need to keep our economy open.”
“Mdm Deputy Speaker, I declare my interest as Advisor to the Federation of Merchant Association, which represents SMEs and micro-SMEs. I stand in support of both Bills. The amendments are essential refinements in our response to the pandemic. The COVID-19 Temporary Relief Act was described by Minister Shanmugam as a Noah’s Ark, with many moving parts to bring as many as possible to higher ground. The points I would like to raise today are on the temporary provisions regarding bankruptcy and insolvency. With the “COVID-19 Temporary Relief” set to expire on 19 November, a large number of lawsuits are being prepared as a consequence. Similarly, the Moratorium which ended on 19 October will likely lead to a large number of bankruptcies and insolvencies through legal actions. I would like to make two suggestions. One, for some of the worst hit sectors, I propose restoring Part 2 of the Temporary Relief Bill, namely, the prescribed measures relating to bankruptcy and insolvency, for at least several more months. Two, for these same badly hit sectors and, hopefully, even beyond, I also propose temporarily removing some of the penalties for directors of insolvent companies affected by the pandemic, so that they can meaningfully contribute to the re-birth and restart of their sectors. Let me speak on my first suggestion. I applaud Part 2 of the Temporary Relief Act because it gives individuals and businesses breathing space. This was done by increasing the bankruptcy and insolvency limits as well as to extend the minimum number of days, from serving of a statutory demand, to serving notice of bankruptcy. As of today, we have made excellent progress in controlling the pandemic. More and more of our economy is operating closer to normal, and Part 2 has largely served its purpose.”
“In fact, I further believe that Singapore should set up an independent environmental impact assessment and audit outfit, perhaps in collaboration with the UN Secretariat for Climate Change, or with a think-tank with deep expertise such as the McKinsey Global Institute. This outfit can assess the cost and benefit of emission reduction efforts from not just the Government, but also the proposals from the industries, environmental groups and Singaporeans. Having an independent body to evaluate the impact will allow us to make the trade-offs so that we can decide how to best meet emission targets while preserving economic opportunities and quality of life. And also, we must also give our environmental groups, the industries and Singaporeans who have come up with these ideas the opportunity to see them through because they care. Indeed, there are ample opportunities on how our Government bring passionate people to deliver on Government objectives. This includes getting our VWOs to deliver Government-funded social services, and also getting rights groups including ACRES to run the Government’s wildlife rescue service. If we can achieve all that, I am confident that the vast majority of Singaporeans, including our youths, will be proud of not just achieving our Climate Change obligations to the world, but also how we can do so together as one Singapore. With that, Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of both the long-term Government plans as outlined by the Presidential address, as well as the Motion of thanks from the hon Member Mr Patrick Tay. 4.41 pm”
“Having spoken to various Government officials, I am aware of the tremendous efforts and resources that our Government is pouring into this area. Our Government is actively pursuing changing our energy imports for power generation away from natural gas and towards cleaner sources of energy, not just solar energy, but also green hydrogen. We are also examining how to reduce and transform industrial emissions through carbon sequestration, and through mineralisation of carbon so as to transform emissions into sand or ammonia. We are also adopting electric vehicles. These are concrete and exciting plans. I am proud to say that Singapore is one of the few countries in the world that has real political will and resources to meet our climate change obligations. Therefore, why not we share the nuts and bolts of these exciting plans, including the implementation cost and expected emissions reduction, with our people? Despite our Government’s best efforts, however, it is likely that our current plan can only allow us to meet a bulk of our long-term emission targets. This is where we have ample round room to co-create policy. I hope the Government can share the gaps openly and transparently, and then work, in the spirit of SG Together, with our environmental groups, industry, and our people to close these gaps. This could also include putting up more calls for industrial collaboration and to elicit solid proposals from our environmental groups and our youths. But whatever ideas that we gather must hold up to the highest standards. We must make sure that these ideas are implementable and cost effective.”
“Some time back, when Deputy Prime Minister Heng launched SG Together, he highlighted that there are many policy areas that the Government can co-create with our people. I cannot agree more. In areas of defence and foreign policy, foreign and domestic intelligence matters, and reserve management, we must maintain confidentiality, as we are living in an increasingly dangerous world. But in most other areas, we can do more to open up the processes, empower our people with facts, so that Singaporeans can make tough choices together. One particular area for co-creating with Singaporeans is climate change. There is this African proverb, “If you want to go fast, go alone. If you want to go far, go together.” And the longest term challenge that Singaporeans must face together is climate change. Therefore, I propose that our Government open up the hoods of the Government workings on Climate Change to Singaporeans, so that our citizens have the information and incentive to co-create policy, including making difficult policy trade-offs. As a start, we can level up our environmental groups and our youths with the latest policy research and technology innovation through high-powered forums. By that, I mean going beyond the occasional consultation exercise. It means ensuring that all stakeholders have access to the same set of core facts. The Government can also publicise, apart from a white paper spelling out the details of our emission tracking framework, the mechanism for regulating emissions including administrative measures and on how we arrive at carbon taxation. We can also regularly share how are we faring, at a programme level, not just at the whole national level, against our ambitious targets.”
“For example, an international company like Samsung, with their regional headquarters in Singapore, would likely have a high number of Koreans nationals in their management. The IT consulting and implementation arm of Deloitte would likely have many Indian nationals because Indian IT professionals form the bulk of available IT talent in our region, and because IT capabilities are critical for our industry transformation. Also, a company from an emerging and promising industry might also need to bring in specialist talents at the start to get a new industry moving, and these talents are available in some specific countries. But short of these selected circumstances, given the talent and ability of our Singaporeans, I do not see why we cannot build up a stronger Singapore Core. I strongly believe that majority of international and large Singapore companies are responsible and the vast majority of Singaporeans I speak to do understand the need to stay open to foreign talent even in middle and senior positions. But we must do everything we can to call out irresponsible employers so as to maintain broad public support for manpower policy during this challenging period. My final point is on how we can co-create climate change policies with our people in the spirit of SG Together. As Singapore matures as a society, our society’s definition of good governance evolves. Talking to my residents, I get the sense that most Singaporeans think of good governance not just in terms of quality of outcome, but also in terms of transparency over process, as well as empathy and simplicity in communications. And I believe that this Government is committed to doing exactly that.”
“This includes DBS, Dymon Asia, Quantedge, Surbana Jurong, Ong and Ong Architect, Woh Hup, just to name a few. Yet, there are also many international companies that have yet to build a strong Singapore Core in their middle and senior management ranks. In fact, as many international companies look to downsize during this pandemic, many worry that whether we will regress, rather than progress, in building our Singapore Core. Building a Singapore Core among amongst middle and senior positions is not an easy task – I fully admit to that. But there is urgency for us to take a fundamental relook at this approach. And we must start by asking ourselves: are these companies making a genuine effort? I am the first one to acknowledge the difficulty in measuring sincerity of effort. However, we can explore different ways of identifying tell-tail signs of systematic issues, starting with the diversity of their workforce. One way is to mandate all companies with more than 200 staff and with more than 25% EP holders to declare the country of origin of their EP holders along four annual renumeration bands: one, from $60,000 to $120,000 a year; two, from $120,000 to $250,000; from $250,000 to $500,000; and beyond $500,000. After all, if the EP holders are dominated by one particular country, despite our very diverse expatriate workforce, how can Singaporeans be persuaded that there is diversity in these companies’ hiring and renumeration policy, and how can Singaporeans trust that they have a genuine intention to build up a Singapore Core? There are, of course, legitimate reasons why high paying EP jobs go to expatriates from a particular country.”
“This task force can at issues such as identifying low cost outdoor lift and escalators options to promote accessibility; promoting more power-assisted devices with shelters or roofs for seniors, and to prioritise cycling and walking paths construction in private estates with challenging terrains and a high density of seniors so that they can use PADs to get around. We can also consider building more rain shelters and sheltered linkways to serve private estate residents in some selected areas. We can also beef up the budget allocated to MSO for private estate upgrading projects, so that decent-sized projects can be implemented outside the EUP when the situation calls for it. Next, let me speak about strengthening the Singapore Core in our private sector. The Government has made some excellent moves to preserve and build on the Singapore Core in our private sector. This includes JSS, strengthening the Fair Consideration Framework or FCF, creating 100,000 jobs and training opportunities, and the recent increase in EP and S Pass salary thresholds. But while much has been done, there is one particular area that I think we should also closely examine, and that is preserving and growing the base of middle and senior Singapore management and professionals, especially within international companies. Compared to say a decade or two ago, Singapore professionals have gained significant experiences in some of the world’s most competitive areas, including areas like asset management, investment banking, management consulting, urban solutions, architecture and engineering services. A number of Singapore outfits, staffed by largely Singaporeans, can hold their own against the best in the world.”
“We also could review our policies on housing grants for seniors and their next generation who want to move from private housing to public estates, especially if they do not have a lot of net worth. We can add pathways for downgrading hospitalisation ward class and therefore, cost of healthcare. We can also review our criteria on COVID related assistance programmes such as Self-employed Person Income Relief or SIRS, and the COVID-19 Support Grant or CSG. The Government can also communicate a clear and consistent whole-of-Government approach towards means-testing for private estates. Several years ago, I recall Minister Edwin Tong, in his capacity as a backbencher, giving an eloquent speech on the subject of reviewing means testing with regards to private estate residents. During the debate, I noted that while various Ministries exercise discretions in helping specific cases, the level of discretion varies from Ministry to Ministry. Now, it is a good time for the Government to do a thorough review and to spell out the core principles of means-testing for private estate, which can form the basis of a new social compact with our private estate residents. Thirdly, I think there is more we can do regarding infrastructure and accessibility for private estates. As our seniors age, there are some estates with unique terrain that require some infrastructure upgrading. A good example is the Teachers' Housing Estate within my constituency, which is nested within a valley. Many of the seniors struggle to walk up two storeys of steep stairs, just to access the bus stop. As such, I hope that MND and MOT can work together to form a task force to come up with a masterplan for liveability and accessibility for the seniors and frail living within the private estates.”
“Seniors who are financially savvy can also make adequate financial planning to make sure that they can benefit from annuities and dividends. But not all seniors, especially our Pioneer Generation seniors, are financially savvy to navigate the tricky global economic waters. Therefore, I believe the Government must actively work with the banking and insurance sectors to create reverse mortgage options for the private estates. I spoke about this several years ago. With the pressing economic conditions, this issue has become more urgent. Our Government can also work with our banks to remove barriers for our people to borrow against their housing equities at a feasible age, even beyond the age of 70. I understand the banks' current reservations in lending to seniors. Perhaps we can mandate the banks to lend against housing equity if that senior, who is Singaporean, have a Lasting Power of Attorney, so that the banks have somebody they can work with, without involving expensive legal remedies, should their clients fall ill and are mentally incapacitated. If our people can tap on their housing equity effectively, I believe most Singaporeans in the private estates would prefer to stand on their own two feet, instead of relying on the Government assistance. Second, we can look at our means testing framework for those without much assets or income. Instead of using annual value of houses as a key determinant of means testing, we can look at a combination of non-housing assets, income, and most importantly, per capital housing equity of the occupants. Beyond using a different yardstick, we can also consider tiering Government benefits, so as to remove the big difference of benefits between public and private housing residents.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to speak about three things today. One, rethinking our social compact with our private estate residents; two, strengthen our Singaporean Core in the private sector through fine-tuning our Employment Pass (EP) policy; and three, co-creating our Climate Change policies with Singaporeans. Let me start with rethinking our social compact with the private estate residents, this is especially so, since I have five private estates within my constituency. Mr Speaker, Sir, for decades, our policies has created ample opportunities for Singaporeans, including private estate residents. They fund the lion share of our tax revenue while consuming a limited amount of Government assistance. This is the right balance. As economic winners of our society, it is appropriate that they contribute to help the rest of Singapore move along. And the majority of them have benefited from Government assistance during COVID-19. Business owners and professionals benefited from Government support such as the Job Support Scheme or JSS, and corporate tax rebates. However, a number of my private estate residents feel there it is time to review the social compact. This group include: (a) retired seniors who are asset-rich but cash poor; (b) residents above 50 facing greater career uncertainty; (c) residents who do not own the home they stay in; and (d) residents who are deeply impacted by COVID-19. As such, I believe we should review our policies in at least three ways. One, the Government must create more ways to help asset rich, cash poor, private estate residents better tap on their housing equity. Of course, residents can selling their houses and downgrade. But this will mean they are uprooted from the neighbourhoods they so cherish, especially in their golden years.”
“I thank the Minister for a comprehensive response. I am very encouraged to hear about the high percentage of loans that were deferred. Two clarifying questions. The first is, regarding the loan deferment, it will help right now, but in maybe six months' time, after the temporary relief Bill term ends, there will likely be a lot more defaults. And so one suggestion I have heard from my resident is, can we get more jobs from SGUnited to help out with Credit Counselling Singapore as a temporary measure to help deal with the additional workload, because the more people we can help to restructure the debts, the better it will be for everybody including the banks in the long run. That is one suggestion. The other suggestion is about the rates. My residents hope that MAS continues to exercise vigilance on the rates. They pointed out to me a particular observation. The observation is that while SIBOR rates have gone down, rightfully so, the credit spreads have gone up recently at a very short time period. That means the SIBOR plus the bank spread. That does not seem to gel with the default rates that does not seem to be increasing rapidly. So, they do hope MAS can look at that, as well as the board rates movement very carefully.”
“I hope the Government can consider expanding and putting some discretion for the Jobs Support Programme. I would like to declare that I am the advisor to the Federation Merchant Association, the trade association that helps SMEs, including heartland enterprises. For micro-SME owners, because they practise the concept of "leaders eat last", some take limited salary and get the bulk of their income through directors' fees. Many of these micro-SME leaders have less than five employees and, therefore, actually, they are both workers and shareholders at the same time. Can the Government consider giving job support on a discretionary basis to some of them if their income is largely limited to directors’ fees? Of course, the job support amount must follow similar salary caps as per the other workers. In conclusion, despite this being an unparalleled global situation, there are still many things within our control. Singapore can and must come together to meet the challenges and emerge stronger. This must and this will be Singapore's finest moment. With that, I stand in full support of all three Budgets.”
“We can apply scenario planning, develop multi-disciplinary insights, to decipher how the world could unfold and, therefore, provide advice and perspective to our Government and national leaders. Some of the issues they can consider include how will the world order change? How will US-China, US-Europe relations evolve? Will Europe EU stay intact? What is the monetary effect of a prolonged and massive debt-raising by developed countries? How will that affect the asset allocation and investment strategies of our national reserves? And what happens to the ASEAN growth story, especially if developing countries are not able to cope with COVID-19 and cannot raise debt to deal with the economic fall-out? If multi-lateralism continues to decline, can we form deeper cooperation with capable, trusted and stable middle powers like Australia, Israel, and Japan, to meet long-term challenges on the food, medical and defence fronts? If the world face a prolonged U-shape or L-shape scenario, should we review our NIRC framework and revisit our long-term infrastructure investment plans? How will our industry structure change after this? Can we benefit from the likely decoupling of the global supply chain? Are there things we can proactively do to mitigate the downsides, for example, through localising the workforce of certain industries to deal with rising structural unemployment? Lastly, will COVID-19 make it more difficult for the world to meet the challenges of climate change? And therefore, must we accelerate our efforts or even do more to forestall or mitigate climate change? Having insights to these questions at the very quickest moments will help Singapore stay nimble amidst unparalleled uncertainty. My last point is this.”
“One way is to consider the Emeritus model, which partners with Ivy League universities to offer online programmes from specialist certificates to masters programmes. These courses now cost around US$3,500 to US$5,000 a year. Perhaps you can consider subsidies to make this more affordable and more immediate to our tertiary students. Also, perhaps you can consider getting our Polytechnics and Universities to temporarily relax criteria to shift majors, do double-degree or do a master’s degree, so that mechanical or civil engineers can switch or double in electrical engineering, data science or computer science. Some of our Universities are already allowing for such flexibilities but it would be ideal if more can be done. We can also consider a quick and temporary expansion of our SkillsFuture effort. In this downturn, there is a fair number of private sector trainers or professionals with skillsets that provide valuable training, but are currently not certified to teach SkillsFuture courses. The Government can consider partnering with a few reputable training providers, who can bring in these talents on board to train other Singaporeans. Four, we should gather Singapore's leading minds to path-find the road ahead. If the pandemic does not globally peak by the middle of this year, the impact to the world could be truly profound. The world is moving in a non-linear way. It may be too complex for any individual groups of professionals, experts or policy-makers to sense-make. Therefore, Singapore can consider creating a task force, a group of 30, perhaps be led by both of our Senior Ministers. It can comprise of our most brilliant and experienced experts, leaders and scientists.”
“Some of them are too qualified to take on many of the new temporary jobs out there. We can sign them up for short contracts, perhaps six to 12 months. To save time, the Government can outsource the management and hiring of these people to the private sector HR companies. The Government does not need to match their private sector pay. Even $2,000 or $3,000 a month will suffice. I believe many Singaporeans want to actively contribute to Singapore, rather than to wait on the sidelines for the economy to recover. Their private sector experience make them ideal to contribute to the Government's transformation, to help the Government build even stronger bridges to the private and the public sector. We can create a real and lasting advantage for Singapore and emerge stronger. And if the pilot succeeds and if structural unemployment emerges, we can scale this up in perhaps three to six months' time. Three, we can explore more ways to help our tertiary education students gain relevant skills. The current situation is very tough for our current and future graduates. While we can create short-term internships and training for some, others want to continue developing skills in critical demand. Even amidst the challenges, there are still some skillsets that are very much in demand: AI, data-science, programming and electrical engineering. I hope that MOE can challenge our Universities to create opportunities for our students to gain these skillsets in the shortest time, at the lowest cost. One possibility is to get non-technical, especially business graduates, to do a one-year advance diploma or a minor in AI, data-science and programming. Naturally, it will be difficult to scale up the faculty strength quickly.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, it is inspiring how Singaporeans are coming together to meet the crisis of our generation. I am also heartened to see the decisive use of our reserves to deliver on the Resilience and Solidarity Budgets. Like many in this Chamber, I have received a tsunami of feedback. With that in mind, I would like to make a few points. One, at this critical stage, we must enforce safe distancing vigorously and our people must urge one another on, to do so. The virus cannot work by itself. It needs people to walk around to transmit, to spread. Therefore, we must find a way to persuade one another that staying at home saves lives. We must also be mindful that no amount of Government spending is sufficient to save our livelihoods if we lose the fight against the virus. Two, we must create more short-term jobs for Singaporeans. Our Resilience Budget has created some temporary jobs, which is a very solid move. But if the economic front continues to deteroriate, we can consider doing more and take a leaf from the US government in the 1930s. Then-US President Roosevelt introduced the Work Progress Administration (WPA) to create jobs for Americans, as part of the New Deal. WPA projects were designed to be manpower intensive, which means that the wages formed the vast majority of the project cost. The WPA were also beneficiaries to US in the long run and they were not designed or geared to compete with the private sector. Therefore, in a similar way, can we explore tapping on the unemployed professionals and management talent to help every Ministry identify processes to streamline, digitise and perhaps, even transform? We can pilot this immediately. There is already a fair number of unemployed professionals and management talent out there.”
“Sir, my first cut. Singapore’s caring and kindness, along with progress in our society’s civic, culture, and sports arena, are fuelled by the passion of our country’s volunteers. MCCY has done an excellent job to identify, nurture, and empower them. We need to look no further than Team Nile, our Museum Volunteers. MCCY also rolled out an excellent cloud-base volunteer portal, Volunteer.sg, that is a game-changer on how VWOs engage volunteers. I am deeply appreciative that MCCY has included Kebun Baru as a pilot within PA. Last year, MCCY rolled out Volunteer Centres in seven towns to grow and coordinate volunteer supply, facilitate partnerships between community partners and build capabilities in these towns. Can the Ministry provide an update on these Volunteer Centres, and whether there are plans to roll out the Centres to more towns? Additional Support by MCCY and NAC My second cut. Most arts and culture institutions rely on a combination of ticket sales, grants, donations and endowment income. For those with NAC grants, the Government usually ties the grants to public attendances and projects that benefit Singapore, and rightfully so. In view of the current circumstances regarding COVID-19, donations from some parts of the business community may be down and there can be reduced demand for large scale public performances. Some institutions without deep reserves or large endowment could face significant challenges. Can MCCY share how MCCY and NAC can better support these institutions in this difficult times? For example, can NAC provide additional support or convert existing grant by getting these institutions to invest in capability development, so that they can emerge stronger from the crisis? Expanding Partnerships for Singapore Together”
“Sir, prior to this Budget, to help our senior workers age with purpose and dignity, Singapore already has a set of pro-senior worker policies. And this year, I am heartened to see that we have continued building on this very strong foundation. In fact, our goal to say that this is a very exciting year for our senior workers. There are at least five key new policies and refinements that benefit our senior workers this year. These include the Enhanced Second Employment Credit, the CPF Transition Offsets, Senior Worker Early Adopter Grant and the Part-Time Re-employment Grant as well as the Matched Retirement Saving Schemes. And these are on top of the improvements of the Silver Support Scheme that improves on social assistance for our seniors and HDB's Lease Buy-back that strengthens the retirement adequacy of our seniors. This is surely the result of MOM's Working Group for Senior Workers, and MOM's willingness to engage many groups of stakeholders, including the PAP.SG through two Private Members' Motion on seniors over the past two years. As such, can MOM provide the House with a comprehensive update on measures to help senior workers stay gainfully employed and improve the quality of their jobs? Productivity of Older Workers”
“Because in this age of technology disruption, not all industries have a strong awareness of what is coming ahead and, therefore, workers, who are currently within or are trying to enter that industry, may not know what skills to re-skill on. Despite these major challenges, it is very heartening that our Government is taking this issue by the horns for many years now, not just within MTI but whole-of-Government, and also to do it in a tripartite manner. Therefore, can MTI share how the Government can help workers remain employable and industry-relevant in this rapidly changing environment, especially mature and mid-career workers, many in their 40s and 50s? For example, how can we upskill more workers in industry-relevant competencies, such as in the area of Design. The mindset of our workers is also pivotal. They must understand that in this day and age, careers are non-linear, and they must up-skill and re-skill themselves multiple times through their career. 6.15 pm Nevertheless, companies play the crucial role. Can MTI share how our Government encourage more firms to embrace a mindset shift, to see workforce transformation as a critical complement to enterprise transformation. Accordingly, how can the Government support and incentivise more firms, especially SMEs, to invest in training and redesigning jobs for worker? And how is the Government publicising such information in a systematic manner? Skills and Jobs”
“Chairman, in the face of significant economic and technology shifts, upskilling and re-skilling is paramount to good employment outcomes for Singaporeans. One can argue that success in both of these areas are some of the hardest public policy that few governments have succeeded in. There are several reasons and it is a complex issue. Successful upskilling is usually done by successful companies. Because successful companies are the ones who have a clear vision for the future, and therefore the skills needed to reach that future. They are also usually operating within a certain national culture, such as those found in Germany and Japan, where companies have a firm sense of responsibility to the long-term employment of the staff. This culture is usually supported by manpower policy at the national level. Upskilling also requires complementary educational institutes and capability for both full-time and part-time upskilling. If upskilling is difficult, re-skilling could be even more challenging. In fact, one would be stretched to think about more than a handful of countries that had systematically re-skilled people who are structurally unemployed. Re-skilling workers to do different jobs is somewhat easier for larger companies, because while they are learning these new skills, they are usually working within the same company, within the culture. For example, as DBS banks digitise, many of its front-line workers got a place to be re-trained within other parts of the bank. However, it is not always so easy to re-skill these people across the broader economy, because not many companies have the scale like DBS. Because in the interconnected world, international companies have the option of re-locating jobs outside Singapore, rather than re-skilling our workers.”
“Chairman, can MFA provide an update on key ASEAN's progress and developments in the past year, including updates on issues such as upholding ASEAN centrality; developing the Code of Conduct for South China Sea; and fostering the ASEAN common market? Amidst the climate of major power rivalry and weakening multi-lateralism, ASEAN continues to be an effective driver for multi-lateralism which has underpinned the prosperity and peace in our region. And for Singapore and our trading partners, ASEAN is an important source of economic potential. How can Singapore best tap onto the opportunities afforded by ASEAN? ASEAN and Regional Cooperation”
“Many of our businesses and companies rely on secure and reliable networks to trade, transact and communicate. They also store vast amount of personal and commercial data in Singapore. As the digital sector expands, it is important that business networks and systems are well protected. We have seen the devastating impact of cyber attacks on individual businesses. More importantly, such attacks also could hurt Singapore's reputation as a trusted hub. Given the pervasiveness of digital threats, MINDEF and MCI introduced Digital Defence as a pillar of Total Defence in 2019. How is MINDEF working with our partners to equip businesses to deal with threats from the digital domain? Psychological Defence”
“Chairman, Sir, last year, I had the opportunity to visit SAF's training camp in Brunei. It was heartening to see the dedication of our servicemen who had to man our overseas detachment and to facilitate the training of our visiting SAF soldiers. Over the years, going on overseas training has become a part of what it means to be a member of the SAF, whether it is a regular, NSF or NSMan. We train overseas because we need to overcome our space constraints, to give our people better and more realistic training opportunities in diverse environments. MINDEF and the SAF have worked hard with our partners to provide the SAF access to overseas training facilities. MINDEF recently announced the signing of an Memorandum of Understanding between US and Singapore to establish a RSAF Fighter Training Detachment in Guam (FTD-Guam). Could the Minister for Defence please provide more information on RSAF's Guam Detachment and how it will improve on RSAF's training? Update on Acquisition of F-35 My next cut. At last year's Committee of Supply debate, MINDEF announced the intention to purchase the F-35, a fifth generation multirole aircraft, which can provide air-to-air, air-to-ground and intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) missions. The F-35's stealth capabilities can help us maintain air dominance and overcome sophisticated air-defence. At the same time, the F-35s can fuse sensors and information from different sources, thereby networking our 4th Generation aircrafts and SAF assets altogether. MINDEF recently announced that Singapore has received the US's approval for the sale of F-35s to Singapore. Could the MINDEF please provide an update on Singapore's acquisition of the F-35s, including how the F-35s will improve the capabilities of the SAF? Maritime Security”
“Mr Chairman, Sir, the Singapore Government is at the forefront of public policy formulation and implementation. It is also one of the largest procurer of goods and services. Naturally, it constitutes an important demonstration platform and springboards for many companies, especially for SMEs and startups, that want to deliver innovative solutions for Singapore and beyond. This is especially so for smart city, climate change, and e-services. Can MOF share how we can enhance the Government procurement approach to enable SMEs and start-ups to develop innovative solutions, and in doing so also help them to grow? This is especially so, as it is imperative to grow new companies in Singapore for the next phase of our economic development. Can MOF also share on how we will inform companies of such efforts? My second cut. Co-creating Solutions with Businesses As the needs of our society grow more diverse and complex, it is inevitable that more regulations are needed to safeguard Singaporeans in different ways. At the same time, more regulations mean more processes and greater compliance cost. This represents added cost and potentially, lost productivity to businesses. I have spoken on this issue on a number of occasions in the past. I am heartened that over the years, the Government also recognises this issue. It has formed the Pro-Enterprise Committee and achieved positive results in cutting red-tape. Nevertheless, this is a never-ending marathon. Can MOF share on how, as part of the Singapore Together movement, MOF and the greater, larger Government agencies can partner businesses on co-creating solutions to reduce compliance costs and streamline processes for greater productivity?”
“Nevertheless, the world can expect Singapore, in the spirit of SG Together, to emerge stronger from every crisis because they know that the hallmark of Singapore is our ability to implement effectively and respond dynamically to short-term, medium-term and long-term challenges all at the same time. With that, I stand in support of the Budget.”
“I hope our House, as a whole, can start tracking developments in Base Erosion and Profit Sharing (BEPS). Our tax incentives for income within and beyond Singapore are important tools to anchor major investments in Singapore. The Group of Twenty (G20) has turned on the pressure on hub economies, such as Singapore, Switzerland and Hong Kong. Singapore has weathered Phase 1 of BEPS well through quick adjustments. But there is a Phase 2 coming along two dimensions. One, the EU and the United Kingdom want a cut of their own citizens' e-commerce revenue, even though existing rules dictate that tax revenue should largely reside in locations generating economic activities. The US currently stands in the way of this proposal, as they benefit from e-commerce. But one cannot rule out a future compromise, to the detriment of hub economies. Two, some major developed economies are pushing for a minimal global tax so that they can tax their companies more, even if companies get a preferential tax rate elsewhere, regardless of the justification. If these developments take place, the impact on our revenue base could be swift and sizable – billions of dollars of lost corporate income tax, additional spending to keep and attract current and future investments, loss tax revenue and spending by a reduced international workforce, and less job opportunities for our people. I hope that within this Chamber, as we discuss about meeting current and future needs, we can keep in mind the possibility of a sudden revenue drop. Let me now conclude. In troubled times like this, we can see the mettle of a country's governance system. Yes, Singapore is undoubtedly the canary bird for globalisation. Pandemics, trade wars, terrorism, climate change, fake news can hit Singapore hard and fast.”
“Second of all, I hope some industries and TACs can step up. A sector is more viable if the companies actively steer industry development. Some industries have yet to come up with compelling visions, despite the additional help that the Government has provided to TACs. Without a compelling vision, Singaporeans will struggle to identify meaningful paths for upskilling within those sectors. If things do not move in some of these sectors, I hope the existing companies and Government can partner to create alternative TACs to drive industry development. Too many jobs, especially from mid-career Singaporeans, are at risk if we do not do this transformation well. Lastly, in a protracted downturn, I hope the Government can actively work with certain established industries to absorb more mid-career Singaporeans. These include the construction, engineering services, healthcare, social work, which usually face difficulty recruiting Singaporeans. Companies can tap on MOM's many excellent initiatives to attract Singaporeans. I also hope that affected Singaporeans will also keep an open mind for these jobs. Yes, career transitions are hard. But I am confident that Singaporeans will rise to the occasion. And if things do not move, I hope the Government can consider further DRC reduction for these specific sectors and implement the Fair Consideration Framework vigorously. Tough actions could be necessary because our sectors that usually absorb mid-career Singaporeans, whether they are heartland enterprises, the Integrated Resorts (IRs), airport, hospitality and private hire transportations, may not be able to do so now. We must give our mid-career Singaporeans the best fighting chance to stay employed. Beyond current concerns, we must also look out for longer-term trends.”
“Well-informed foreign investors also shared with me that should a global pandemic happen, Singapore is best placed regionally to weather the storm. I am also heartened to see MOH's additional $800 million of funding, on top of the large post-SARS investments. As a comparison, the US is seeking additional funding of US$1.2 billion for their CDC, for a population of 300 million. Clearly, our Government spares no expenses when it comes to protecting the lives of Singaporeans! With globalisation and climate change, we must expect more pandemics. Yet, over the years, the global healthcare supply chain has become overly lean for even crucial healthcare essentials. According to WHO, the widespread inappropriate use of face masks and protective suits globally by those not at the frontline caring for patients, further contributed to the unexpected shortage and price surge. Therefore, changing global circumstances require us to do an immediate review of our medical stockpile and resilience policy, both for basic drugs and medical disposables commonly used in pandemics. If necessary, we should anchor relevant manufacturers in Singapore on strategic and not purely economic considerations. And if that is not possible, we can explore prepositioning materials and manufacturing capabilities within Singapore. Next, developing our Singaporeans. We are making wonderful progress for our seniors to age with purpose and dignity. Our urgent task now is to strengthen the employability of mid-career Singaporeans, especially in a protracted downturn. Here are some suggestions. First, I hope mid-career Singaporeans will fully embrace the SkillsFuture NextCareer Package, now that they have an additional $1,000 credit. I also hope to see stronger publicity by all for SkillsFuture.”
“Four, MAS can consider accelerating the banking licensing process for new entrants, if they can bring different perspectives on credit-worthiness, for example, through supply chain and data analytics so that more viable firms can benefit. Five, some foreign workers are thinking of returning home. After the Little India riot, I saw firsthand how our frontbench went systematically to major dormitories to calm the ground. Our TACs, businesses, the Government and unions can consider doing something similar. Also, if there is an exodus of foreign workers from any particular country, perhaps MOM can consider temporarily expanding the countries our firms hire from. Lastly, some Singaporeans are wondering if there will be a second economic package. Could MOF share the likely criterion to determine if a second package is needed, and the considerations and determinations on the scale and scope of further actions? I also hope the TAC leaders, who are usually respected elders in their industry, play the difficult role to counsel owners, when their businesses are no longer viable and on how to move forward, so that they can seek social assistance early and move quickly to new opportunities, before their finances deteriorate beyond the point of no return. Next, I would like to speak on MOH's and the taskforce's exceptional response to the coronavirus. I recently ran into my family general practitioner of many years. Like many Singaporeans, he commended MOH for the excellent response so far. He shared that during SARS, we had limited medical resources. The Communicable Disease Centre (CDC) 1 was a pre-war building and CDC 2 was a converted ward. Today, we have an excellent system, with a state-of-the-art NCID at the heart of it.”
“One, for the next 12 months, MOF, MTI and MOM can have monthly meetings with the key TACs and unions. Key areas to track include bank lending levels by sector and company size, short-term grant utilisation and efforts to help affected workers. This allows for a dynamic response. For example, if companies withhold wage across the board, there could be less take-up on the Enhanced Wage Credit scheme. Could we then perhaps redeploy funds to other short-term measures so as to achieve the intended positive fiscal impulse? Two, some companies in badly affected sectors hope for more assistance in a prolonged downturn. Some ideas – the Inland Revenue Authority of Singapore (IRAS) can also consider implementing the Jobs Support Programme for them immediately. Some deeply impacted companies are asking for a short-term waiver of the Foreign Worker Levy. If we do so, our objective must be to protect the jobs of the Singaporeans in these companies. Also, during SARS, the Singapore Tourism Board prepared an excellent marketing campaign so that we were one of the first to pitch for tourism when travel resumed. Even as things look bleak for tourism today, we can do similar preparations. Three, our banks must live up to the social and moral responsibility to lend to viable companies, especially now that the Government has done its part to take on more default risk. Many banks are digitalising their relationship and risk management approach. In fact, many smaller SMEs told me that they no longer know who are the champions within their banks, which is critical during tough times. Our Singapore banks have a strong reputation of being responsible in supporting viable companies during tough times. Now is the time for them to earn that reputation for many more years to come.”