Lee Yock Suan
Singapore
“The position will be clear when the regulations have been drafted. Right now we are debating it in the absence of actual wording of the regulations. The regulations will be fair, they are meant to maintain a level playing field, and we should wait for the regulations before we pass judgement. The intention is not to go after everybody.”
“I think the Member will be aware that Internet is a very dangerous place. We can have all kinds of poison letters and they will just spread like wild fire. So we must have some means to try and minimise this and make sure that everything is orderly and fair.”
“The other Members have no problem supporting the Bill, including Mr Chiam. I think the position is about 95% clear. Question put, and agreed to. Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House. The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. - [Mr Lee Yock Suan].”
“Then we will have to see the actual situation. But, as I said, the intention is to go after the popular sites, the main sites of parties and non-party political sites. If it is an individual, eg, a young man posting up his own site and saying "These are my views", we are not going to go after those people.”
“The intention is to make the rules clear for the main parties involved in the contest, in other words, the party websites. These are the areas we are mainly after.”
“I thank Mr Chiam for reminding me about his question. On listening to his speech, I was under the impression that he was asking whether this ban on opinion polls applies to the mass media. The answer is yes, it applies to all media, not just the Internet but also newspapers, TV and so on. Thank you for pointing this out.”
The complete record
Every one of 1,595 lines we hold for Lee Yock Suan, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 15 of 32.
“These classes are meant to be a pilot project to test out my Ministry's new preparatory year programme which is used to upgrade the private kindergartens. The private sector has all along been providing kindergarten education in Singapore, like most other countries. We should help to upgrade these kindergartens and not replace them with a Government scheme. To do so would tantamount to one more year of schooling. It will be at high cost and may produce only marginal improvements in the overall performance of our students. My Ministry can better apply the limited resources to improve formal education in Singapore. Sir, we owe it to ourselves and future generations of Singaporeans to provide our young with the best education that we can achieve. Results will only be known many years later. By then what kind of world will we be living in and what knowledge, skills and talents will best serve us? To face an uncertain, competitive and rapidly changing world, we need people who are nimble, flexible and resourceful. We should have greater flexibility and variety in our education system and develop each child to his maximum potential. We must continue to emphasize our bilingual policy. English is our common working language and it provides vital links to the outside world. Our mother tongues are basic to maintain our cultural ballast, Asian values and identity. At the same time, in our eagerness to prepare future generations, we must not overload our students as human capacity is limited and there are trade-offs. To achieve quality education we must have not only a good system and facilities but, more importantly, good principals and teachers. The quality of school leadership is vital.”
“Guidelines will be drawn up to guide the schools which will be given discretion to utilise the grants to improve their educational facilities and services or to provide bursaries to needy students. Mr Speaker, Sir, these refinements to Edusave are within the scheme's objectives. The grants to all secondary non-independent schools serve to pool together part of the Edusave resources for the schools to apply flexibly to improve their programmes and facilities for the benefit of all their students. The school management are in the best position to know what the schools lack so that the funds can be applied most effectively. The scholarship schemes are intended to encourage students to excel and to reward effort. Not only top students going to independent schools but also good students in all other secondary schools, including neighbourhood schools, will have the opportunity to qualify for Edusave scholarships. Besides funding these schemes, Edusave contributions will also be made to students' Edusave accounts which can be used for approved education fees and enrichment programmes. These amounts will increase as the Edusave Fund builds up over the years. The Edusave Fund is separate from my Ministry's budget. Although the broad outline and objectives of Edusave were given, the public should not assume that Edusave is an entitlement and that the features were already locked in. At this gestation stage, improvements have been made. If necessary, further refinements will be made to the Edusave scheme in future for the benefit of our students. Next, I wish to clarify why the Government is likely to phase out pre-primary classes from schools within two years.”
“If we do not do this, we will run the risk of stagnating in mediocrity. I share Members' concern that schools in Singapore should remain affordable. No student should be prevented by financial circumstances from receiving the education he deserves. For the independent schools, there is already a financial assistance scheme for children from lower income families. Students with family incomes of $2000 per month or less can qualify for partial or full remission of the fees. In addition, an Edusave Scholarship Scheme will be introduced next year for the top 25% of students who enrol in the independent schools based on their PSLE results. The schools will reserve up to certain percentages of their places for these scholars who can choose whichever independent school they wish. Certain schools will therefore receive more scholars than others. The scholarship will cover the fees for the full four years in the school. It will be based purely on academic merit, regardless of family background. I have no objection if some rich scholars decide to give up their scholarships to poor students. Two more girl schools, Raffles Girls and Nanyang Girls, will go independent, bringing the total to four girl schools and four boy schools. Besides the independent schools, there will be other good secondary schools for parents to choose from. Edusave will also provide scholarships for top students of other secondary schools. Thus, good students in all secondary schools will be recognised and encouraged to do their best. Besides scholarships, Edusave will also make annual grants averaging $100,000 per school to all non-independent secondary schools.”
“It is hoped that under the new system they will be better able to receive training in the Institute of Technical Education to qualify for better jobs. Mr Speaker, Sir, there can be no doubt that the Government is investing heavily in education and that it is highly subsidised. School fees are only about $10 per month in all schools, except in the six independent schools where fees range from $70 to $200 per month. That the independent schools have found it necessary to charge such fees shows how expensive education can be when you start introducing innovations like smaller class sizes. Independent schools were introduced in 1988 as a way of improving the quality of education. Our centralised system has ensured uniform and satisfactory standards in all schools at a time of rapid expansion of school enrolment in the 60s and 70s. However, centralised control means putting constraints on what schools can do for their pupils. These constraints inhibit innovation and creativity and hold back the more able from realising their maximum potential. For these reasons, we have, over the years, devolved greater authority and responsibility to schools. Our Government and Government-aided schools now have more discretion in professional matters such as curricula and programmes. Principals have taken full advantage of this discretion to make teaching and learning more effective. To see what further educational innovation and improvements are possible, we allowed six schools to go independent. The objective is to achieve an overall improvement in the quality of education for all schools by allowing independent schools to try out new ideas and later on share their experiences with other secondary schools. This will in turn raise the quality of education in Singapore all round.”
“This is likely to increase as more students make it to secondary and tertiary education, as salaries rise and as we employ more highly qualified staff. The question is how to optimise our investment in education. We should invest where we can derive maximum returns whilst spreading the benefits to as many students as possible who can make the grade. We must develop our brightest and most talented students to the limits of their ability and potential as they will be our future leaders. They will be our cutting edge in a highly competitive world. At the same time, we must raise the educational level of all our students and educate each child to the limits of his potential. This way, we level up our student population. My Ministry has also been paying much attention to slow learners to help them along and reduce wastage. This has been the basis of the streaming policy which enables students to be taught according to their learning abilities. Slow learners are given more time to complete the course so that more students can pass. The result has been a significant reduction in the drop-out rate for primary schools from 11% in 1980 to 4% in 1990. The corresponding rate for secondary schools declined from 20% in 1980 to 5% in 1990. Allowing students to remain longer in school means higher cost. The cost will be further increased when the refined education system with streaming at Primary 4 is fully implemented. Students will no longer be screened out by the Primary School Leaving Examination (PSLE) but will be placed in secondary schools according to their abilities to receive at least 10 years of schooling. This will benefit mainly the 13% of the students who did not proceed to secondary school under the previous system.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, many Members have spoken on education which is a key topic in the President's Address. I wish to thank them for their views and suggestions. I also welcome this opportunity to join in the debate. As the new Minister for Education I hope to build and improve on the strong foundation which has been so well and ably established by Dr Tony Tan, Dr Goh Keng Swee and other previous Ministers for Education. What is our education philosophy and objective over the next 10 years? It must be to further improve the quality of our education, to strive for excellence in education. This means educating each child, not only the bright child but also the average child and the not so bright, to his maximum potential, taking into account his abilities and interests. It goes beyond academic achievement to include social, cultural, moral and physical development. It means developing well-rounded, upright and useful citizens who can think critically and creatively and apply their varied talents and skills for the benefit of our society. A school is not only a place for academic learning. It is also a place for children to interact with others and develop healthy habits and attitudes, such as tolerance and understanding and appreciation of each other's cultures. We must strive to make schooling a rewarding, enriching and enjoyable experience for our students. To achieve our goals, we must invest heavily in our people. To quote from the book The Next Lap: 'Education will receive the highest emphasis as it is resourcefulness, not resources, that will increasingly determine winners and losers in the future.' We are already investing about 4% of our GDP on education each year.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, if work permit holders are allowed to hold two jobs, the main advantage is apparently to derive more work from the pool of foreign workers. The disadvantages are: Firstly, the cost of employing the foreign workers concerned will be reduced, with adverse implications on local wages and the pressure on the employers to reduce their dependence on foreign workers. Secondly, there will be problems of accountability for the foreign worker and collection of levy from both employers. Thirdly, the workers' health, safety consciousness and job performance will be affected by his eagerness to work longer hours. Under the Employment Act, workers are limited to a certain amount of overtime work per month beyond which my Ministry's approval is required. On balance, I am not in favour of allowing work permit holders to hold two jobssimultaneously. As it is, many foreign workers are already working overtime and on shift work. SPORTS COMPLEX AND PUBLIC SWIMMING POOL IN BRADDELL HEIGHTS CONSTITUENCY (Completion Date) 12. Mr Goh Choon Kang asked the Minister for Community Development when the construction of the sports complex and public swimming pool in Braddell Heights Constituency will be completed.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the total amount of foreign workers levy collected in each of the years 1987 to 1990 and for the first four months of 1991 were as follows: 1987 : $140 million 1988 : $220 million 1989 : $400 million 1990 : $640 million 1991 (Jan-Apr) : About $240 million. WORK PERMIT HOLDERS (Permission to hold two jobs) The following Question stood in the name of Mrs Yu-Foo Yee Shoon - 11. To ask the Minister for Labour whether his Ministry will allow foreign workers on work permits to hold two jobs.”
“Sir, I am responding in my capacity as the Deputy Chairman of the People's Association. 1.15 pm There are 75 modern community centres in Singapore. The vast majority were built in the 80s. In other words, they are 10 years old or newer. The majority are still relatively new and I think adequate for their purpose although, as the Member has said, expectations are rising. I think it may not be so important to make the buildings aesthetically attractive so long as there are good activities which will attract residents to come and take part. As I have mentioned last year, the key factors really are what activities should go on in the community centres and who are the people who are attracted to come and organise activities for like-minded participants. That is one area where I feel we should all put in further efforts to make the community centres focal points of activities within the regions where they are located. Some of the centres which were built in the 1970s do not have the finishes and equipment normally found in modern community centres. I therefore agree that some may need to be renovated and furnished to bring them up to date. So the questions are: to what extent should we do it and who should bear the cost? My officers in the PA are studying this issue and discussing with the Ministry of Finance. For the construction and expansion of modern community centres, the formula for cost sharing is set and already familiar to Members. There is no change. For major repairs and renovations of old community centres, a cost-sharing formula has to be settled with the Ministry of Finance.”
“I agree that community centres should organise more multi-cultural shows. It is up to the advisors and management committees how they wish to promote and coordinate such activities.”
“Sir, I am obliged to reply because community centres have been mentioned. As you know, I am the Deputy Chairman of the People's Association (PA), and so long as the Prime Minister delegates to me the responsibility for the PA, you will continue seeing me here during the debate on the Ministry of Community Development's vote. I share Dr Lau's view that more multi-cultural shows should be staged for multi-racial audiences. In fact, this is what the People's Association has been doing since its establishment 30 years ago. One of the PA's objectives is to promote racial harmony and social cohesion. The best approach is to promote harmony within the diversity of our race, language and culture. We can do this by promoting a sense of togetherness, an appreciation of our diverse cultures and not through the "melting pot" approach. We recognise that each racial group wants to form its own cultural unit to preserve and develop its own culture and traditions. At the same time, the various groups should recognise that they are all part of Singapore's multi-cultural heritage. The PA's performances are therefore usually a mix of various cultural items to project and promote Singapore's multi-racial and multi-cultural character. For example, the Chingay and the PA show time are all multi-racial in nature. Indeed, Singaporeans are fortunate to be able to enjoy the wide variety and richness of our respective cultures. Understandably, during festivals, such as the Lunar New Year, Hari Raya Puasa and Deepavali, the shows and audiences are predominantly from one ethnic group. However, even for such events we could encourage more multi-racial participation. This will certainly help to promote cross-cultural appreciation and harmony.”
“Being more impressionistic, young workers could be easily misled by slogan-shouting leaders into supporting undesirable objectives and activities that may not be in their interests nor that of the nation. However, the character of our trade union movement has changed and our union leaders are committed to the preservation of harmonious labour-management relations. I therefore agree with the Member that we should now review this provision and I will ask my officers to look into it. Lowering the age limit will enable more young workers to benefit from union membership.”
“One way is, of course, for them to become Members of Parliament and then through working with the unions and getting their acceptance by the rank and file, to eventually be the trade union leaders, as we find them here today. The other way is to have better leaders coming up through the rank and file. Judging from the experience of house unions, I think the fear of employers that allowing, say, some supervisors or junior executives to join unions would lead to conflict of interest may not be founded in some cases. So there could perhaps be some room for flexibility for first-line supervisors and maybe even junior executives to join the same union as the rank and file workers if they wish to, and if the employers are agreeable. I am not so sure that there is a need to amend the law here, if we are more pragmatic in how we look at section 16(3), as we have done for house unions. Maybe we can all study the problem and try and decide on certain guidelines before we decide whether we should amend the law. As I said, I am in favour of giving the unions better leadership. And if you exclude all the supervisors and foremen, and so on, then what you are left with will be just the lower level workers. But whether it is necessary to change the law, that is something we have to study further. I understand that both the NTUC and the Singapore National Employers Federation (SNEF) are currently discussing this problem, and my Ministry is happy to assist and come out with some guidelines. On the point of eligibility age for union membership raised by Mr Goh Chee Wee, the minimum age for union membership in the Trade Unions Act, section 28, was set at 18 years in the early years when left-wing organisations were using unions for their united front activities.”
“Sir, the labour MPs who have spoken have all asked that the Government should amend the legislation to allow the executives to join the same union as rank and file workers. This issue has received wide coverage in the papers. I think there are a number of reasons for this call. One reason is that some employers have given executive titles to workers when they are not really performing the roles of executives or managers. These are so-called "bogus" executive titles. Another reason is that the unions need able and qualified leaders. I would first like to address the issue of "bogus" executive titles. I think there is no need to change the law to deal with this problem. My Ministry can help to conciliate and decide whether certain groups should be allowed to join unions or not, depending on their job responsibilities, not just the title alone. If that is not enough, both the employer and the union can refer the issue to the Industrial Arbitration Court under section 16(4) of the Industrial Relations Act to obtain a determination from the court. The court in its deliberation has to take into consideration not only the title but also the nature of the job, and whether allowing these so-called executives to join unions would lead to conflict of interest. The other issue of union leadership is, to my mind, a more fundamental and basic one. The question is whether we should allow employees with supervisory or junior executive functions to join unions to help provide leadership and better links with management. I share the view that the unions do require good and capable leaders.”
“During the debate on the budget policy, some Members asked why it is necessary to have both a dependency ceiling as well as the foreign worker levy. The levy is intended to raise the cost of employing a foreign worker to at least that of an equivalent local worker. Otherwise, employers will find it more profitable to employ foreign workers and local wages will be depressed. The ready availability of low-cost foreign labour will also retard the upgrading of our economy. On the other hand, we would like to attract skilled foreign workers. Those who are qualified or skilled are given 3-year work permits and placed on the CPF scheme where no levy is payable. For skilled construction workers, the levy has also been set at a lower rate. The dependency ceiling is necessary, on the other hand, because we need to prevent employers from becoming overly dependent on foreign workers. Beyond a certain limit, it is doubtful whether such operations should continue to be carried out in Singapore and even to expand, based on more and more imported workers. Mr Lim Boon Heng: Sir, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. 1.30 pm”
“Whilst we can refine our control mechanisms, we must be mindful that there has to be a limit to the number of foreign workers we can admit. As a small country, we are faced with resource constraints, especially land and labour. Through selective immigration, we can top up our population to a certain extent. However, our long-term sustainable growth rate domestically is 4-6% per annum. If we try and expand more than that within Singapore itself, the result has to be overheating of the economy. The only way forward is to upgrade and restructure our economy and to carry out the lower value-added and more labour- intensive operations overseas. I agree fully with Mr Lim Boon Heng and Encik Othman that we should be very careful in controlling the number of work permits. If we are too liberal, then the result would be to depress our local wages. And also in the long term, we will be incurring a lot of social costs as seen from experience of the more developed countries like Germany. Mr Lau Ping Sum touched on the problems of small local employers. I wish to clarify that my Ministry has in fact been more accommodating in processing work permit applications from small local businesses, such as hair-dressing salons and motor repair shops. Although the dependency ceiling is 20% for such service employers, we have allowed very small operators with fewer than five workers to exceed the 20% limit. One problem with many of these small employers is that they do not pay CPF for their local workers. So we are therefore unable to verify whether they have in fact so many local workers as they claim. If they want to have foreign workers, they should pay CPF for their local workers and show us that they in fact have so many workers and then we can accommodate their request.”
“But beyond that, as business fluctuates, then perhaps they can bid for the workers. Or alternatively, they can buy the certificates from a secondary market. I think it would be necessary to make the certificates transferable. For example, the employer may find suddenly that he does not need so many workers any more. So he should be able to transfer the certificate to another employer. Or in another situation, the employee may have resigned, in which case the employer either gets a refund or he sells the certificate to somebody else. I would like to take this opportunity to comment on some of the suggestions from Mr Chew Heng Ching and other Members on this issue. I agree with Mr Chew that the work permit control should be kept as simple as possible, both to understand and to administer. However, a multi-tier system which he proposed will make the system even more complicated, because it is extremely difficult to monitor and keep up with the changes in the dependency levels as the workforce changes. So if we have a multi-tier system, it is going to be almost impossible to administer. I would also like to avoid a system where different individual workers in the same firm or industry are subject to different levies depending on when they are employed. It is better that all foreign workers in the same industry be subject to the same prevailing levies. But for additional permits above the first tier, a lump-sum premium is payable front end. If we allow the levy to be fixed for the duration of the 2-year permit, the employer is shielded from levy adjustments which the market may require. It would then mean that larger adjustments of the levy will be necessary for new work permits. Our labour shortage problem will not go away.”
“As mentioned by Mr Lim, I think this system will have the same problem of inflexibility as in the present system that we are having today. The Government will have to guess at what the second level of levies should be. Again, it will be difficult to adjust this level frequently as the market changes. In addition, if you have this two-levy system both at flat rates, what will happen is that there will be more companies, which are already very dependent, getting even more dependent and you cannot really control the numbers in that way. So if you want to try and cap the numbers at some acceptable level, then the best way would be to do it by a tender system, similar to what has been done for motor cars. The car tendering system has proven to be effective, even though there were some initial reservations and unhappiness amongst the public. Members are aware that during the Gulf crisis, the premiums had really come down to a rock bottom level. I think this reflects the market situation. When the market is high, people are willing to pay more. For example, in a tight labour market, if there are more people who think they can make money by having more foreign workers and are willing to pay, then the levy will go up. Conversely, if the market is depressed, then the premiums will come down and correspondingly even the base levy may have to be adjusted. If you have this kind of system of a flat levy up to a certain level and beyond that you tender, what happens is that for employers who need fewer foreign workers, say, below the 35% level, they are assured of a stable core of workers. I think this is very important because they have to plan their production and so on. So we must make sure that the employers have a certain workforce which they can depend upon.”
“Sir, my Ministry and the Ministry of Trade and Industry are studying how to adjust the work permit control mechanisms to make them more effective, flexible and market related. The overall policy, however, remains the same, ie, to have a revolving pool of foreign workers within carefully controlled limits bearing in mind their long-term economic and social costs. The study will take into consideration the different factors and the different sources of workers. I am not sure whether we will be able to differentiate by size, maybe to some extent, because it is not always true that the small employers will be outbidded by the big employers. If the small employers are catering only for the domestic captive market and are not faced with international competition, it may turn out that they are better able to afford a higher premium for the one or two workers that they need. Anyway, we will study this. As mentioned, for example, for the manufacturing sector, one refinement is to have a lower dependency ceiling of, say, 35% instead of the present 40%. So below this 35% ceiling, the levy will be a flat levy set by the Government. If employers need to exceed this limit, they may have to tender for a certificate to hire more foreign workers. The successful bidders will have to pay a front-end premium for a 2-year certificate in addition to the set levy which is payable monthly. The certificate will entitle the holder to the additional work permit. It will not be tied to the foreign worker who may resign or change jobs. So it is a certificate for a permit. It is not a certificate for a worker. It has been suggested that the premium for the additional workers can perhaps be set by the Government as well.”
“As there is still some time left until the end of this year, I would like to call on all employers not to delay any further. Everybody is agreed that there is a need to raise the retirement age in view of our labour shortage, and in view of the good health of our workers. So there is no reason to delay any further. A problem with the voluntary approach is that many Singaporeans are employed in small firms without union representation. There are no collective agreements and sometimes not even written contracts of employment. So if we do not legislate, how do we ensure that these Singaporean workers also enjoy the benefit of a higher retirement age of 60? Do we not need a labour standard on retirement age which allows for exemption only in very special cases? My Ministry is studying this matter.”
“Sir, I wish to thank the Members for raising this issue as it gives me the opportunity to make a status report on the progress made so far and also to clarify my thinking on this matter. I am happy to report that substantial progress has been made in the unionised sector. Thanks to the understanding of the employers and the help of the trade unions which have been pressing for the raising of the retirement age. In 1990, out of 362 collective agreements signed, 65% of them stipulated retirement age at 60 years or beyond, and another 10% at between ages 55 to 59, making a total of 75%. In the first two months of this year, the figures were 66% and 14% respectively, making a total of 80%. I am, however, disappointed with the response of the non-unionised sector. Even among the larger companies in this sector, only about one quarter has a retirement age of 60. When the President opened the Parliamentary Session in January 1988, he mentioned a three-year time frame during which we hope the employers will voluntarily raise the retirement age. So this three-year time frame is coming to a close very soon, by the end of this year. Therefore, my Ministry is closely monitoring the situation and by the end of this year, we will have to make up our minds whether we should in fact go forward and legislate. The preferred approach is not to legislate because it would tend to be rather inflexible. However, I am not optimistic that most employers in the non-unionised sector will voluntarily raise their retirement age. I do not know the reasons, but maybe they are just dragging their feet, or there could be other reasons. I have, therefore, instructed my officers to study the possible forms of legislation taking into account the experience of other countries.”
“Sir, I agree with Encik Othman bin Haron Eusofe that management should be more willing to share information with their workers. This will help to build up mutual trust and confidence between management and workers, leading to industrial harmony and higher productivity. As we know, many companies now have flexible wage systems which reward workers according to company and individual performance. To a certain extent, therefore, the workers are now co-owners of the company, as it were. They can be better motivated if they are kept informed about their company's performance so that they can better contribute to its success. At the same time, however, our workers and unions should also demonstrate to the employers their maturity and prudence in handling information given to them. In certain situations, for example, when there is going to be a retrenchment forthcoming, I think it is understandable that the management will be very careful about releasing information prematurely. But I think to avoid speculation and loss of productivity, as soon as plans are firmed up, they should let the workers know early, so that they can make their own arrangements. Encik Othman also suggested that the Ministry should organise more forums where all three parties can exchange views. I think this is something we can consider.”
“Sir, in a competitive world, we understand that managements have to re-organise or restructure their companies or part of their operations. However, if this is done without keeping the unions and employees informed, they are kept in the dark about the company's intentions and this creates unnecessary fears. It affects the morale of the workers. They lose confidence and trust in the management. Productivity is also affected. We understand that there may be reasons to keep certain information of the company's plans and strategies confidential for fear that they may get into the wrong hands, or into the competitor's hands. Sir, however, if there is general understanding between management and labour, that unions and employees will be kept adequately informed whenever appropriate or whenever possible, I think this will be an assurance that their welfare will be adequately safeguarded. Sir, I believe that the Ministry of Labour can perhaps play a vital role here. One way is to organise regular meetings between labour and management groups to discuss issues, which can have a negative impact on labour-management cooperation. In this way, we can always look at these issues, how to tackle them positively, and how we can help strengthen labour-management cooperation. I hope that the Minister could comment on this.”
“Sir, I think most Members here are already quite clear from what I said yesterday about the workers earning below $400 and $600. I mentioned that the figures include National Servicemen, students, and so forth. But if the Member wants to have further figures, I will ask my officers to see whether they can put up some data for him. Encik Othman bin Haron Eusofe (Marine Parade GRC): Sir, it is well known that we now enjoy excellent labour-management cooperation. Our union leadership is responsible and constructive and takes the lead to promote good labour-management relations. However, Sir, we cannot take our industrial peace and harmony for granted. Management and labour must continue to work together to enhance our excellent labour-management cooperation. We must work together to identify the issues which can adversely affect labour-management cooperation. Sir, I would like to deal with one issue which can have an impact on labour-management cooperation, that is, the need to have better information sharing between labour and management. I do not need to stress that information sharing helps promote trust and confidence between employers and unions. Our management must be ready to take the unions and their leaders into their confidence and provide information of their company's performance and prospects, especially during collective bargaining. I think in bad times management is alwaya prepared to show the books, but during good times this may not always be the case. And sometimes management makes unilateral announcement on schemes which affect the welfare and interest of workers without keeping the unions adequately informed. This makes our union leaders unhappy because it undermines their credibility.”
“My officers will consult the unions and employer organisations to try and establish mutually acceptable guidelines which should be flexible enough to deal with various situations. Whatever we do, Sir, we must maintain flexibility to restructure and respond to changing needs and economic circumstances. Singaporean workers have always understood and accepted this, for example, the need to automate. At the same time, their difficulties and needs must be recognised. Whilst studying legislation from other countries, we must of course not copy them blindly, lest we get locked into inflexible and self-defeating legislation. Hence, flexible guidelines will be useful as a start to resolve disputes which may arise with the restructuring of various organisations.”
“Sir, may I next turn to Mr Lim Boon Heng's points. I agree with him that this is indeed a complex issue and that guidelines will be useful to guide the affected parties in such situations. In Singapore, the accepted practice is for employees to be paid retrenchment benefits when they are made redundant as a result of poor business or reorganisation of the company. Such cases may involve the sale of part of a company's assets with consequent reduction in staffing levels. Yesterday, we also discussed the case of liquidation which is a terminal case. Another situation is when the shares of a company are sold to other shareholders without any change in the company's business and employment. The workers continue to be employed by the company and their jobs are not affected. Therefore, no retrenchment benefit is payable. In fact, this happens every day. When shares are transacted on the stock market, the ownership may be changing but nobody is asking for retrenchment benefits. Other cases may involve more complicated situations of restructuring, as mentioned by Mr Lim Boon Heng. It is not clear whether retrenchment benefits or any other forms of compensation should be paid to the affected employees in such situations. I therefore agree with the Member that it will be useful to draw up some guidelines to assess such situations. Some factors we could consider are: firstly, are the employees' jobs affected? Secondly, is seniority and length of service recognised? Thirdly, does the employee suffer any hardship or inconvenience resulting from the restructuring? Fourthly, which entities are involved and are they related? My officers are studying this matter and will welcome views and suggestions, and we will be happy to work closely with the GPC for Labour on this matter.”
“Sir, before I respond to Mr Lim Boon Heng concerning the restructuring of companies, may I just take a few minutes to clarify what I said yesterday. We were discussing Mr Goh Chee Wee's figures and this gave rise to the report in the Straits Times today - "MP's figures inaccurate: Labour Minister". Maybe it was the way I put it, but I just want to clarify that I did not say that Mr Goh Chee Wee's figures were inaccurate. I did say that the figure for workers earning below $400 per month does not reflect the salary situation in Singapore. However, concerning the figure for workers earning below $600 per month, after adjusting for foreign workers, part-timers, students, new workers, and so forth, there is indeed a number of other Singaporeans whose salaries are below $600 per month. Many of them are older, unskilled workers. Incidentally, the salaries reported do not include employers' CPF contributions. Having made this clarification, Sir, may I just elaborate a little on why these older, unskilled workers earn salaries which appear low by Singapore standards. Their salaries are the values placed on their jobs by the market, that is, by supply and demand. As there are many workers, including foreign workers, with such low level skills, the market is only prepared to pay them so much. On the other hand, if our workers are able to upgrade themselves and acquire skills which are more in demand, then their salaries will improve. Ours is an open economy where wages are set by the market and by international competition. Investors come here because we have skilled and productive workers at competitive salaries. We cannot arbitrarily set salary levels. Even in closed economies, attempts to set minimum wages have given rise to unemployment.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to report that the Committee of Supply has made further progress on the Main and Development Estimates for the financial year 1991/92, and ask leave to sit again tomorrow.”
“Sir, I was not trying to say that Singaporean workers should be paid low wages. In fact, I am one of those who strongly advocate that the purpose of economic development is to have a stronger economy and higher wages for our workers. In fact, as Mrs Yu-Foo Yee Shoon has mentioned the other day, quoting some figures, our wage rates in Singapore are comparable but slightly lower than the wages in Hong Kong, South Korea and Taiwan. That was as of 1989. But if you look at our wages compared to, say, the Philippines, Indonesia, or even Malaysia, we are much better off. These are competitors very close on our heels. For example, there have been cases of Filipino maids here who are able to use their salaries to maintain their families and also to employ maids on their own in the Philippines.”
“So the starting pay of about $500 per month is reflected in this figure. It is probably true that in our Singapore situation, there is still a number of older unskilled workers who are drawing lower pay. Having clarified all these, I just want to say that I agree basically with Mr Goh Chee Wee that if the work permit policies are too liberal, the result could be to depress local wages. On the other hand, if we do not allow new projects to hire foreign workers, the investments may not come to Singapore. Therefore, we have to allow some foreign workers to come in, but regulate the foreign worker population carefully to avoid the long-term social and economic costs. I hope my clarification has laid to rest this issue of low paid Singaporean workers.”
“These were mostly Singaporeans, about 76% of them, but the figure of 156,000 includes some foreign workers, for example, foreign maids who, as you know, are usually paid less than $400 per month. Of the 120,000 Singaporeans remaining, about half or 60,000 were part-timers and national servicemen. So you are left with about 60,000 workers. As it was a June school vacation, there were also many students working full-time, as well as part-time. Older workers above age 45 formed 20% of the total, about 30,000 workers. Some were unskilled and earning low pay, for example cleaners in HDB estates. Some respondents may have also under-declared their income. So for this group of workers earning less than $400, there could be a small number who are older workers, as I said, for example, the HDB cleaners. But in general this does not represent the salary situation in Singapore. If you look next at the figure of 427,000 persons earning less than $600 per month, about 360,000 were Singaporeans. Of these Singaporeans, about 70,000 were part-timers and national servicemen. Another 84,000 workers were workers above the age of 45. So again you have the problem of some older workers. There were also 160,000 workers who were below the age of 25. If you exclude the national servicemen and student part-timers, the majority of this group of 160,000 workers were probably young production or service workers who had started work recently. The starting pay of $600 or less per month is lower than in the other NIEs and the developed countries but higher than in the other ASEAN countries. Therefore, if you look at the figure of workers earning less than $600 per month, and you exclude the part-timers and the national servicemen, there is a big group who are new workers.”
“It is also a form of recognition for their past services. These reasons continue to be valid when workers are thrown out of their jobs by a company under liquidation. It does seem unfair if employees who are held back to help turn around an ailing company end up getting no compensation whereas their colleagues who were retrenched earlier had received their benefits. As mentioned by Mr Lim, the workers who were held back tend to be the more productive ones. In fact, the Government has been telling companies that if they are to retrench, they should retrench the less productive workers first. In the case of Vosper (Pte) Ltd, as you have heard, the company had sufficient funds to settle all outstanding claims, including retrenchment benefits. I am, therefore, inclined to recommend that the law be amended to clarify that retrenchment benefits are payable by a company under liquidation. It has taken my Ministry some time to study this issue. It is quite complex because we are looking at the whole issue in toto. But I expect that this particular issue of benefits upon liquidation should be resolved fairly soon. I would like to turn next to the points made by Mr Goh Chee Wee to clarify what he said the other day. Just to correct one small error in his presentation. He mentioned that in Table 4, the total number of Singaporeans who earned less than $600 per month in 1989 was 52.4%. Just a small correction there. I think it should be 42.4%. An hon. Member: No, 31.9%. Mr Lee Yock Suan: 31.9%, is it? Yes, I am sorry. He mentioned the figure of more than half or something. Anyway, the point is this. First, concerning the 12% of the workforce or 156,000 persons earning less than $400 per month in 1989, I looked at the statistics in more detail.”
“Sir, I would like to first respond to the issue of retrenchment benefits upon liquidation of companies. My Ministry has been reviewing the issue of retrenchment benefits in toto and the circumstances under which such benefits are payable. As mentioned by Mr Lim Boon Heng, an important question is whether retrenchment benefits should be paid to employees when they lose their jobs as a result of the employer winding up his business voluntarily or otherwise. Until the case of Vosper (Pte) Ltd versus the Shipbuilding and Marine Engineering Employees Union (SMEEU), it was commonly accepted that retrenchment benefits were payable by a company under liquidation. Many collective agreements which provide for the payment of retrenchment benefits assume that such benefits are payable in situations of liquidation. In Vosper's case, the High Court rejected SMEEU's claim on the following grounds: Retrenchment benefit is only payable by a company when it is still in existence. Where a company is still carrying on business and because the company finds that it is overstaffed or where there is reorganisation, some employees are dismissed, in which case they will be entitled to retrenchment benefits on account of redundancy. It follows that if a company is under winding up, its existence comes to an end and no reorganisation or redundancy can take place after a winding-up order is made. Therefore, there can be no retrenchment benefit in the case of a company forced into liquidation. The court had no power to force the liquidator to negotiate with the union on the payment of retrenchment benefit. Sir, retrenchment benefits are paid to redundant employees to help them tide over their difficulties arising from the loss of their jobs through no fault of their own.”
“But if the town councillors have done their best to make sure that the sub-contractors are forewarned, checks have been carried out, and we are convinced that the sub-contractors are the ones actually responsible, then they are the ones who will be charged, not the town councillors. On the other hand, if it is found that some agents of the town councils, for example, have been abetting this offence or have been negligent in checking on this area, then I am afraid the full force of the law must fall on these people. Mr Charles Chong asked about clause 9, which applies in a situation where the Government has to cancel work permits, for example, maybe because of a change in policy, or because the work permit conditions have not been followed. Under those circumstances, it is not possible for the matter to be represented by the unions. It is the prerogative of the Government to decide that the work permit should be cancelled for various following reasons, and there will be no recourse to the courts or to the unions. However, if the employer is at fault, if he sacks the worker for no reason and cancels his work permit, then the normal recourse will apply. The employee can appeal to the union, and the union can take it up with my Ministry, or with me personally. We will look into those cases and, if the employer is at fault, we will allow the foreign worker to continue working, perhaps with another company. Sir, I think I have covered all the points raised by Members. Question put, and agreed to. Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House. The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. - [Mr Lee Yock Suan]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed.”
“We have also this similar clause in other Acts, like the Betting Act, the Common Gaming Houses Act and the Arms Offences Act. We will be very careful in the way we implement this clause because we realise that when you presume, then you must have proper evidence. I want to assure the House, as well as members of the public, that my Ministry will consider all the evidence first. The problem is that, without this presumption clause, it is almost impossible for my Ministry's officers to work because it is very simple for the employer and the worker to deny employment and then all our efforts would have been wasted. In many cases, it is obvious that the workers are there to work. They may even be wearing the uniform of the company. So the evidence must be there. They must be in possession of tools, they must be caught working, and we will be examining all the circumstances before we take action to make sure that we do not punish innocent people. Having said that, I think it is the responsibility of employers, big or small, to have proper checks on the people going into their premises. For example, most factories have security guards and I would like to see them checking the workers or visitors who go in to make sure they have a proper purpose to go into the factory. And if they are foreign workers, they should have proper immigration papers and valid work permits. It is not enough just to say, "Look, I told my sub-contractor not to hire foreign workers." That is too simple. Then obviously they have a very useful shelter. What we want is for the employers to be responsible and to do what they can within the limits of practicality and within the resource constraints. For example, in the case of Town Councils, I know Members are worried about this.”
“Firstly, we have to be clear that there must be a control on the total number of foreign workers we allow into Singapore in view of the long-term social and economic costs. For one thing, if you are too liberal, then they will depress the wages of our local workers and there will be no incentive for employers to upgrade and automate and so on. So the whole economy has to adjust, not only the Government in relaxing the policy but also the employers, in terms of upgrading, changing the line of business, or, in the extreme, maybe even moving to Batam or Johor to take advantage of the growth triangle concept that we are now promoting. For the small employers, it is obviously not possible to satisfy everybody. One record shows that there are about 53,000 small employers with less than 10 workers each. If we allow each of them two foreign workers, we will already be having 100,000 additional foreign workers. Therefore, we have to be clear about our objectives and strike a balance between the entry of foreign workers and the need to upgrade the economy and protect our local workers as well. I would, therefore, urge all employers to upgrade their operations and reduce their manpower requirements. They should, for example, consider tapping the pool of older Singaporeans, raise their retirement age and also make use of the pool of housewives - there are several hundred thousands of - on a part-time basis. My Ministry has been promoting this but the response has been quite slow so far. There is certainly a lot of scope in this area for an increase in local employment. Next, I turn to this question of the presumption clause. This presumption clause is actually not new. It is similar to the one in the Immigration Act.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I wish to thank both Members for supporting the Bill. Firstly, I would like to clarify one point and it is that today we are dealing with the problem of illegal employment. Sometime ago, last year, we were dealing with the problem of immigration offenders for whom the penalties are tougher. For today, we are looking at the offence of illegal employment of people who usually have valid immigration papers. And for this group of foreign workers who work here illegally, the penalties under this Bill have, in fact, not been changed. We are really going after the employers who, we think, are the main culprits. I am aware that the labour market is tight and that some small businesses in Singapore are having difficulties in recruiting local workers. That is the reason why the Government has reviewed the work permit policy and decided, in March this year, to gradually liberalise the policy to allow these sectors, which hitherto were not allowed to employ foreign workers to also have some access to foreign workers. However, we have to be careful not to open the floodgates and allow a great influx of foreign workers. Therefore, my Ministry has been very careful in initially having a 10% limit on the dependency rate of these firms. Strictly speaking, if a small firm employs less than 10 local workers, then it is not entitled to any foreign worker. But, in practice, my Ministry has allowed even smaller firms to employ foreign workers. For example, if a company has only, say, four local workers and is allowed to employ one foreign worker, then the dependency ratio is actually 20%. We are monitoring the situation and, if need be, we will gradually liberalise further. But the fact that the market is tight is no reason for anybody to blatantly violate our laws.”
“If they collude in the illegal employment of foreign workers, they could be charged for abetment and it will not be sufficient for the firms merely to show that they have instructed their subcontractors not to employ foreign workers illegally. Other Penalties and Compositional Fine The penalties for other offences will also be raised. Clause 11(4) stipulates that for late payment of the levy, the penalty interest remains unchanged at 2% per month but the cumulative penalty is increased from a maximum of 20% to 30% of the levy outstanding. Clause 18(1) seeks to raise the fine for certain general offences from $1,000 to $5,000. The maximum amount of compositional fine that may be imposed will also be raised from $100 to $1,000. Powers of Employment Inspectors Currently, my Ministry's enforcement officers have been hampered by the inadequate powers under the existing Act. Foreigners suspected of working illegally often refuse to hand over documents such as identity cards or passports to the enforcement officers. Clause 16 of the Bill will enable enforcement officers to enter and search premises suspected of having illegal foreign workers and to retain any documents, including travel and identity documents. Clause 17, which is modelled on a similar provision in the Immigration Act, will confer the power of arrest on the enforcement officers. Sir, I beg to move. Question proposed.”
“The officer could be the director, manager, secretary or any other officer acting in a similar capacity. An employer will be charged for each illegal worker employed. He could therefore be convicted at the same trial of several charges for the illegal employment of several foreign workers. To protect a first offender from the mandatory jail sentence provided for second and subsequent offences, clause 5(8) of the Bill provides that all convictions at one trial will be considered as one conviction. Our enforcement target is the employer since the foreign worker will not be able to work here if no employer offers to hire him. The penalty for a foreign worker convicted of working illegally will therefore remain unchanged. Presumption Clause Under the current Act, proof of illegal employment rests with the enforcement officers. Their efforts are often frustrated by the employer and the illegal worker colluding to deny employment. The Act therefore has to be amended to put the burden of proof on the employers through a presumption clause. Clause 6 is similar to that in the Immigration Act. It will put the onus of proof on an occupier who will be presumed to have employed a foreign worker found working in his premises until he proves the contrary. To safeguard innocent occupiers, clause 22 enables them to absolve themselves from liability by helping to bring in the actual offender as a party to the Court proceedings. Abetment From my Ministry's experience, some firms do not employ illegal workers directly but engage subcontractors who resort to illegal workers. It is important that firms take sufficient precautions to ensure that foreign workers are not employed illegally in their premises.”
“Penalty for Illegal Employment Clause 5 deals with the offence of illegal employment and its penalties. An employer is considered to have employed a foreign worker illegally if the foreign worker is found working in his premises without a valid work permit. The penalty for illegal employment under the existing Act is a maximum fine of $5,000 or imprisonment of up to one year or both. This applies to both the employer and the employee. The penalty is inadequate to deter employers from engaging in illegal employment. The fines imposed by the courts range from $800 to $2,500 per illegal worker. The average is about $1,200 per worker. Based on the existing levy of $300 per month, a dishonest employer is able to gain from illegal employment if he escapes detection for four months or longer. The Government has therefore decided to raise the penalty for illegal employment such that any economic gains will be more than offset once the dishonest employer is caught. The penalty for an employer convicted for the first time will be revised to a minimum fine equivalent to two years of the foreign worker levy and a maximum fine equivalent to four years' levy, or imprisonment up to one year or both. Based on the current levy rate of $300 per month, the minimum and maximum fines will be $7,200 and $14,400 respectively. For the second and subsequent convictions, the penalty will be a mandatory jail sentence of one to 12 months in addition to the stipulated fines. For corporate offenders, clause 5(6) of the Bill provides that where the illegal employment is committed by a company with the consent or connivance of, or is attributable to any neglect on the part of an officer of the company, both the officer as well as the company will be guilty of the offence.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." In recent years, a buoyant economy and the slow growth of our local labour force have resulted in a tight labour market and an increasing demand for foreign workers. To ease the labour market, the Government has since March this year gradually liberalised the foreign worker policy for those sectors which hitherto were not allowed to employ foreign workers. At the same time, to encourage upgrading of the economy and minimise the social and economic costs of a large foreign workforce, the Government must continue to regulate the inflow of foreign workers through the foreign worker levy and other measures. To circumvent these controls, some employers have resorted to employing foreign workers illegally without work permits. With the enhancement of penalties under the Immigration Act, the illegal workers are now mostly foreigners with valid social visit passes but no work permits. Some have valid work permits but are deployed illegally to other sectors or companies. Such illegal employment has to be checked as it undermines our economic strategy. The Employment of Foreign Workers Bill seeks to repeal and re-enact with amendments the Regulation of Employment Act, which is the current legislation for regulating the employment of foreign workers. The Bill provides enhanced penalties and powers to enable the Ministry to deal more effectively with the problem of illegal foreign workers. I will now highlight the significant provisions of the Bill. Definition of Foreign Workers Clause 2 includes the definition of a foreign worker. The Bill will apply to any non-citizen of Singapore who works for a monthly salary of $1,500 per month and below or any other non-citizen whom the Minister may specify.”
“Question put, and agreed to. Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House. The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. - [Mr Lee Yock Suan]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. EMPLOYMENT OF FOREIGN WORKERS BILL Order for Second Reading read.”
“They will be allowed to apply the cap of $100,000 on total wages. Some changes in the CPF collection procedures have to be made to implement the cap. Previously, the amount of CPF payable on additional wages could be determined and collected as and when such wages were paid. With the introduction of the cap, the exact amount payable can be determined only when the total ordinary and additional wages for the year are known. For practical purposes, the cap will have to be based on the total ordinary and additional wages of the preceding year and adjusted at the end of the year when total wages are known. Any under-collection of CPF will then be collected and excess contributions refunded or credited. Clause 2 of the Bill provides for the collection of contributions on additional wages to be based on the preceding year's wages with adjustment at the end of the year. It allows an employer to recover from his employees, further contributions on additional wages if these are required, not later than six months from the end of that year. The employer can make further contributions on additional wages in anticipation of year-end adjustments and recover the employee's portion of such contributions from him. The CPF Board will be empowered to waive the payment of any contributions on additional wages that an employer is unable to recover from the wages of an employee who is no longer in his employment. Clause 3 of the Bill provides for refund by the CPF Board of any excess contributions with interest. The Board will also be allowed to offset such amounts against any monies due to the Fund. The cap and other implementation details will be set out in the Regulations to be made after the Bill has been passed. The Bill will come into effect from 1st January 1990. Sir, I beg to move.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." Before January 1990, CPF was payable on additional wages such as bonuses and commissions without limit. In contrast, CPF contribution on ordinary wages is payable only on $6,000 of wages a month. As CPF contributions are tax deductible, certain individuals were able to avoid tax by arranging to receive their income mainly in the form of additional wages. In one case, bonus amounted to about 14 years or 170 months of ordinary wages. To prevent the use of CPF as a tax shelter, the Government has imposed from Year of Assessment 1990, a tax deductible limit on CPF contribution on additional wages. The CPF contribution payable on additional wages will also be capped in line with the tax deductible limit. I shall now ask the Clerk of Parliament to distribute a table (Cols. 503 - 504) summarising details of this limit which were announced in December last year. [Copies of table distributed to hon. Members.] table (Cols. 503 - 504) The Bill before the House seeks to amend the CPF Act for this purpose. The Income Tax Act will also be amended to impose the tax deductible limit. The cap will not affect the vast majority of CPF members. It will only affect the very small number whose total wages in a year exceed $100,000. For this group, no CPF contributions need to be paid for additional wages exceeding 40% of the annual ordinary wages, equivalent to almost five months of ordinary wages. Within this group, there are some borderline cases which will be better off with the limit of $100,000 on total wages instead of the 40% limit on additional wages. These are employees with annual ordinary wages not exceeding $72,000 but total wages exceeding $100,000.”
“I think we will proceed with these amendments and assess the situation. So far, most employers have insured their workmen. For example, we did a study recently. In a survey of about 2,400 employers carried out last year, only three employers were found to have failed to insure themselves under the Act, and these three will be prosecuted in court. So I want to emphasise to employers that it is very important for them financially and, of course, for their employees that they have proper insurance under the scheme. Finally, concerning the point raised by Mr Chay Wai Chuen, I did explain this too in March, but he might not have been present, that the Workmen's Compensation Act insures all workmen, meaning all manual workers regardless of salary levels. These are the people who are most exposed to industrial accidents. The ceiling of $1,250 is more applicable to, say, clerical staff and others who are not manual workers. We have found from experience that of the injured factory workers, 95% are already covered under the Act. So for the time being anyway, there is no need for us to review this ceiling. Question put, and agreed to. Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House. The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. - [Mr Lee Yock Suan]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. RECLAMATION (Pulau Damar Laut)”
“Turning to the points from Dr Lee Siew-Choh, I am glad to note that he too supports the Bill but, as usual, with his frame of mind in wanting us to do more and more, he wants us to raise all the ceilings and, if possible, pay everybody a lot of money for doing very little. It is true that with inflation the ceilings have to be raised and that is why we have raised the amounts by a hefty 73%. It was unfortunate that there was this long period when the rates were not changed. But during that period, what has happened is that those who suffered more serious injuries and death, they were not compensated to the levels that they deserved. But those who suffered minor injuries like finger, thumb and toe injuries were in fact over-compensated. I did explain in March this year the reason for lowering the rates for toe, thumb and finger injuries. It is because these rates are out of line with those paid by countries like UK, Germany, Hong Kong and so forth and in fact they give rise to anomalies. For example, a workman who loses a thumb and a few fingers will end up getting more compensation than another worker who loses an entire arm. So we have to correct the anomalies. The compensation ceilings are based on the median salary of our workmen. The new rates are based on the median salary of $716 per month, as compared to the old basis which was about $400 or so. Besides the compensation under this Act, there is also compensation, for example, in the case of death and permanent total incapacity under the Dependants' Protection Insurance Scheme of the CPF Board. So I think our workers are now better protected, not only under the Act but also under other insurance schemes. He suggested that we enhance penalties for various infringements by employers. I take his point.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I would like to thank all the Members who have spoken for supporting the Bill. Firstly, concerning the point raised by Dr Wong Kwei Cheong, as I explained in March, my Ministry has done a study of the factory accidents which occurred last year based on the new rates. The conclusion was that, based on these new rates, the ceilings have been raised but, at the same time, the percentage of compensation has been lowered for thumb, finger and toe injuries. The net effect is no increase in cost for insurance companies. So there appears to be no justification for the insurance companies to raise their premiums across-the-board. Of course, it will depend on the type of industry they are operating in and their experience on actual claims. So the premiums will have to be negotiated between the insurance company and the insured party on a case-by-case basis without any interference from third parties. But in general there should not be an increase across-the-board arising from these revisions in the rates. Encik Othman Haron Eusofe raised the point that my Ministry should make regular reviews of the rates. Yes, we will do that, perhaps every two or three years. He also asked that we expedite the processing of claims under the Act. I am very conscious of this point. I have been chasing my staff to make sure they expedite all the claims. As he has said, there are some delays because of assessment by doctors and so on. But to the extent possible, we should try and process the claims quickly to minimise hardship for the injured members and their families.”
“Clause 9 will apply these amendments to accidents which occurred on or after 1st May 1990. A new provision is included in clause 7 to empower the Minister to vary by order the maximum or minimum amount of compensation payable. This provision will enable future changes to the compensation limits to be made expeditiously to keep pace with changes in income levels of workmen. Other minor amendments are proposed to the Act to facilitate its administration and to enhance the penalties for certain offences. Clause 2 of the Bill will remove ambiguities concerning how the monthly earnings for a workman who had worked for less than a month should be calculated. Clause 3 will allow greater flexibility in the reporting of minor accidents. Employers will be allowed to submit monthly summary reports for minor accidents instead of having to report each accident within 10 days. The clause also raises the penalty for not reporting an accident within the prescribed time limit from a fine of $1,000 to $2,000. This is to preserve the punitive effect of the fine, which has not been adjusted for many years. Clause 4 will increase the fine from $4,000 to $10,000 for an employer who fails to insure himself against the contingent liability of having to pay workmen's compensation. Clause 5 will empower the Commissioner for Labour to require the attendance of any person to answer questions or produce documents concerning any injured workman. This will facilitate the assessment of compensation. Sir, I beg to move. Question proposed.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." In March this year, I announced in this House various adjustments to the work- men's compensation rates. This Bill seeks to amend the Workmen's Compensation Act to effect these adjustments, which are: (a) an increase in the compensation for death from the existing range which is $15,000 minimum to $45,000 maximum to the new range which is $26,000 minimum to $78,000 maximum; (b) an increase in the compensation for permanent total incapacity from the existing range which is $20,000 minimum to $60,000 maximum to the new range which is $35,000 minimum to $105,000 maximum. (The actual compensation for death or permanent total incapacity depends on the age and salary of the workman at the time of the accident); (c) a revision of the compensation in percentages of loss of earning capacity for thumb, finger and toe injuries; and (d) removal of the cap of $390 on monthly wage compensation for temporary and permanent incapacity and limiting the maximum period for such payment to one year. Henceforth an injured workman will be entitled to medical leave with full pay of up to 60 days if he is hospitalised and 14 days if he is not hospitalised and thereafter to medical leave at two-thirds of his salary (without the previous cap of $390 per month) up to a maximum of one year medical leave. The adjustments in the compensation rates are necessary because of the 73% increase in the median wage of workers since the last revision in 1980. The compensation for thumb, finger and toe injuries have to be revised to correct the anomalies of some of the existing rates. I will now highlight the main clauses in the Bill. Clauses 6 and 7 will provide for the above-mentioned changes.”
“Sir, the thrust of my answer is that the labour shortage is only one aspect of the problem and I think the Member agrees with me. So I hope that Members in their role as town councillors will look at the wider perspective and not just the labour shortage alone because the labour shortage depends also on other factors, for example, the pay levels. If there are many cases where the contractors are in fact paying this level as I have quoted, then obviously they cannot get many workers. The other factor is that I do not know whether the contracts are clearly spelling out the kind of standards you expect - how many workers per block, and whether the managing agents in fact supervise closely. These are the other factors. And I think the councillors should also consider enforcement against littering. If despite all these measures, there have to be more foreign workers, then my Ministry will look into it. ELECTRICAL PRODUCTS (Safety standards) 10. Mr Loh Meng See asked the Minister for Trade and Industry what steps are being taken to ensure that consumers are protected from faulty electrical products or from poorly manufactured electrical goods that do not meet safety standards.”