Leon Perera
Singapore
“I thank the Nominated Member, Mr Mark Chay, for his clarification. I did, in my speech, allude to my awareness of the existence of sports scholarships and I mentioned a few, nor in my speech did I claim that there is no Government support for these less well-known sports.”
“Sorry, again. I acknowledge that, of course, no system is perfect. I think we all acknowledge that. My colleague Assoc Prof Jamus Lim presented data on the performance of different countries in sporting excellence, government spending relative to gross domestic product (GDP) per capita.”
“Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. I would like to ask one short supplementary question. I am wondering if the Government will consider requiring or mandating private companies to provide an elderly or parent care leave to some extent, or flexible work arrangements that will allow for time for eldercare and parent care duties?”
“Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. Just one supplementary question for the Senior Minister of State. He referred to the service quality framework that the Government uses vis-à-vis SingPost because SingPost is a Government licencee.”
“I was suggesting that the determination of consistency of the Ministerial Code of Conduct be done by an independent organisation. It could be the AGO, it could be a judge or retired judge or someone else to put that imprimatur of independence. I was not suggesting either or. You may disagree with that.”
“At the end of the day, healthcare is, and will remain, must remain, a profoundly human endeavour. There is no more important goal in healthcare than attracting, retaining and bringing out the best from our great healthcare workers.”
The complete record
Every one of 1,226 lines we hold for Leon Perera, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 18 of 25.
“Mr Chairman, Sir, from my recent exchange with the hon Senior Minister of State Dr Janil Puthucheary on Members of Parliament (MPs) speaking in schools, and from information subsequently obtained, I am not 100% sure, but it would seem that Government officeholders and grassroots advisers (GRAs) can go into MOE schools to officiate at events, hold dialogues on national issues and interact with students. But MPs in their MP capacity cannot. The Senior Minister of State did not confirm this directly. I would like to ask MOE to now confirm if this is, indeed, correct. That exchange was headlined in some media outlets as if I was advocating partisan politics in schools whereas the Government wants to keep politics out of schools. That is incorrect. What I am arguing for is that we should balance up the exposure that students already have to People's Action Party (PAP) MPs wearing their GRA or Ministerial hats. The key phrase in what I said is "both sides". Our students should be able to hear from and talk with MPs who are not from the ruling party. Why? For two reasons. Firstly, students should not be exposed to only one set of perspectives on national issues. Students should be able to hear first-hand in their schools the perspectives of duly elected non-PAP MPs on issues of the day, be it our ageing society, public finance or social policies. It is not an adequate response to this to say that students can access views on the Internet. Exposing students to only one set of views from speakers in schools is unhealthy for the development of their critical faculties and their ability to see both sides of an issue. They should be able to pose questions and dialogue with elected public figures, both PAP and non-PAP.”
“In general terms, the current gender income gap means that women will have 18% less CPF savings than men when they enroll in CPF LIFE. With the gender differentiated premiums, women will get less income per month from CPF LIFE than men. The argument for gender differentiated CPF LIFE payouts is that it is fair because women as a group live longer than men. The corollary is that a unisex CPF LIFE with the same payouts for men and women will make men "cross-subsidise" women for living longer. I do not know why men "cross-subsidising" women so that everyone can have a reasonable retirement income until they pass on is so terrible a notion. Let us take a step back and consider this. Women are already disadvantaged by the gender income gap and the unpaid caregiving in the middle of the M-curve. Should not women be given the slight advantage at the end of their lives, just in terms of CPF LIFE payouts, for the sacrifices they willingly take up during the most productive phase of their lives? The other argument for gender differentiated CPF LIFE payouts is that it is following the industry norm for annuities. But CPF LIFE is not a commercial product sold by a private insurer. It is a national pension programme that combines commercial standards and the social protection concerns of a progressive Government. The retirement inadequacy of women is a major social protection concern in our ageing society. Support for Caregivers”
“Mr Chairman, Sir, when we discuss retirement adequacy, we speak of replacement rates – the ratio of retirement income to pre-retirement earnings. Nowadays, many PMETs are finding themselves retrenched, being unemployed for stretches of time, and/or having to take pay cuts later in life. As a result, the replacement rate from just CPF LIFE payouts may increase as a result of their income dropping later in life. In the case of people who are in this at-risk group who have already reached a CPF Minimum Sum, and who can show their income has dropped severely, can MOM consider allowing them on an appeal and for a limited time to contribute a smaller amount in employee CPF so as to free up more cash for their day-to-day needs? That would mean that their CPF does not grow quickly and would get less CPF LIFE payouts when they retire, but they will still get their CPF LIFE payout generated by the Minimum Sum. And if their working income has dropped drastically, then their smaller CPF LIFE payout in future would still achieve a reasonable replacement rate with less employee CPF paid for some years prior to retirement. I hope MOM will consider this. CPF LIFE and Women Assoc Prof Daniel Goh Pei Siong: Chairman, Sir, the gender differentiated premiums for CPF Life compounds the effect of the gender income gap. This gap stands at 18% and has not changed in a decade. It suggests we have hit a structural limit to closing the gap by improving the educational attainment of women. To put it simply, this structural limit is that women's participation in the workforce tends to follow the M-curve, leaving employment in their 30s and 40s to provide caregiving for children or aged parents.”
“Mr Chairman, Sir, one consequence of an ageing society is that many family businesses face the challenge of business succession planning. And it is a challenge, since some entrepreneurs do not have children or professional employees who would want to take over, or they may have successors in mind but those successors are not yet able enough to take over. In reply to a previous PQ, MTI confirmed that a number of schemes exist that can be used to support consulting to facilitate the business succession planning process. I would like to suggest that MTI's economic agencies make it a condition, or an advantage, in applying for the grant, for the award of all grants for strategy development initiatives, like the CDG, Market Readiness Assistance (MRA) and Innovation and Capability Voucher (ICV), for example, to the effect that the SME should involve "next-tier" managers within their company, not only the senior management team, in working on the consulting project, so that those next tier leaders can get exposure and training. This will nudge SMEs to pay more attention to grooming the next tier in their companies. Finally, I declare that I am the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of a research consultancy that does work in this and other fields. Strengthening Business Capabilities”
“Mr Chairman, Sir, developing a vibrant manufacturing sector is important for our economy. In addition to multinational corporations (MNCs), we need to ensure the success of local startups and Singapore SMEs in manufacturing, as these may, with supportive policies, be more likely to keep Singapore as a centre of gravity. Senior Minister of State Mr Koh Poh Koon recently shared data on rental costs in reply to my Parliamentary Question (PQ). The percentage of rental out of total costs may not be high now, but it may rise if technology replaces manpower in the future, as may happen with the advent of artificial intelligence (AI) and robotics. Industrial rentals have also seen volatility in the past. And Singapore does not have low land cost zones on the outskirts as other global cities may have. Will MTI consider setting a target for industrial rental inflation to stay in line with the consumer price index (CPI) and adjust policies accordingly? Will MTI also thoroughly benchmark industrial rentals in other cities with big manufacturing startup sectors and manufacturing SME sectors and publish the findings?”
“Some other countries have formalised guidelines to minimise printing of Government annual reports. For example, the New South Wales government in Australia goes so far as to say that government departments and, I quote, "may only externally print hardcopies where express permission is granted by the relevant Minister following clear justification on need and demand". Embracing Change with Digitalisation”
“Mr Chairman, based on a Parliamentary exchange in 2012, other than the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB) and Auditor-General, Public Service officers can direct whistleblowing complaints to PSC. I would like to ask what measures are in place to ensure that all civil and public servants know what are the channels available to each of them inside and outside their organisations to report perceived wrongdoings. I ask this because many whistleblowers in any organisation may hesitate to complain to a department within their organisation. Is it currently made clear to all civil and public servants that they can highlight problematic acts without fear for their careers, provided that the reporting is in good faith? Also, is PSC the whistleblower reporting point for ethical lapses for the whole Public Service, including for lapses relating to the recent requirement that a political officeholder cannot instruct the civil servants to act with respect to a person or persons and, if so, is the PSC properly resourced to handle such complaints? Printing of Government Annual Reports Mr Chairman, Sir, each year, Government Ministries and Statutory Boards produce annual reports. In some cases, printed copies are sent to various stakeholders, including Members of this House. I am not sure how many of these printed copies are retained by the recipients for long. I would like to suggest that, in future, annual reports be produced only as softcopy files. These can be posted on the website. Users can print these for their own use if they want to. Since they have to print for the printing themselves, it is likely that they would only print the pages they need. This would save the Government money and it is greener, with few implications for the wider public.”
“I thank the Second Minister for the reply. Just one very quick supplementary question: may I know the source of the data for the first part of the answer on the proportion of users who previously had telephone betting accounts?”
“Firstly, why the need to lower the tax exemption for start-ups now from 100% on the first $100,000 to 75%? Is there evidence that we have passed a certain threshold in terms of our effort to cultivate a vibrant start-up landscape? It would be helpful to understand the background to this change, coming at this time. Secondly, the Minister for Finance did not mention the gig economy in his speech. Could he touch on how the Government views the gig economy and what would be the broad thrust of Government policy towards this sector? 3.17 pm”
“One of Singapore’s core competencies seems to be design, project management and servicing of urban infrastructure, a point I have alluded to in earlier speeches in this House. Secondly, we could propose an ASEAN urban solar panel initiative where Singapore test-beds new technologies for solar power generation in dense urban environments – I made a similar though not identical argument in this House in 2016. We could pioneer new technologies and processes in manufacturing, deployment and maintenance of solar panels. For example, though it need not take this particular form, such an initiative could use perovskite technology, which some scientists believe has major advantages over traditional silicon-based solar cells. Some scientists hold that perovskite cells can generate more energy from sunlight on low-light days, which may be helpful, given Southeast Asia's weather patterns. Though there are also disadvantages of perovskite, like a greater susceptibility to temperature- and humidity-induced instability, which scientists are in the process of overcoming. The point is Singapore could pioneer best practices in the manufacture, deployment and maintenance of solar panels in dense, urban environments in ASEAN's largely tropical weather conditions. These could be used as a model for deployment in major cities across ASEAN. I offer these suggestions in the spirit of demonstrating the contours that a major ASEAN-wide initiative could take, without asserting that these are necessarily the only or best candidates for such an initiative. Lastly, and in conclusion ‒ in moving away from the main theme of my speech, Sir ‒ I would like to pose two questions for the Minister for Finance.”
“The Europeans also established the world’s largest particle accelerator in 2008, the 27-km long Large Hadron Collider, as well as other particle accelerators in a complex known as CERN. CERN focuses on high-end physics research. More recently, CERN has become a pioneer in grid computing or distributed computing. Mr Speaker, Sir, I am not suggesting that we launch an ASEAN space effort or particle collider and I hope my speech will not be caricaturised as calling for that. But the examples of NASA, ESA and CERN show us what ingredients can go into a bold project that has broad economic spin-off benefits. We could propose a project that would enable Singapore to serve as a test-bed and hub as the project is rolled out across ASEAN. I know that it is never easy or fast to get things off the ground in ASEAN. But such a proposal could build on the precedents that have been set and the learning curve that has been gained from pioneering the ASEAN Innovation Network, the ASEAN Financial Information Network and the ASEAN Agreement on E-commerce. Some ideas for such an ASEAN-wide initiative that Singapore could champion are as follows. Firstly, an ASEAN autonomous vehicles initiative, some or all of which could be electric vehicles. Singapore could help to test-bed autonomous vehicles, pioneering the establishment and maintenance of refuelling stations as well as the associated regulatory framework. The financing for such an ASEAN-wide project could be raised in Singapore. The know-how and supply of parts and services for refuelling or, perhaps, I should say, recharging stations as well as manufacture of critical components for the vehicles could be undertaken in Singapore.”
“At this point, I declare that I am the CEO of a research and consulting firm which operates in the Asia Pacific region and global emerging markets. We could cultivate the soft power of working in a multi-disciplinary fashion to collect and analyse all relevant data on how disruptive industries could rise in ASEAN countries. ASEAN has 10 states of which only two have more than 15% of the total population, meaning it is a rather fragmented region, population-wise. Each ASEAN state has a different economic, business, financial, technology, governmental and cultural landscape. Such studies could indicate the alternative pathways down which disruptive industries could evolve in ASEAN countries – leading to outcomes like Grab and GO-JEK’s motorcycle private-hire in Indonesia. My fourth point is that Singapore could consider suggesting a bold, visionary project that aims to transform the ASEAN region itself into a test-bed for innovation. The thing about big projects is that they can serve to galvanise a people and boost the economy. President Kennedy’s goal of sending a man to the moon helped galvanise a massive scientific and organisational effort in the US. While the goal, by itself, served a symbolic, nationalistic purpose, along the way, it helped seed an aerospace industry in the US that has, over the decades, yielded many new technologies that US industry has made use of, like the business of launching commercial satellites today and the current US private sector space industry. In Europe, 22 member countries have come together to create the European Space Agency (ESA) for researching and exploring space, which has registered 82 successful commercial satellite launches till 2018.”
“It is also the region where our efforts to make Singapore’s economy relevant are pushing on an open door, given the vast size, presence of strong domestic industry players and market barriers that exist in other regions of Asia, such as China, India, Japan and Korea. A Singapore that is deeply engaged and co-prospering with ASEAN will help ensure that ASEAN will be a fruitful intersection point between the great powers of China, India and Japan, rather than becoming in the future their battleground at some point in the decades to come. How can Singapore be relevant to the rise of disruptive industries in ASEAN? The example of Grab may hold a lesson. Grab is a Singapore-based firm, with Singapore being its largest R&D centre. Grab has embarked on growth initiatives in the region. Along the way, it launched a new business model in Indonesia which is uniquely suited to that vast market – motorcycle-hire, which competes with local firm GO-JEK and others. Today, Grab operates in over 50 cities across Indonesia. It also acquired Indonesian shopping app firm Kudo. Mr Speaker, Sir, Singapore could be a hub for disruptive industry players as they plan and execute ASEAN-wide penetration strategies. As such, Singapore could host data centres, management teams, R&D labs, financing hubs and so on. Singapore could also produce and supply to the region the most advanced, high value-added and IP-sensitive components, materials and services. Singapore, with its multi-ethnic make-up, could also be a test-bed to trial products. For a start – and this brings me to my third broad point – Singapore could galvanise our base of Autonomous Universities, think-tanks, private consultancies, research agencies and so on, to focus on mapping out the paths which disruption could take in ASEAN.”
“For example, iOT could generate vast quantities of data for AI to work on so as to improve processes. And this is not even mentioning sharing economy industries like private car-hire, whose disruptive effect is already quite mature in some cities. As these technologies become increasingly mainstream, they will transform the economies of Asia. Indeed, that is already happening, in both mature and emerging Asian economies. How can Singapore be relevant to this process of the unfolding of disruption in Asia? There are a number of ways. Firstly, as a hub for R&D and localisation; secondly, as a test-bed to trial new products; thirdly, as a management headquarters for regional companies; fourthly, as a manufacturing base for high-tech, high-value added exports; fifthly, as a service export hub for things like analytics, professional and business services; and, lastly, as a financing centre. Our economic agencies have, for a long time, conceived and implemented initiatives to help Singapore develop a role vis-à-vis the Asian region in these respects. These initiatives have helped to create and sustain many good-quality jobs and high value-added economic activities. How could Singapore position itself to play such roles vis-à-vis the unfolding of disruptive industries in Asia? For a start – and this is the second broad point in my speech – we could focus on ASEAN above all. I was glad to note some ASEAN-related initiatives in the Budget speech. ASEAN has over 600 million people, about 8% of the world’s population. It is our region and our destiny is inextricably linked to its.”
“In spite of the structural issues faced by some western countries – which range from fiscal deficits and state debt to low productivity growth to inequality-fuelled populism and chronic crime in some cities – western countries still have unmatched soft power. In fields, such as R&D, entertainment, academia and information and communications technology (ICT), not to mention military technology and diplomatic clout, the West still leads the world, even if the size of that lead is diminishing. We should ensure that our efforts to engage North America and Europe are well-maintained, so as to draw learnings and forge partnerships, whether in the public or private sector realms. We should not assume that Asia will continue to outgrow the West in a linear fashion. Some western countries have shown a tremendous resilience, an ability to rebound from setbacks. The recent victory of President Macron in France underlines that ability to self-correct and renew. Next, Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to talk about industry disruption but, specifically, in the context of Asia and, in particular, ASEAN. The world economy is teeming with disruption, which both destroys and creates anew. Some emerging technologies and business models that are disrupting the world include big data analytics, the Internet of Things (iOT) which collects big data, artificial intelligence (AI) which is fed by big data, drones, autonomous vehicles, robotics including social robotics, 3D printing, virtual and augmented reality, cloud computing, crypto-currencies, genetic editing and renewable energy technologies like cutting-edge solar cells coupled with cutting-edge battery technology. Many of these are coming together in interesting ways.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, we live in interesting times. Of course, human beings in every era view their era as a time of modernity and change. But the era we are living through is seeing many fundamental economic and geopolitical changes to the post-World War II status quo, changes that are making the past a less and less reliable guide to the future, changes that underline ever more strongly that the strategies that brought us here today will not be the same ones that enable us to navigate successfully tomorrow. The world is seeing the emergence of disruptive industries using new technology or new business models, like the sharing economy, industries that may reshape the economy – destroying old jobs and stodgy companies, but also creating new ones. Geopolitical and economic weight is shifting towards Asia, particularly China, and to a lesser extent, India; while Japan and Korea remain major economies. Regional powers, including ASEAN, have the potential to carry much more weight. Meanwhile, inequality, both within and between countries, is adding to the unpredictability, triggering political shifts like what happened in the US with the election of President Trump and, in the UK, with Brexit. And climate change marches on, even as the world struggles to cope, using the Paris accords that the US abandoned. The first broad point I would like to make in my speech is, while we pay special attention to Asia – and I agree that we should do this – as our home region and the world's fastest growing major economic region, let us not write off the West.”
“I thank the Minister for his comprehensive response. Given that the CAGR for Bangkok and Jakarta are quite substantially higher than Changi Airport, does the Ministry have any concerns that, over time, the competitiveness of our air hub will be eroded vis-à-vis Bangkok and Jakarta? What are some of the plans that the Ministry is looking into to mitigate that?”
“I thank the Minister of State for his comprehensive reply. Just one supplementary question. The Minister of State mentioned that the rental costs are comparable to major cities in the US, Japan and Switzerland. I think in some of these countries, SMEs may have the option of moving to the outskirts of the city and renting industrial property or even light industrial or commercial properties. I am not sure if that has been factored into the statistical comparison that the Minister of State mentioned. So, my question is: will the Ministry consider studying the comparison between rental costs here and rental costs in key cities in these other countries, including the outskirts, and monitor that and study if that level of rental costs that we have is serving as an impediment to entrepreneurship or people wanting to continue in SMEs going forward.”
“I thank the Minister for his comprehensive reply. Just one supplementary question: will the Ministry consider publishing such data at regular intervals in future as a key performance indicator of the performance of the system in this regard?”
“I would take it that Ministers and officeholders of the Government can speak at schools and I believe that is the case. Would the Senior Minister of State not acknowledge that if Ministers and officeholders of the Government can enter schools and speak and personally engage with students, but members of other parties represented in Parliament or Nominated MPs are not allowed to speak and directly engage with students in the same way, would that not have a detrimental effect in two regards: one, the access that students have to both sides of the political debate so that they can develop into citizens who can exercise some judgement on political questions; and secondly, also in terms of the capacity of the students to develop their critical faculty and to see both sides of a question? Would not that one-sidedness be detrimental in that regard?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, just one supplementary question to the Senior Minister of State. Is it the case that all MPs cannot speak at schools and that it includes officeholders, Ministers and so on and so forth?”
“Do we choose a Singapore where seniors are equal citizens, crucially engaged in society and playing a vital role by imparting their experience, their skills and wisdom and their inspiring example? Or will we choose a future where seniors are, at worst, ignored or patronised or, at best, treated as a necessary evil, a politically significant constituency which should be shunted out of the mainstream but which should be mollified for other ends? The choice needs to be made by us as a society, and it needs to be made by us as individuals, employers, employees, family members, commuters, residents and citizens. On this question, we need a multi-pronged whole-of-Government and whole-of-society approach. The difference we will make with this choice is profound and I have no doubt that Singapore and Singaporeans have always stood and will always stand on the right side of this question. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, the Workers' Party supports this Motion.”
“Is there more we could do, for example, to offer low-cost or free vaccines to citizens to reduce the risk of disease later in life, a move that would probably more than pay for itself, in terms of fiscal dollars and a subject which MPs have spoken about in the past? Can we do more to experiment with new platforms for delivering preventive healthcare into homes using telemedicine and artificial intelligence (AI), for example? I believe so. A last question is on the living environment. How do we build a good enabling living environment that gives older people the confidence to venture out, work part-time and get more socially engaged, knowing that at home, their basic needs are taken care of? As with persons with disabilities, for older people, they would not be so disadvantaged, were it not for an urban environment not designed primarily with their needs in mind. Can we do more to experiment with different models of living environment for older people beyond living by themselves or with their children, such as what they call assisted living in the United States (US), or what they call Silver Towns in Korea? I believe we can. Silver Towns in Korea are towns which are comprehensive retirement communities, for example, in some cases, with facilities for young children to encourage frequent family visitations. And there is a variety of these Silver Towns catering to different income levels. At this point, I declare that I am the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of an international research consultancy whose Korean arm has undertaken research into this field in Korea. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, Singapore today faces a choice.”
“For example, using the SkillsFuture platform which has courses for trainers like the Advanced Certificate in Training and Assessment (ACTA) to reflect on their experience and be adept at converting this into forms that are useful, such as training videos, knowledge pills, podcasts and so on. Fourthly, should we strive for non-discriminatory workplaces and social conditions? Of course, we should. We should banish discrimination from the workplace. Right now, almost 10,000 workers are classified as "discouraged", meaning that they have given up looking for a job. Some of them have given up due to what they sense is ageist discrimination in the labour market. Discrimination in all its forms is not just morally wrong. It hurts our labour force participation and hurts the economy, meaning it hurts us all. Let us do more to fight this, perhaps by giving the Tripartite Alliance for Fair and Progressive Employment Practices (TAFEP) more teeth and perhaps exploring how we can better recognise employers who walk-the-talk by having older workers make up a larger share of their workforce. The fifth question is how to age with quality of life. Is there more we can do upstream to ensure that the burden of disease, chronic conditions does not erode the quality of life of seniors and harm their potential contribution to the economy and drain state finances? I believe there is. We are pushing out subsided health screenings to all and this is a step in the right direction as is MOH's action plan for successful ageing and the various programmes associated with it, such as the Active Ageing Centres.”
“Technology holds up the promise of better enabling seniors to lead productive lives, to contribute to the world of work in the way they feel best abled to and for longer. The march of technology can also mitigate some of the ravages of age that might otherwise impede that. A second question is how to work. To fully unlock the potential of seniors in the workplace, we need to do more to create options for work. Many seniors have a wealth of knowledge and experience but many may want to work in a part-time advisory or consulting capacity if those capacities existed. Can we do more to create platforms where seniors can contribute in a flexible way towards projects or to employers? I believe we can. For example, there are platforms right now that match potential board members to board openings in the for-profit and not-for-profit sectors. Not every senior, of course, has the background to serve as a board member but many have pools of experience and niche skills to impart. We can create matching platforms for consulting freelance or part-time work. Once again, NGOs will probably serve this role best and the Government can nudge and support these initiatives. Examples of success can be highlighted in marketing campaigns. Thirdly, can we do more to empower seniors to impart their experience? Yes, we can. We need to do more to nudge seniors to reskill their experience into a form where it can be usefully conveyed as training or consulting. Experience is nothing if one does not process the experience and convert it into a form that is useful to others and to oneself. One of my favourite quotes is from Aldous Huxley when he said, "Experience is not what happens to you; it is what you do with what happens to you". We should find ways to nudge our seniors.”
“My unconscious bias had held me back from learning from, from being inspired by this person. Yes, older people do have a lot to contribute. We have to build a society that recognises, pools and embraces those contributions but we also have to build a society where older people have the confidence to make those contributions, to master enabling technologies and to speak to make their voice heard. The rest of my speech, Sir, will touch on some of the broad principles we need to entrench in order to be a truly inclusive non-ageist society for the betterment of our soul. I will speak of these principles each in the form of a question. Firstly, to work until when? Inevitably, as life expectancy rise, people will need to work in some form till later in life to some extent, depending on productivity growth. Moreover, many seniors will choose to work for intrinsic reasons if they could find the work options suited to their situation. Should we strive to create a rich tapestry of choices for our seniors to decide how they want to work, for how many hours in what ways? Of course, we should, because this means dignity for our seniors. More choices also mean more likelihood that seniors will choose to work in the way that suits them, thus raising labour force participation. Can we do more to unlock the benefits of technology and automation for seniors? Yes, we can. For example, engaging on-government organisations (NGOs) to raise the technology literacy and usage of mobile apps by seniors, using perhaps a social impact bond to tie results to state spending to ensure maximum impact for our fiscal dollars. The concept of a social impact bond is something I have spoken about in the House previously.”
“We should be proud of these instincts. But when we speak of our seniors, it should not only be about taking care of the disadvantaged group, it should be about how we can also build a more inclusive society because that advances the cause of Singapore and all Singaporeans, because seniors can contribute and give back, not only consume and receive. Again, we turn to anthropologists. Ancient human societies greatly valued older people because they had, to use a modern expression from the business world, racked up the air miles. They had experienced many seasons, many cycles, many events and had a repository of memories of our natural conditions, interactions with other societies or tribes and intra-community dynamics that could add value to their communities and maybe even make the difference between life and death. And yet in our modern societies, this logic is often turned on its head. Older people are sometimes stigmatised and stereotyped as stuck in the mud, unable to keep up with the times, incapable of using technology, in short, as irrelevant. I am reminded of the time when a very old cashier at the shop once started a deep conversation with me. At first, I instinctively got a little impatient. A part of me said, "Oh, no, here comes a rambling senior, how can I extricate myself from this?" And then I thought while I get many calls, emails, visits today, every day as we all do, I think as Members of this House, a day may come when no one wants to talk to me. What will I do then? So, I listened and I listened, and when I opened my mind, my heart, I realised that this lady had many interesting and useful insights, much wisdom to share. After a while, I almost wanted to whip up my mobile device and start taking down notes.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I support the Motion. We all age. That is an inescapable fact of the human condition. But it is a fact that we, human beings, all too often try to escape or decry or deny or despair of rather than embrace ageing as the doorway to a new different exciting phase of life with its own potential and pitfalls and this goes to the heart of the matter. Archaeologists have found extremely ancient human skeletal remains where skeletons were obviously people who lived to a very old age, beyond the point when they could meaningfully contribute economically and where they may well have been invalid or immobile due to the kinds of illnesses that were rife in ancient times. And yet they lived till they were very old. The ancient tribes they lived within probably tended to them, helped to move from campsite to campsite, helped feed, clothe and care for them to enable them to live so long. Embracing ageing and the aged defines a part of what it means to be human. Whether and how we include older people as equal members of our society is a mark of civilisation and humanity. On this barometer, I know that Singapore will never fall short. In our homes, our workplaces or coffee shops, when Singaporeans speak of seniors who are their relatives, seniors who are their mentors, seniors that they know in their neighbourhoods or communities, it is inevitably in tones of respect, concern and empathy. This gut reaction speaks volumes about the kind of people Singaporeans are. We defend those who are disadvantaged, even if they are frail and economically weak. We have an instinctive sense of social justice and fairness. These ideals are embodied in our pledge which is why our pledge, that short collection of words, deeply resonates with all Singaporeans.”
“One supplementary question for the Senior Minister of State. Some economists have opined that technical jobs may be more at risk from trends, such as automation, robotics, artificial intelligence. Does the Ministry feel that the outlook for these jobs is more at risk going forward because of these developments as compared to other kinds of jobs, for example, graduate jobs?”
“Sir, what I said was that I did not object to the Bill.”
“And how will this differentiation be conveyed to the companies that these agencies serve? Lastly, I trust that one area the new Enterprise Singapore will actively look into is how to catalyse links between Singapore companies when they operate in international markets. We do see such links between some companies from foreign countries when they move abroad, whereby such companies cluster into specific areas or even buildings and business centres, share learnings and networks, and thus, shorten the learning curve and lessen the risk for one another. This is especially important in difficult markets, like Africa, which is probably the next and last frontier in emerging market region. I would like know what Enterprise Singapore plans to do on this issue. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, local SMEs are responsible for half of gross domestic product (GDP) and over two-thirds of the jobs in our economy. The consolidation of most state support to local enterprises under one roof has the potential to create a powerful one-stop shop to support our local enterprises in ways that are appropriate to their entrepreneurial trajectory for maximum benefit to our economy. The Workers’ Party supports this move to consolidate local enterprise support under Enterprise Singapore. Local enterprises need to be a strong third pillar of our economy alongside MNCs and Government-linked companies (GLCs). Right now, their share of value-added is much smaller than their share of jobs, implying that we need to move those capable and aspirational SMEs up the productivity ladder. And at the apex, we need to groom a critical mass of local companies to become globally competitive, with the centre of gravity and critical headquarters functions rooted in Singapore.”
“And they would need support in terms of internationalisation and overseas market penetration, or even foreign direct investment to locate parts of their global business supply chain abroad while keeping critical headquarters and other functions in Singapore. The optimal approach for such enterprises would perhaps involve tapping on whole-of-Government resources to enable them to resolve problems in their overseas operations or to introduce them to sources of funding or potential partners, to cite two examples. Will Enterprise Singapore, therefore, provide different approaches in this manner to support local enterprises based on their needs, abilities and aspirations? The different approaches that are called for may require separate divisions and separate operating styles in those divisions. Secondly, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, would the integration lead to companies being serviced by a single account manager as in a single account management officer or account management team within Enterprise Singapore to avoid confusion and for maximum efficiency on the part of the company as well as state? Thirdly, and to take this a little further, does the Government try to arrange a single account manager for each company for Government support, across all agencies? That account manager could reside in different agencies, for example, the Singapore Tourism Board (STB) for tourism-related companies. Anecdotally, it would appear that some companies sometimes may not be completely clear about whether there is a single Government account manager currently along these lines. Fourthly, and relatedly, how will Enterprise Singapore's role be differentiated from that of other economic agencies like the EDB and STB?”
“Some SMEs are more focused on stability, have modest ambitions and may not want to become the next Facebook. But others are more focused on growth and should be encouraged and supported to become dynamic job creation and value creation engines for our economy. For those enterprises which may be small or mid-sized and not in a hurry to grow radically, largely domestically-oriented and/or are more focused on stability rather than growth, there is a case for supporting such enterprises with challenges like productivity, internationalisation and business succession planning, so as to maintain jobs and grow wages. The approach taken to support these SMEs could be more oriented towards programme administration. But on top of that, some of those enterprises could be nudged into using incentive schemes towards sunrise sectors within their own broad industry or in adjacent industries where they have core competencies that can be leveraged. On the other hand, there are enterprises that have the potential to become regional or global champions, those with the ambition, drive and ability to become engines for job creation and value creation for our economy. These would need support in a much more open-ended way. The appropriate approach to support such enterprises would be to provide more aggressive support in a more holistic, responsive and creative way. Such enterprises may need support in terms of human capital, recruiting management and expert talent. They may need support to obtain financing where, at some stages of growth, some SMEs continue to experience an inability to raise sufficient financing from capital markets, venture capitalists (VCs) or banks.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, the Enterprise Singapore Board Bill seeks to merge the operations of IE Singapore and SPRING Singapore into a single entity and also to transfer the fair trading functions of SPRING Singapore to CCS. The move to integrate the functions of SPRING Singapore and IE Singapore would facilitate the provision of domestic and international state support to enterprises in a coordinated fashion, in a manner of a one-stop shop. Such a move may eliminate any potential interagency overlap or rivalries and reduce confusion and time on the part of enterprises seeking Government support. Moreover, integrating all functions relating to fair trade under the new CCCS would have the same streamlining and rationalising effect. Therefore, this is a step in the right direction and I do not oppose this Bill. The work of supporting local enterprise is critical, so as to grow a third pillar to drive value creation and job creation for our economy, alongside the pillars of MNCs and Government-linked entities. I would like to ask a few questions and make a few suggestions in relation to the future and important work of Enterprise Singapore. Before I do so, I declare that I am the CEO of a research consultancy that works with a wide spectrum of end-clients, including some SMEs. Firstly, there is a strong case for Enterprise Singapore to differentiate the account management approach it takes to enterprises according to whether an enterprise has limited growth potential and aspirations versus those with strong potential and ambitions. The term "SME" is a convenient shorthand which we all use. However, there are often big differences between the S and the M. Aside from just size, there are differences in terms of the mindset of the entrepreneurs.”
“I thank the Minister for her clarification. So, my supplementary question will be, to date, based on these figures, I suppose a minority of them, I mean there was a certain amount of attrition – about 30% – have there been any insights gleaned into the reasons behind that? Were there any employability gaps that were discerned after the PMET was placed with the CSP employer which suggest that there are some training gaps that need to be fulfilled? Because anecdotally, I have come across such feedback that that may be the case occasionally. And if so, what kind of solutions can be put forward or deployed to meet those training and employability gaps.”
“Thank you, Sir. I thank the Minister for her comprehensive reply. Just a few supplementary questions. If I understood the Minister correctly, to date, for the CSP about 70% of the employees have remained in the CSP employer, and 30% have moved on to another employer, or have left the CSP employer. Is that right?”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, I think Question No 11 has not been answered yet.”
“Yes. So, through the creation of software models that take into account different factors we can anticipate that. So, is that being done or can that be considered to be done?”
“Thank you. I would like to thank the Senior Minister of State for her comprehensive reply. Just a few supplementary questions. Firstly, will the Senior Minister of State be able to share the figure for the number of leaks each year for the last seven years? I believe the Senior Minister of State said, on average, it is six leaks per 100 km over the last seven years. But what I am trying to get at is has the number been increasing, decreasing or remaining more or less the same? So, can that information be shared? That is the first one. The second one is: will the PUB consider publishing this data on an annual basis if that is not being done right now? I say that also in the context of the statement that we have one of the best rates of water leakage in the world, which is commendable. I presume that that is using data that is published from other countries. So, presumably, other countries do publish this data. So, if that is not being done, will that data on the number of leaks per year be published on a regular basis? My third and last supplementary question: is the PUB working or moving beyond just leak detection and response towards proactive leak anticipation or prediction? I believe that there are research projects and there are initiatives in other parts of the world – I am not sure if that is being done in Singapore – where models are constructed using data to predict and anticipate where a fault or a leak is likely to occur, so that preventive action can be taken before the leak actually occurs. I know in Sydney, this has been going on for some time. The Water Research Foundation believes that through failure prediction —”
“I thank the Parliamentary Secretary for his answer. Just two supplementary questions. Firstly, does this plan aim to integrate both public and private healthcare resources to operate in concert in case of a mass casualty? Secondly, does MOH actively study the plans of other countries like France to learn from their experience, and that experience is evolving with more and more terrorist incidents, mass casualty incidents and so on. So, is that kind of study being done of the experience of other cities?”
“It may cool the ardour of such public servants to second-guess their boss and act for him or her. Such a rule would also have other benefits than the one I have mentioned. It would ensure that future MPs and Ministers from the Civil Service would need to have private sector and/or not-for-profit sector experience prior to becoming MPs and Ministers. The relative lack of such experience in the Cabinet has often been bemoaned by experts and commentators. In Singapore's first Cabinet, upon the attainment of self-government, the proportion of civil servants was far, far less than in the Cabinets that followed. And the period of time during the mandatory time gap would also allow them an alternative form of employment to give them the time and space to reflect if they really do want to enter politics, so that those who eventually do take that step may prove to be more committed to that pathway. I hope that some form of mandatory time gap can be considered for ex-public servants seeking to join politics.”
“In the debate on the Banking Act, I had asked then, coincidentally Minister Ong Ye Kung as well, if such a mandatory time gap, referred to in that context as "garden leave" or a cooling-off period, existed for Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) officers who wished to resign from MAS and join the financial institutions. He confirmed that such a mandatory time gap existed. The analogy here with what I am proposing is not perfect. But it is useful to note that there is a precedent for such a mandatory time gap proposal. Imposing a mandatory time gap between when one can leave the Public Service and when one can join politics, say, three years, would give pause to any ambitious public servant who might seek to read their political masters' mind and do their partisan bidding unasked, so as to facilitate their chances of joining the ruling Party as an elected politician. He or she would know that they would need to find employment outside the Public Service in the private sector or not-for-profit sector for some years before joining politics. Hence, there would be a period of time when they would need to find alternative employment and the fruit of their partisan action or actions could not be reaped immediately. And with the passage of time, the memory of their acts in the Public Service and their links to their former political masters may become more attenuated, thus further reducing the motive to commit such acts in the first place. Imposing a mandatory time gap may send a signal to aspiring public servants that if they choose to second-guess their bosses and speed the path to a Ministerial post, the link between their actions and the hoped for results will be weaker than it is now.”
“In fact, it is a risk that has been noted for centuries in the context of all kinds of organisations. I will cite one famous example from history. There is a sentence attributed to a former King of England from the 12th century, Henry II. He was supposed to have said in the council of his senior advisors and noblemen, "Will no one rid me of this meddlesome Priest?", referring to Thomas Becket, the then-Archbishop of Canterbury, with whom he had had repeated conflicts. This was not a direct order, but it is said that, upon hearing this comment, four senior knights attending the meeting then went on to kill Becket in one of the most famous political assassinations of medieval times. I cannot, of course, attest to the historical veracity of every part of the story but it is a story that has been told through the centuries to illustrate the perils of subordinates in any organisation second-guessing their boss and taking actions that they think may please their boss and even perhaps going to greater extremes than their boss would have thought necessary. So, this problem is not a new one and not specific to any organisation or context. So, how do we prevent a culture of ambitious public servants second-guessing their bosses and take partisan but legally permissible actions which may, over time, tend to erode the reputation of the Public Service for non-partisanship? I would like to make one suggestion here, which is to impose a mandatory time gap between when an individual leaves the Public Service and when that individual enters politics.”
“So as to increase their chances of successfully joining the ruling Party and becoming MPs or Ministers, such public servants may try to second-guess what their Ministers would like them to do. Even in the absence of any explicit instruction from a Minister to do the said act, they may then just go out and do it. The intended goal of such a strategy may be for that individual public servant to be looked upon favourably not just by his or her Minister but by the leadership of the ruling Party in respect of consideration for being fielded as a ruling Party candidate in the next election. Mr Deputy Speaker, I am not arguing that this necessarily happens today, but it is something that may happen in the future. My focus is on the principle and managing future risks. To be sure, there would be nothing illegal about any public servant attempting to pursue such a strategy and this law does not change that. But is it healthy for Singapore for such a culture to become widespread? After all, becoming a Minister is an attractive career option for a high performing public servant as it means taking on the role of the boss under which he or she ultimately serves. So, the incentive for such a culture to grow is there. And if such a culture takes root in the future, it would mean that the Public Service would become partisan and eventually and inevitably be seen by the public as partisan, which would be a terrible outcome not least in terms of attracting and retaining good public servants who have no wish to be partisan or to eventually enter politics. To be sure, the risk of subordinates second-guessing their boss and doing what their boss wants in the absence of a formal explicit instruction is not new.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, the Public Sector (Governance) Bill aims to harmonise the rules governing the operation of all public bodies in Singapore in respect of dimensions, such as the relationship between a Minister and the public body, values, data protection rules and so on and so forth. On the whole, the Bill marks a step in the right direction and I cannot oppose the Bill. Before I continue, I declare that I serve as the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of a research and consulting firm that has, on occasion, undertaken public sector projects in the past. My speech will focus on clause 11 which seeks to limit the Minister's powers to issue directions to public sector agencies so as to reduce the risk of the politicisation of the Public Service. Clause 11(3) states that Ministers are not authorised to direct any public sector agency or any public body or public officer to perform or not to perform a particular act with respect to a particular person or persons. This is clearly a step in the right direction and I welcome this. Having said that, I share the concerns and support the questions raised in relation to this clause by my colleague and party chairman Sylvia Lim. I shall not repeat them here but will focus on one additional consideration. In Singapore, we have a history of public servants moving on to take up roles in politics immediately upon leaving the Public Service, primarily by joining the ruling Party and serving as MPs or Ministers in the PAP Government with little or no break in between. There would always presumably be some public servants who possess the necessary ambition, aspiration and willingness to seek to exit the Public Service and join politics and perhaps to become a Minister or even Prime Minister one day.”
“Thank you, again. I do agree that the statements were inaccurate and, therefore, misled the House, but it was not my intention to make an allegation against Mediacorp of having done partisan editing to that clip.”
“I thank the Leader of the House for her clarification and I certainly agree that my recollections were imperfect. It had not been my intention to allege that Mediacorp had undertaken partisan editing of the clip. Having said that, I think the statements that I made contained inaccuracies. I have withdrawn them and I acknowledge that.”
“Firstly, I did not plan to raise this incident during supplementary questions. I did so off the cuff and only in response to the request to enumerate any incident of editing that I knew of. As it turned out, my memory of the incident was inaccurate. Secondly, I did acknowledge that my memory of the incident may well be imperfect as I prefaced it with the phrase "if my memory serves me well". Thirdly, I stated explicitly and twice on that day that the incident had been resolved amicably and had not accused Mediacorp of partisan editing of a video clip in that incident, which makes the matter of when the clip was corrected immaterial. I would also like to reiterate that the main thrust of my Parliamentary Question (PQ) and supplementary question had been, firstly, the nature and ownership of Parliamentary video footage which was clarified as a result of the PQ. Secondly, whether and how videos are edited, which was also clarified by the PQ in that and if there is editing insofar as that means the arrangement of Parliamentary exchanges into the clips and so on, but not verbatim editing of exchange within a particular clip. And thirdly, why "live" streaming of Parliament is not provided, an issue where Senior Minister of State Chee Hong Tat explained the Government's position – which is one with which I disagree – since "live" streaming would tend to remove any concern about the reflectiveness of clips of particular exchanges uploaded sometime after the event. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, in conclusion, I apologise to the House for any mistaken impression created by my failure of memory. I agree that Parliamentary privilege is a privilege that should never be taken lightly. However, I did not deliberately misrepresent facts or deliberately mislead the House for whatever reason.”
“Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker, for the permission to make a personal statement regarding my supplementary question on the ownership of Parliamentary videos on 7 November 2017. In my supplementary question on the Parliamentary video footage on 7 November, when asked for specific examples of editing, I said, and I quote, "There was a specific example where a clip was put up in relation to the Presidential Election Act debates. If my memory serves me well, it was in January or February, and the clip that was put up of certain exchanges, there were certain bits removed. It was actually communicated with Mediacorp and, through the correspondence, they actually made the rectification and put up a different clip. So, I think that was resolved quite amicably", unquote. I was asked to clarify my remarks later on that day. I acknowledge that I could have recalled certain facts incorrectly about an exchange with Mediacorp that had occurred in February 2017, nine months earlier. I said that I would need to verify the facts with my email archive but that, and I quote, "I am sure that that will be the case when I have verified. So, I am quite prepared to accept that fact". I would now like to definitively withdraw my earlier statements to the effect that the video had been edited with certain bits removed and that the video had been edited and only corrected after my intervention. I confirm that Mediacorp had explained this to me in February 2017 and that I had accepted that. I would like to apologise to the House for all incorrect recollections of the chain of events in February 2017 contained in this exchange as per House conventions. However, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I did not deliberately misrepresent the facts of that incident for this House.”
“Our economy's competitiveness as a developed country in the 21st century, amidst all the disruption from artificial intelligence and other factors that will unfold, hinges on the quality of our human resources. We need to churn out future entrepreneurs and disruptors. MOE has reduced average class sizes before: for Primary 1 in 2005 and Primary 2 in 2006. In Parliament in 2007, the outcome of this class size reduction change was described by the Government as positive. Let us not shirk from giving all students the kind of benefits of small class sizes that Gifted Education Programme students now enjoy and that established academic research has demonstrated. And not by way of remedial classes that have their own down-sides and side effects. Let us not shirk from making the changes needed to turn Singapore's future classrooms into incubators of innovation and catalysts for equality of opportunity.”