Liang Eng Hwa
Singapore
“Sir, in Mandarin, please. (In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] I would like to thank IMDA for its flexibility in allowing the filming of "Dear You" in the Teochew dialect, and for approving additional screenings to meet public demand.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. Sir, we hope that there will be peaceful resolution to the Middle East conflict soon and that the Strait of Hormuz will be fully open.”
“Sir, I believe the political office holders have not replied or responded to my cut on traffic congestion, so can I perhaps ask the Minister, whether is it because he disagrees with me that the traffic congestion has worsened or that there is no non-pricing solutions to traffic congestion, which I had asked for.”
“Sir, Minister Chee, in his speech mentioned that this year we will be launching 19,600 new BTO flats. So, I would like to ask, how he sees the trajectory in the next two, three years.”
“Also, flexible work arrangements, through inter-agency coordination, could also help flatten peak demand. Sir, road pricing remains important, of course, but it must be a multi-pronged approach to manage congestions. And all these suggestions that I have made, I hope would also help to reduce congestions.”
“Thank you, Speaker. Sir, there are Singaporeans who felt strongly that the founding Prime Minister Mr Lee Kuan Yew's original wish to have the house demolished should be respected. It is not just because this is his personal wish but also the values that he espouse, which is not to have personal monuments.”
The complete record
Every one of 1,031 lines we hold for Liang Eng Hwa, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 13 of 21.
“I want to thank Minister Lim, Minister Iswaran, Senior Minister of State Sim Ann, Minister of State Koh Poh Koon and Parliamentary Secretary Low Yen Ling for doing justice to the cuts that we have filed, with their very good and comprehensive answers. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. [(proc text) Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. (proc text)] [(proc text) The sum of $934,388,300 for Head V ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. (proc text)] [(proc text) The sum of $5,226,603,400 for Head V ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. (proc text)]”
“Chairman, as I remember, MTI does have an anti-profiteering taskforce that was set up some time back. I would like to ask the Minister whether this taskforce is still active. And given the concern about water hikes and how businesses could profiteer, these are concerns from the public whether the taskforce will now swing back into action and start to go around and ensure that there are no profiteering activities happening, especially in the neighbourhood areas?”
“Sure. Thank you, Chairman. I am happy with the announcement of yet another scheme, the Gov-PACT, where the Government will introduce flexibility in the procurement of innovation solutions. Can I ask the Minister what sort of contractual amount we are looking at and how extensive this will be? In some jurisdictions, such schemes also come with some bridge financing for the startups, including for some new inventions, some safeguards for IP. So, is that what we are going to do as well for this scheme?”
“Thirdly, urban solutions were identified as one of the growth sectors that would benefit from the rising middle-class and urbanisation in Asia. How can the Government help companies capture these growth opportunities? Fourthly, TACs are critical partners in supporting industry transformation. How has the partnership between the Government and TACs progressed? How can TACs play a bigger role, moving forward? Fifthly, we have been building up our startup landscape for some time now. What is the progress of our efforts? What more does the Government plan to do to enable the startup scene to be vibrant and continue to grow? [(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]”
“I hope that the whole exercise of CFE has also uplifted businesses' enthusiasm and confidence to embrace the new future. The Government can and should help, support, facilitate and enable. But we also know that too much of it can also be counterproductive. Already, I felt that the Government's hand is everywhere to be seen within the economy, not to mention the extensive assistance schemes and support offered by agencies like the Standards, Productivity and Innovation Board (SPRING), International Enterprise (IE) Singapore and others. In the sort of economy that we envisaged where we gear towards value-creating, innovation and more entrepreneurship, there should actually be less of Government and more of the spirit of enterprise, as what the Minister for Finance said yesterday. [Deputy Speaker (Mr Lim Biow Chuan) in the Chair] Ultimately, it is still the businesses that will come up with the next "killer" product or services that can sell to the consumers of the world. Businesses should be the trendsetters. The Government can help, but the Government may not always make the right business call. Sir, I would like to also take this opportunity to ask the Minister a few other specific questions. Firstly, the CFE report pointed out that Singapore must continue to remain open and connected. But that will also make us more vulnerable to global trends and changes, such as the US withdrawal from the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and Brexit. How will this strategy of remaining open and connected serve us well, given the rise of anti-globalisation sentiments globally? Secondly, the Report also highlighted using forward-looking regulations and Government-led demand to support innovation. How does the Government plan to implement these recommendations?”
“This is doable and we can build on our existing advantages. What I like about the CFE report is the "true to ourselves" way that it sums up the global and domestic realities that we face today and in the future, and the no-frills but pragmatic way in which it outlines what needs to be done to get to the new promised land. Whether it is about strengthening Singapore's international linkages, deepening individual skills, enhancing enterprises' capabilities, building a digital economy, the Industry Transformation Maps (ITMs) or working together in new ways, these are not unexpected undertakings but are absolutely essential to transform the economy. 5.15 pm Even if we could get just some of these efforts to bear fruits, we would have moved or pushed the frontiers forward. In some of these key thrusts, we may need to start in small steps initially to gain traction. Thereafter, we scale up fast so as to multiply the value and move the needle. ITMs clearly demonstrated this grounded and microeconomic-centric approach. By bringing into the ITM platform relevant stakeholders of the industries, we could harness the collective wisdom of the industries to drive growth and opportunities and leverage the mutual resources and support to overcome challenges and build new capabilities. But ITMs can only succeed if each of the stakeholders ‒ enterprises, the trade associations and chambers (TACs), labour and agencies ‒ are aligned to a common purpose, and almost altruistic about it. Also, ITMs need to have the space and the risk tolerance to experiment new ideas and also necessarily empowered to make speedy ground decisions to respond to fast-changing industry scenarios.”
“For example, the global value chains are being restructured and, as a result, we have seen international trade slowed. Countries like China and the US are in-sourcing more than before due to availability of better production technologies. This has direct and indirect impacts on manufacturing, shipping, port and other supporting sectors where we have built up strong capabilities. But the overriding reason why it is the time again to reposition our economy is the rapid technological changes that are fast disrupting businesses, products, services, the value chain and the way we earn our living. In the midst of these developments, domestically for Singapore, our economy started to grow at a more mature pace of about 2%. Our population entered into a steeper rate of ageing and we are nearing the limits of the growth of our workforce. In other words, we will soon reach the full potential of the economy unless we add new capacity and capabilities again and create new growth drivers. What this means is that we have pretty much plucked most of the lower hanging fruits or even the middle hanging fruits. From here on, our next unit of growth would have to come from plucking the higher hanging fruits which may well taste better. In CFE lingo, this is what we meant by moving from value-adding to value-creating or, in the case of internationalisation, encouraging our enterprises to move beyond the traditional markets into more challenging international markets to seek further business growth. Well, it sounds like a new economic strategy is needed and here enters CFE and its recommendations. We need to do the "single or double jump", so to speak, in terms of overall capabilities so that these higher hanging fruits are within our reach.”
“Mdm Chair, I beg to move, "That the total sum to be allocated for Head V of the Estimates be reduced by $100." Our economic strategies have evolved at different phases of the country's development. As the global economic landscape changes, we correspondingly updated our economic strategies and developed new competitive advantages and capabilities to ride on the prevailing opportunities. In our earlier post-Independence years, we started off competing as a low-cost manufacturing location, attracting multinational corporations (MNCs) to set up in Singapore while at the same time also growing our own timber by building up home-bred companies. Complementing our strength as an entrepot, we built up export-led industrial capabilities augmented with a skillful workforce. In the 1980s and 1990s, we further moved up the value ladder, creating value-adding hubs, such as manufacturing, petrochemicals, financial services, shipbuilding, air and sea transportation, among others. We also encouraged local enterprises to go regional and seek growth through internationalisation. By any measure, our economic development has been a great success. It has progressed the country, created good jobs, incomes and opportunities, brought about a better quality of life and strengthened our financial security. Fast forward to today, the operating context has once again changed and, this time round, with fast disruptive implications. The rise of anti-globalisation sentiments and the inward-looking policies of the new United States (US) administration are real and present concerns, although we do hope that these changes are not permanent and can improve over time. But what is of more consequence to us are the permanent and irreversible changes that are taking place even as we speak.”
“Mr Chairman, ASEAN is our immediate neighbourhood. Relationships have been warm and constructive in the last few years, especially with neighbouring Malaysia and Indonesia. While we share some core common values and positions, the diverse political backgrounds and ever-changing circumstances within each country will inevitably lead to situations where we need to manage some of the differences and potential tension points that will surface from time to time. Maintaining strong and resilient political, economic and people-to-people ties within our region is, hence, very important in a region as diverse as Southeast Asia. What is Singapore doing to maintain strong links with our fellow ASEAN countries? How can we deepen Singaporeans' understanding of and familiarity with political developments in ASEAN, its culture and sensitivities and its economic opportunities? In the CFE Report, it had mentioned that AEC will make ASEAN a more compelling market and a competitive production base. There are, indeed, good potential opportunities and sound commercial reasons for our companies to expand and internationalise into the region. As the ASEAN Chair in 2018, how could Singapore help to advance economic integration within ASEAN and with its key partners? ASEAN”
“Mdm Chairman, at last year's PMO COS, Deputy Prime Minister Teo signalled strongly about the Government building stronger engineering capabilities across the Public Service. He announced that the Public Service will employ an additional 1,000 engineers and raise the salaries of our public sector engineers to attract and retain engineering officers in the Service. Last year, at the Public Service Leadership Dinner, Deputy Prime Minister Teo, also mentioned about the need to prepare Singapore and Singaporeans towards a Smart Nation. He highlighted that digitisation will transform the way we work and deliver public services. He also spoke about the cross-cutting issues facing the Public Service and how the Service could work together to address those issues to ensure coordination and coherence across the whole-of-Government. One of the CFE's recommendations called for the Government to harness data as an asset and to build deep capabilities in data analytics. I would like to use this opportunity at the COS to seek an update from PMO on the progress in these areas; in particular, on how the Public Service is investing in strategic capabilities, such as engineering, digitisation and data analytics. Public Service Employment of Persons with Disabilities”
“And the best way to mitigate these new risks is to always maintain a strong financial position, ready to act with effective measures when the situation warrants and have the internal resilience to weather external shocks that will definitely come time and again. Amidst all these, we must maintain social cohesion, alongside capable political leadership. As individuals take on more career risks and the nature of work changes due to innovations, there may be the need to further strengthen the social safety nets while maximising opportunities for Singapore workers. We must avoid the discontentment and divisions that we recently saw happening in Europe and the US to globalisation. Mdm Speaker, the Budget is a package of good policy intentions and, in the Singapore context, almost always medium to long term in focus. In the last 10 years of Budgets which I have debated as a Member of this House, I can only remember one year where the Budget was almost entirely short term. That was in 2009 when the economy contracted by 17% the quarter preceding and a negative growth of 2% to 5% was forecasted for that year. The circumstances then warranted decisive and timely action by the Government to save jobs and to help businesses, and the centrepiece item for that year's Budget was the $4.9 billion Resilience Package. Everyone would love to have a Budget package with tasty, immediate goodies. I would love it, too. However, we would find our fruits tastier, if they were harvested through hard work and prudence from plans put in place many Budgets ago. That has been the spirit of Singapore Budgets since our Independence and has been core to our values. We should continue to do it this way, even in the future economy. Madam, I support the Budget.”
“Also, I hope companies can be incentivised to provide sabbatical leave to long-serving employees who may wish to take stock of their accumulated skills and experience, take learning breaks to reskill and re-energise. This is consistent with enhancing long-term employability in the future economy. Many of the Fortune 500 companies already have such practices. Secondly, to expand post-secondary education options with more polytechnic and ITE places and the range of course offerings. We should also review the curriculum of junior colleges and to consider placing a greater emphasis on applied learning, beyond just pre-university education. It is also timely to study and weigh the long-term benefits of national A-level exams in the new future landscape. Thirdly, we should carry out deeper analysis on Employment Pass and S-Pass data to understand the skills and expectation mismatches within the workforce. After all, these are real observable data on why we could not find Singaporeans to fill those jobs. With the deeper understanding, we can map out the right skills development programme to reduce mismatches. Information gaps are among the reasons why there are mismatches between employers and employees. I am glad that CFE and Budget 2017 have undertaken to step up the functionality and user experience of the national Jobs Bank. We need to harness the value of the whole-of-economy data to do a better job in matching jobs. Mdm Speaker, in the interest of time, I will not speak on the ITMs but I will cover them during the Committee of Supply (COS) debate for the Ministry of Trade and Industry. The transition to a more entrepreneurial, international and innovative economy will obviously come with risks.”
“I hope the Ministry of National Development can consider making available unused buildings or spaces in locations near IHLs, such as Clementi and West Coast, which are near to the National University of Singapore, Dover Road, near Singapore Polytechnic, to foster closer social networking and economy shaping between IHLs and the innovators. On skills, Mdm Speaker, the key word in CFE and Budget 2017 is to go deep. The message is loud and clear. So, while I can appreciate the need to make training more accessible via e-learning platforms, I am not sure that a modularised and technology-enabled training programme can achieve the right depth and rigour to meet the needs of the market place. But I fully agree we need to strengthen on-the-job skills utilisation and to urge employers and TACs to take the lead in the design and structuring of skills upgrade. The nexus between skills acquisition and utilisation will be better aligned if employers and TACs take ownership. In addition, I hope that the Government will also consider three other suggestions related to skills and jobs that the GPC has earlier put up. Firstly, we should allow more flexibility in admission for mid-career applicants to enter the Institutes of Technical Education, polytechnics and universities. Mature students, with their rich life and workplace experience can bring useful perspectives to the classroom, even as they learn new skills there. I like a particular line in the CFE report, which said "we need to go beyond the pursuit of the highest possible academic qualifications early in life to focus on acquiring and using knowledge and skills throughout our lives." I hope the Ministry of Education and the IHLs can start making changes in this area and turn these words into action.”
“It also gives the Government a greater handle in keeping the company's headquarter and core operations rooted in Singapore. And should the company's owner decide to cash out and sell their stakes, the Government's equity stake in the company would be better able to help retain the value in Singapore. These requirements should be clearly stated in the investment mandate. Besides the state investment agencies as provider of patient capital, the GPC also urged the Government to encourage locally-established and "patriotic" foundations and family offices to be another source of capital for local enterprises' efforts to boost innovative capabilities and scale up. We have seen that in some countries, for example, in Sweden, there is this Wallenburg Foundation which will invest in companies to pursue their own Swedish national interest. Mdm Speaker, cost of space is often cited as an impediment to startups and new enterprises. We should expand the availability of low-cost spaces. Last year, France opened Europe's biggest accelerators with space for 1,000 startups in a refurbished Paris train station. There are many more such newly set up accelerators in Europe today, very much like our Block 71. State land that is earmarked for medium- to long-term use could be leased out on short-term leases with temporary built-in structures. Also, from overseas experience, precincts near the Institutes of Higher Learning (IHLs) tend to be good fertile ground for like-minded innovators to gravitate towards and a community of innovators to spontaneously form.”
“It can expand Singapore's economic spaces and add excitement and vibrancy, notwithstanding a slower 2% to 3% home-based growth. On internationalisations, given recent global political developments and the anti-free trade sentiments in Europe and the United States (US), we clearly need to further expand and diversify beyond traditional markets. There is scope to pursue more opportunities within the ASEAN markets, riding on the growing middle class and its expanding infrastructural needs. We would need to further expand consular and International Enterprise (IE) Singapore's presence in these locations, expand air links and develop closer multifaceted ties, including setting up more location-based business councils with the local jurisdictions. Amidst all these initiatives, the oxygen for businesses to scale up, innovate and venture overseas is funding and capital, which was also addressed in the CFE report. Besides the international financing schemes, such as the International Finance Scheme (IFS), which has been enhanced, we must also have available long-term risk capital and seed funding to take direct equity stakes in promising local enterprises or ventures with the aim to help companies expand the regional footprint and anchor value in Singapore. Hence, I welcome the setting up of the $600 million International Partnership Fund (IPF). Indeed, this is one of the bold ideas of CFE. Under this initiative, the Government will commit capital through a Temasek-linked fund to co-invest with a Singapore-based company. Such equity injection, which tends to be longer term in horizon, would be a good source of patient capital as well as a confidence and rating boost for the company.”
“At the national level, the Government should also see building nation-wide digital capabilities and infrastructure as a public good and to go beyond just playing the enabling role. Often, decisive actions are needed to fast-track or build such capabilities ahead of time. The private sector may not always be commercially aligned to the ultimate national objectives and may have other nuances or take longer to mobilise, for example. A case in point is the setting up of the national digital payments system, which was suggested by the GPC for Finance, Trade and Industry to CFE, where leaving it to the private sector may take ages to happen, given the multiple commercial stakeholders involved. The Government should also hasten the proliferation of sharing economy platforms, enabling trade and e-commerce connectivity across and up and down the economy. In the area of innovations, the GPC believes that enterprises should leverage on R&D as a key competitive driver. Through the ITM platforms, more R&D support, such as Research, Innovation and Enterprise (RIE) 2020, can be made available to promising local enterprises to develop breakthrough and trendsetting products and services. Currently, most of our R&D resources are being utilised by very large companies. We need to "bite-sized" this R&D funding support so that it is within the scope of smaller enterprises and, through ITMs, to cluster businesses together to seek joint solutions to common challenges, such as water and carbon emissions. Mdm Speaker, the Global Innovation Alliance and SkillsFuture Leadership Development initiatives are sound attempts to build international innovation networks. In the new landscape, superior global connectivity will be the key success factor.”
“Many of the key ideas of CFE were well-shared and ventilated during the one year of public engagement and, hence, most of the recommendations come as no surprises, though they are not any less impactful. We know that this is the to-do list on hand and what is more crucial is to get as many done as soon as possible and to do them well. That will make a transformational difference. Since not everything is cast in stone and more plans are being hatched on the move, I hope the Government can still take new ideas on board to transform the economy, and I have some of my thoughts and suggestions here today. Building strong digital capabilities is among the foremost priorities. We must quickly capitalise on our competitive edge to stay way ahead of the curve, so that we can exploit the powerful multiplying effect that digitisation can bring. Jack Ma recently said that Alibaba aims to be the fifth largest economy in the world with its e-commerce platform and digital connectivity. So, the sky is the limit in this space. We need to accelerate adoption of digital technologies by small and medium enterprises (SMEs). There is no other more enterprise-centric way to carry this out than to go one-on-one with enterprises, offering step-by-step advice on the technologies to use at each stage of the growth, roping in resources from the Infocomm media Development Authority (IMDA), the Standards, Productivity and Innovation Board (SPRING) and other lead agencies, giving some funding to those that are ready to pilot emerging infocomm technology (ICT) solutions and starting with sectors that are in greatest need to improve productivity. All that I have just said is actually what the SME Go Digital Programme is all about and that is the way to go.”
“For example, in the case of water, perhaps the food industry's Industry Transformation Map (ITM) can be the platform where industry players and all stakeholders come together to seek longer-term solutions and working with the Public Utilities Board (PUB) and the Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*STAR) for both research and development (R&D) and resource support. Mdm Speaker, this year's Budget carries with it the added vital task of implementing the recommendations from CFE and the all-important mission of renewing our economy. Hence, necessarily, Budget 2017 would be more heavily weighted in the areas of economic transformation and setting our sights on the medium- to long-term horizon. The Government Parliamentary Committee (GPC) for Finance, Trade and Industry supports the key thrust of the strategies outlined by CFE to decisively position Singapore to capture the opportunities of the future economic landscape. The comprehensive set of recommendations is a good start to deepen transformation. We noted that a number of the suggestions put up by the GPC, primarily on the supply-side areas, were also in the report. Some have critiqued that the CFE report offers no new ground-breaking ideas and that it was lacking in detailed execution plans. It is, indeed, not the usual approach. However, we are in uncharted territory in this new fast-paced ever-changing landscape, having a well thought out strategy and clear directions as to where we should go will put us in pole position. But the important next step is to develop quick response capabilities that can react swiftly and seize opportunities whenever they present themselves and these opportunities are likely to come in shorter cycles with greater injects of newer unknowns in play.”
“As we intensify digitisation, we can expect possible job losses but there will also be new jobs created for those who can adapt. Under such circumstances, giving out broad-based short-term cash grants to businesses will not reverse these trends. It requires a whole-of-system approach to deal with the challenge. The CFE and Budget 2017 do have a host of recommendations and measures to address this development, including the Adapt and Grow initiatives and specific industry transformation support. For businesses, the perennial concerns are still about the costs of doing business in Singapore. I do agree that the increase in water prices and diesel duty do not help the situation, even as the businesses can understand the reason for the hikes. For example, I read last Thursday in Lianhe Wanbao about how the food industry and food manufacturers are most concerned with the hikes as both water and diesel are their major inputs in the food production chain and there are no direct rebates in the Budget to help them. We do know that there is no turning back on having less air pollutive fuel and to have better air quality, as that is what we want. We want better environment. We also know that the cost of an additional drop of water will cost more as we tap more of the expensive sources of water going forward. These are irreversible trends. Rather than look for short-term painkillers, let us tackle the problem head-on and collectively work on longer-term alternative solutions.”
“4% quarter-on-quarter and 1% year-on-year. So, clearly, from a data standpoint, we are not seeing the sort of sharp contraction similar to what we saw in recent downturns. Hence, it may not warrant the Government to roll out a massive rescue package to save the economy but rather to continue with and enhance existing schemes to assist businesses, which include the cash schemes, like the Wage Credit and the additional Special Employment Credit (SEC). These are in addition to the other assistance measures in the Budget, some of which were recommended by the Committee on the Future Economy (CFE). So, in my view, the Finance Minister has struck the appropriate balance here. However, it is worth noting that we are seeing the new realities of our economy setting in. Firstly, the uneven nature of the growth and, secondly, the overall low and flat growth trajectory. This probably explains why some businesses are feeling downbeat. In particular, businesses are beginning to feel the effects of life under a slower 2% growth environment, compared to what used to be a 3% to 5% growth a few years ago. It is showing up in their order books in the form of fewer orders and, as a result, more competition and compressed margins while, at the same time, seeing business costs continuously creeping up. If we further overlay the picture with the employment situation, then we are beginning to see troubling signs that we ought to be concerned about. For the fourth quarter, last year, total employment grew by only a lower 1,900 compared to 2,700 in the previous quarter and much lower than the 16,100 in the same quarter in 2015. This could be due to a combination of cyclical downturns in some sectors and structural shifts taking place within the economy which lead to higher job mismatches.”
“Mdm Speaker, thank you for this opportunity to start the Debate. The general response from the businesses to this year's Budget has not been positive. From the media reports, we have read strong statements from the Singapore Business Federation, Singapore Chinese Chamber of Commerce and Industry (SCCCI), Association of Small and Medium Enterprises and the other trade associations and chambers (TACs) expressing disappointments with the Budget for not doing enough to help businesses cope with the immediate challenges. It is understandable and natural for businesses to always seek an even better business environment. It happens in all countries to varying degrees and for as long as we can remember. I did some quick homework to satisfy myself as to whether this barrage of criticisms by the businesses are fair and justifiable, or whether the Finance Minister is, indeed, doing the right thing from an economic management and, of course, from a prudential standpoint. So, let us start with the most recent economic numbers to see if the economy is, indeed, in a dismal state. In the latest fourth quarter gross domestic product (GDP) numbers, the economy grew 12.3% quarter-on-quarter. It is the strongest quarterly growth recorded in six years and it translates into a 2.9% year-on-year growth for the fourth quarter. Granted that the key driver from the surge in growth came mainly from two manufacturing sectors, namely, the semiconductor and pharmaceutical sectors, but we can expect spillover effects to other sectors supporting these two sectors, such as precision engineering, transport, warehousing, financial and other supporting services. Importantly, we have also seen credible growth from the services sector which accounts for about two-thirds of the economy. The sector grew by 8.”
“Madam, my follow-up question is on bilateral trade agreements. Given that multilateral trade agreements are so difficult to stitch and ratify with many varying political interests, political cycles and not to mention, the long-drawn process, would the Ministry now take a different strategy or perhaps a separate strategy to pursue more bilateral trade agreements with countries, especially those economies that could be potentially our new markets, like South America, Latin America and Africa, for example? Would there be a separate track or effort to do that as well?”
“Madam, I thank the Parliamentary Secretary for sharing the very impressive numbers. The enrolment numbers for SCCs increasing from 3,000 to 18,000 is a six-fold increase. Parents I spoke to appreciate the SCC support as this makes their lives better as working parents. I sense that the demand will continue to rise. So, I want to ask the Parliamentary Secretary whether MOE has plans to further scale up both the SCCs within the schools as well as those that are outside the schools. Would MOE work with some of the voluntary welfare organisations (VWOs) which are interested to set up SCCs, which they slowed or stopped since the school-based SCCs were introduced? Thirdly, there is more demand. If MOE can increase the effort, that would really help parents, especially the working parents.”
“Mdm Speaker, I must say that the resumption in the building of new hawker centres is probably the best decision that the Ministry of the Environment and Water Resources has made, in my view, and my constituency is a direct beneficiary. I also support NEA's approach to try out the new model to finesse the way our hawker centres are run. Can I ask the Senior Minister of State whether there are good learning points since we implemented the not-for-profit model? Has it improved the attractiveness of the hawker professionals and lowered the barrier for entry of aspiring hawkers? I understand from stallholders from the Bukit Panjang new market that their new monthly conservancy charges are about almost $2,000. I would like to ask the Senior Minister of State why are there no benefits of scale, since there is centralised dishwashing and so on, and can this charge be lowered?”
“Yes, we are equally concerned over the next President as well. I just want to also ask the Minister, from my interactions with the SMRT staff and engineers looking after the BPLRT system, I get the sense they are not placing enough priority, or maybe they are not resourced enough to deal with some of these operational problems that they have. And maybe, indeed, they were also thinking and hoping that the system will be scrapped. So, I would like to ask the Minister, as we look at this whole change to enhance the system, whether it makes sense to have this system run by a separate entity on a not-for-profit basis so that we get the system stabilised first before we look at how we can worry about other commercial considerations.”
“Madam, I appreciate the very candid reply from the Minister and I thank him for the clearest indication yet that the LRT system will not be scrapped. The news headline of that possibility has caused great anxiety and concerns to our residents. But notwithstanding the service breakdowns that they had experienced, I think they still want the LRT system because replacing it with a bus system is just not practical. So, I would like to ask the Minister, whilst we are looking into how we can significantly upgrade the system to enhance the reliability, in the interim, can LTA improve on the response to breakdowns because there could still be some more breakdowns as we discover new things, whether we can have provision of more buses within the town, feeder service so that in the event there is a disruption or breakdown, the buses can be re-deployed to respond to breakdowns and to minimise inconvenience to our residents?”
“Mdm Speaker, in our Meet-the-People Sessions (MPS), we always hear sad cases of employees who are quite skilled and have high abilities being retrenched and losing their jobs. I would like to ask the Minister, as we scale up the PCPs and the CSP, can particular emphasis be given to how we can preserve the skills or, if not, preserve the abilities? They may have rich experience and so on, so how do we preserve these? This is so that, as a whole, our human capital is preserved and retained so that we can use that to grow our economy.”
“Madam, I am not sure if the Minister has addressed the question by Mr Saktiandi on the number of firms failing and closing but I would like to ask again whether the Minister sees increasing numbers of companies running into serious problems and not surviving. And related to that, whether as these companies fail, are we at risk of permanently losing these capabilities – engineering and economic capabilities, for example, for the oil and gas sector – the contracting capabilities. And whether the Government will come up with sector-specific measures to help these industries and sectors. For example, the Industry Transformation Map, whether you want to activate this early to help these companies.”
“Madam, I would like to ask the Senior Minister of State what is the distinction between the AGO's report and that of the KPMG audit report on Aljunied-Hougang Town Council (AHTC), given that they also uncovered a series of lapses, as people may be confused and draw comparisons and similarities between the two reports. Would the Senior Minister of State give us proper perspectives on this, to borrow the words of Ms Sylvia Lim?”
“Mdm Speaker, we live in an increasingly connected global neighbourhood where events or calamities that happen at one end of the globe could have impact and ramifications on other faraway locations, financial or otherwise. As a highly open economy and international financial centre, it would also serve us well to support IMF's multilateral efforts to improve the livelihood of poorer countries, develop sustainable economic growth and preserve global financial stability. Mdm Speaker, with that, I support the amendments. 4.34 pm”
“I understand from the Minister's speech that the additional funds for the PRGT initiative is paid for from the profits arising from the IMF's sales of part of its gold holdings. The member states Page: 53 have agreed to this arrangement and Singapore's share of contribution to PRGT amounted to US$20 million. I would like to ask the Minister: do our gold holdings at IMF form part of our official foreign reserves and, hence, would the conversion of the sales profits from the disposal of our gold holdings into the financial grant to PRGT constitute a spending on reserves? Secondly, I would like to ask the Minister whether he envisages the IMF requesting more contributions from member countries and, in particular, asking for bigger contributions from Singapore? This is against the backdrop of the growing trend of Western countries under political pressure to reduce their commitment to foreign aid. Would the PRGT be able to self-sustain its concessionary lending capacity over the long term with this latest contribution? Thirdly, section 6A(2)(b) of the Bill states that MAS needs to be satisfied that at least one other government would be willing to provide the financial assistance in response to IMF's request before the grant or financial assistance can be given. I would like to ask the Minister whether that would be setting the bar too low with just one other government needing to consent to provide the financial assistance. What is the rationale and why would we not require more governments to participate before we assist, given that IMF is a multilateral participatory organisation? In this case, I understand that PRGT has already obtained support of more than 80% of the member countries.”
“Mdm Speaker, the amendments to the Bretton Woods Agreements Act further set out the authority provided to MAS to enter into agreements with IMF and to empower MAS to carry out its obligations under the fund arrangement and fund programme established by IMF. In particular, the proposed amendments to the Act will allow MAS to make grants and other financial assistances to IMF's concessional lending facility known as Poverty Reduction and Growth Trust (PRGT). The PRGT was set up primarily to lend to low-income countries who may be severely impacted by catastrophes, natural disasters, epidemics or global financial crises. The amendments also instituted additional safeguards, such as requiring Parliament's approval for the provision of the grants and that the Minister-in-charge of MAS must also publish in the Gazette a statement containing details of the financial agreement. I support the amendment to empower MAS, as well as the safeguards put in place over MAS' exercise of powers. From a humanitarian standpoint, I would also agree with the Government's position that we need to do our part and contribute our humble share to help poorer countries impacted by various calamities from time to time. It is also in our interest to see greater international cooperation in dealing with the various global challenges that we face and for the spirit of Bretton Woods to come to bear and continue. After all, we hope to live in a global village where the community of nations make efforts to help one another in need and each doing our part to alleviate poverty. However, Mdm Speaker, I do have a few questions for the Minister.”
“Thank you, Madam. I promised my resident that I would raise this. So, I have to convey this unhappy feedback, mostly from the Orange cardholders. The unhappy part about it is the $1,100 monthly household income cut-off criterion per person is too low to qualify for the Blue card. I would like to ask whether the Ministry would look at reviewing this threshold, given that medical expenses have gone up and whether there is any plan to merge the Blue and Orange cards. Given that the Orange card is so unpopular and not so appreciated, maybe we should just move more to the Blue card. That will also take some of the patient load off the polyclinics because there are still a lot of people going to the polyclinics as it is a lot cheaper. If we can expand this group, that is, to have more getting the Blue card, that would probably improve the well-being of everyone and also ease the workload at the polyclinics. Page: 27”
“The Minister mentioned the breakdown rate of 20 per 1,000 per month. If you look at the HDB lifts that we have, it still represents about a few hundred a month. It still appears high from a percentage standpoint. I want to ask whether BCA sets a more stringent standard in terms of the breakdowns for all the HDB lifts. The second question is: with the breakdowns that we have seen in the last few months, is there a need to review the procurement policies? For example, whether the current contractual tenures for these lift maintenance contractors are too short for them, to the extent that they may not want to invest in lift maintenance capabilities because they are not sure whether they will still be in business after two years. So, would we want to look into the tenure, as well as how they source the parts? There are still talks that maybe the parts that we sourced from a vendor that offers cheaper rates may compromise the quality. So, does that not require a review as well?”
“It is timely for our Government to relook into the pay, career path, jobscope and recognition of engineers in the Civil Service. To maximise the Government's efforts, I urge the Government to also influence the private sector through the contracts it awards. When asking for engineering-related tenders, instead of simply award to the lowest, the engineering innovation and local Singaporean Core workforce should carry much higher weightage.”
“We will need many computer engineers and information technology (IT) experts to make us a Smart Nation. We need engineers to develop robots. We need engineers to keep our Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) system, airport and seaport working in tip-top conditions. We need engineers to build smarter homes, clean supply of water and even security system for protection of our country. In fact, it is estimated that half our economy relies on inputs from engineers. Do we have enough engineers to bring our nation to the next level? Unfortunately, the answer is no. In 2015, among the top 10 jobs that went unfilled for six months, four were engineering related. 4.15 pm Our engineering faculties are unable to attract enough locals and have to fill the vacancies with foreign students. In fact, one local student was joking: whenever he says that he is from engineering, he has to quickly specify he is Singaporean, otherwise people will assume he is a foreigner. How did the situation get so bad? First, there is the perception that studying engineering is boring and tough. Students have to slog long hours. Next, is the remuneration. Those engineers who have accountant, lawyer or doctor wives told me that their wives earn more than them. Hence, many left their engineering career. Many also feel being an engineer is tough. Not only do they have to spend long hours in their job, there is also the feeling that when things go wrong, everybody blames the engineers. When things go right, they are forgotten. There is no recognition. In fact, there is a saying: a scientist can fail all his life. He just needs to have one success to win the Nobel Prize. Whereas engineers you have to do it right all your life. You just need to have one failure to end up in jail. Jin bo hua, or not worth it.”
“They are Mr Tan Nguan Sen and Mr Yap Kheng Guan from the Public Utilities Board (PUB). Both men and many other engineers in PUB epitomise the passion and competency of PUB engineers as well as the deep expertise they have on how to sustain Singapore's self-sufficiency in water resource. It is always a reassuring experience whenever I seek assistance from both of them on constituency-related engineering problems. They show deep knowledge and experience on PUB-related matters and will always offer good practical solutions to local problems. I hope that the Public Service continues to bring about such passionate, resolute and capable engineers to the ranks and inculcate in them the pioneer values and the can-do spirit to turn our vulnerability or whatever adversity we encounter into strengths. I have a few questions for PMO. How is the Public Service growing its engineering capabilities and developing its engineering workforce in the years to come? Are there fulfilling career paths for public sector engineers and are they competitively compensated? Given that the Public Service has outsourced and already privatised many of its engineering activities in the past, will there be sufficient engineering jobs in the public sector and where are the areas of growth? Engineering Er Dr Lee Bee Wah (Nee Soon): Mdm Chair, when I entered university in 1980, engineering was a much sought-after discipline. Top science students either studied medicine or engineering. Many of my seniors proudly told me their contribution and involvement in our nation-building. They practically helped build Singapore. As Singapore enters the next lap of its nationhood, do we still have passionate and committed engineers?”
“Mdm Chair, several reasons led to the decline in the number of professional engineers in the Public Service. Among others are the increase in the outsourcing of engineering services over the years, the privatisation of Government engineering units into commercial entities and the change in the way the Government functions; moving away from paddling to steering, to borrow a boating analogy. While I can see the merits of outsourcing and the hiving off of engineering units as private entities, I believe the Public Service still needs to retain a high level of engineering capabilities and core competencies. Whether it is in the administering of engineering projects, contract management, regulation, technical grants allocation or even policymaking with regard to very technical areas, such as automation and robotics, the Public Service clearly needs to possess key domain expertise to carry out the functions of the Government. The Government must never be in a position where it is overly dependent on the private sector for engineering advice and loses its ability to do internal engineering appraisals. We need to attract and recruit more engineers into the Public Service and to ensure that the fresh cohorts of younger engineers continue to be inducted to succeed the retiring engineers so as to strengthen the organic capabilities. Anecdotally, when I interact with many public sector engineers, it seems that there are more white-hair engineers now. It seems that the professional engineers in the public sector are ageing. Here, I would like to make a special mention of two very competent and experienced senior engineers that I have the pleasure of working with in the Government Parliamentary Committee for the Environment and in my constituency work.”
“Mdm Chair, two new hawker centres were completed since the Government resumed the building of hawker centres. They were Hougang Ci Yuan Hawker Centre operated by Fei Siong Food Management and Bukit Panjang Hawker Centre run by NTUC Foodfare. These two hawker centres were run under the new "not-for-profit" model. Can the Minister update how the experience has been and whether there are good learning points to apply for the Page: 56 next 18 new hawker centres? Building the hawker centres is the relatively easier part. The more difficult challenge is to find enough enterprising hawkers, especially young hawkers. It is important that we groom a new generation of hawkers so that our hawker culture and the good food can carry on. Would NEA consider further lowering the barrier to entry for young would-be hawkers and have a new hawker assistance scheme or programme to help first-time hawkers? To keep our hawker centres vibrant and lively, would NEA consider studying overseas models and experiences, such as those at the Taipei night markets and Hong Kong street markets, to see if there are any good ideas that can be replicated in Singapore?”
“Madam, it is the time of the year again when we need to raise our vigilance against the rising cases of dengue. NEA announced that we are likely to see a higher number of dengue cases compared to last year. This time around, we have the added threat of Zika which could be transmitted by the same mosquitoes. The key is to reduce the population of mosquitoes through removing the source of breeding. At the community level, the practical response is always to encourage as many of the residents as Page: 51 possible to conduct the "Do the Mozzie Wipeout" exercise. We also need to step up vector control operations and enhance surveillance. What more can we do to tackle this threat? I read that the Wolbachia technology has been experimented in countries like Australia, Brazil, Vietnam and Indonesia. Can I ask if NEA will be looking into this technology? I understand that there are also some positive developments in the area of vaccine. Is the Ministry also looking into this option as well? Water Resilience and Conservation”
“Mdm Chair, I am sure it must have been a hectic few months for the MOF team. And in keeping with tradition, we have kept the MOF COS short and sweet. Once again, congratulations to Minister Heng Swee Keat and the MOF team for the truly transformational Budget and also thanks to Senior Minister of State Indranee Rajah and Senior Minister of State Sim Ann for their replies, notwithstanding the short time that they have. So, with that, Madam, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. [(proc text) Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. (proc text)] [(proc text) The sum of $767,425,400 for Head M ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. (proc text)] [(proc text) The sum of $175,267,300 for Head M ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. (proc text)]”
“Mdm Chair, this year's COS is held in the month of April. We are into the new financial year (FY) 2016. I would like to ask the Minister: how is the Government able to stay funded in this month of April when we are still here in the midst of debating and passing the Supply Bill for FY2016? Are there any Government programmes or functions of the Government which are affected because of the later than usual COS?”
“Despite being a $450-million scheme, only 28 projects were put up since 2011, with no mention of any take up. One of the criteria mentioned was that during the commercialisation phase, the agency may need to call for an open tender to procure the innovative product or service. Mdm Chair, this is a good initiative, notwithstanding the poor take-up rate. It is probably ahead of its time. But now, with greater emphasis on working closely with businesses and to foster innovation, the Government should give this scheme another boost and fine tune the criteria and KPIs to be more innovation friendly. Given the call in the Budget Statement for the Government to better partner industry and innovators, can the Minister share how the Government intends to co-create solutions with businesses and the public? What can the Government do to help smaller firms better access Government procurement opportunities and to build a track record for their overseas expansion? Cumbersome procurement processes and irrelevant qualifying criteria, such as how big the company is and the number of years in operation, have deterred many SMEs, especially the start-ups, from supplying solutions to the Government where innovative and creative procurement is concerned. We should introduce greater flexibilities in the way the Government sector procures goods and services, including looking at non-traditional safeguards to ensure value for money. Developing a more SME-friendly procurement process will allow SMEs the opportunities to harness their creativity and capabilities, yet result in higher competition on ideas and solutions, leading to better value for money for the public sector agencies. This is a win-win for the Government and businesses. [(proc text) Question proposed.”
“Subjecting every proposal to an open tender would be the surest way to kill off initiative and creativity among the small businesses, and some could be start-ups. Understandably, there is a need to devise new and alternative governance safeguards other than just making every tenderer compete on prices in the name of transparency and fairness. Getting the best price tender may not necessarily bring out the most creative and innovative solution which serve the long-term needs of the public sector. The cumulative solution may not be a more sustainable solution. In the private sector, awarding contracts on the basis of ideas and innovation by large companies to small firms are already prevalent. Many developed countries' public sectors do have tailor-made procurement practices too that promote innovations and co-creations. We can take a leaf from the United Kingdom (UK). To help SMEs develop innovative solutions to public sector challenges, the UK government established the Small Business Research Initiative (SBRI) specifically to help small companies compete for government projects. SBRI helps to connect small businesses to government departments which have public sector problems and assist small businesses come up with innovative solutions and ideas. This scheme even helps with bridge financing and, in cases of new invention, to safeguard the intellectual property. In Singapore, we do have a similar scheme known as Public-Private Co-Innovation Partnership (CI Partnership), which is the platform for Government departments and local companies to co-develop innovative solutions to meet the Government's needs. However, upon deeper study into the details on the CI Partnership website, it seems that this scheme has turned dormant.”
“Mdm Chairman, I beg to move, "That the total sum to be allotted for head M of the Estimates be reduced by $100." As the largest buyer of goods and services in the market, the Government has significant market influence to shape enterprise behaviour and, through its procurement practices, incentivise businesses to draw on their research and innovative capabilities in coming up with solutions to public sector problems. There is scope to enhance our procurement practices towards promoting innovation among our small and medium enterprises (SMEs) while, at the same time, delivering value for money for the public sector. As a start, the public sector could earmark a portion of the public sector tenders specifically to promote and encourage innovation and creativity. I suggest that the Government establish a new "buy innovation" procurement framework where innovative solutions are being sought for public sector problems. This could be a new category of tenders carved out for projects where the public sector agencies intend to co-create solutions with SMEs. In such tenders, the procurement of innovations is better achieved by specifying the public sector problems to be solved rather than by prescribing the solution and the work to be done, which is the usual approach. Mdm Chair, at the Public Service level, our procurement rules and instruction manuals may also need to be reviewed and updated to cater to a more entrepreneurial and innovative society to come. We need to allow for sufficient discretion at the operating level for bite-size public sector projects to be awarded to small businesses which may be early movers or who are proactive in coming up with innovative solutions that the public agencies are looking for.”
“Thank you, Mr Chairman. In this year's Budget, clearly, the word "transformation" is key. It is mentioned so many times – as well as "industry transformation". These are obviously the priority items in this year's Budget. And thereafter, we will have the CFE where, again, MTI will be all hands on deck to push ahead with the transformation. Minister Iswaran mentioned about the formidable task ahead and we empathise with the responsibility on MTI's shoulders. I just want to say that MTI and the family of agencies should draw on the inspiration of the power-packed Transformers, since they are transforming the economy, and then charge ahead. With that, we wish you all the best and we are with you. I want to thank Minister Lim, Minister Iswaran, Minister of State Koh Poh Koon and Parliamentary Secretary Low Yen Ling for their replies. I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. [(proc text) Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. (proc text)] [(proc text) The sum of $924,799,100 for Head V ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. (proc text)] [(proc text) The sum of $5,662,788,200 for Head V ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. (proc text)]”
“The Minister did talk about the benefits of TPP. Clearly, quite a list of things that our businesses can benefit from. We know that TPP is now political football, as we observe the US elections. I would like to ask the Minister whether he still sees hope that we can get this ratified in the US administration and Congress and whether we should now bank on RCEP instead, given that we are likely to have an agreement this year and, hopefully, the smooth ratification as well. Given that we also have a US-Singapore FTA, with that FTA plus RCEP, without TPP, does it impact us that much? I wish to hear the Minister's views on this.”
“Well, I applaud the Government's move to establish the cluster champions consisting of teams of officers from the public sector rolling up their sleeves and fast-tracking the transformation of about 20 sectors. That is a tremendous effort, accounting for about 80% of our economy. But also, it requires the officers to adopt a new approach of working beyond just within the service. As the Government, you work in a Government agency; but, now, to work with the markets, you work with the businesses. So, in terms of resourcing and organising, I would like to ask the Minister how does the Ministry at this stage set up the headcount that is needed, the changes in terms of the different agencies to be able to drive this sector roadmap that was introduced by the Finance Minister?”
“While it is not possible to save any single company from failing, our economic agencies should do their utmost to help the SMEs transform, upgrade and capture new growth opportunities. Mdm Chair, the advent of disruptive technologies and the emergence of new business models are fast changing the economic order. We are not spared. But then, on the defensive, we should gear ourselves to ride on this wave of change and seize the new opportunities. Obviously, it will require us to reorientate and, more importantly, for the workers to reskill for the new types of jobs to come. Lifelong learning and continuous skills upgrading are the best defence against skills obsolescence and structural unemployment. SkillsFuture can be the immediate tool available to workers to learn and safeguard workers' employability throughout their work life cycle. But I believe that MTI and its agencies can also work with the industries and companies to leverage the resources offered by SkillsFuture and ensure the skills readiness of our workers. It will require greater horizontal coordination and management attention on the part of the stakeholders involved so that we can achieve the desired state of right jobs, right skills and right match, as articulated by the Minister for Finance yesterday. Finally, we are all excited about the set-up of the Committee for the Future Economy (CFE) and look forward to the recommendations of the Committee. In this era of fast-paced technological changes and never-ending innovation, it is increasingly challenging to predict product trends or to anticipate what the next big thing would be. In that regard, the CFE has a very tough job. Could the Minister also provide an update on the progress of the CFE so far?”
“If China dropped the ball on its reform to rebalance its economy, we could see a much sharper slowdown in its growth and it will hit us directly and immediately. On the home front, we are pressing on with restructuring and industry transformation as laid out in the Industry Transformation Roadmap, pending the completion of the review. Against these forces at play, what is MTI's latest view on the economy this year and whether our economy is resilient enough to cope with the external shocks and the internal restructuring? Does MTI intend to do more to help companies manage the downside risks and uncertainties? To the credit of MTI and International Enterprise (IE) Singapore, several enhancements to existing schemes were announced last year, such as the Market Readiness Assistance Scheme and the Global Company Partnership Scheme administered by IE Singapore and new schemes, like the International Growth Scheme, amongst others, introduced to help companies which are internationalising. I would like to hear from the Minister if the schemes have been useful or well taken up by the businesses. For this year's Committee of Supply (COS), would MTI introduce more support for companies, especially small and medium enterprises (SMEs) looking to expand overseas? Mdm Chair, SMEs are a major pillar of our economy and their activities account for about half of our gross domestic product (GDP). Their continued growth and vibrancy are of utmost importance to achieving our goal of becoming an innovative and value-creating economy. As we restructure the economy, we have to help our SMEs build capabilities, including improving productivity, and seek growth opportunities through internationalising. The risks of SMEs being displaced as we restructure the economy are real.”