Low Thia Khiang
Singapore
“Mr Speaker, my question is for the Minister for Health. The official communication channel to the people who subscribe to the WhatsApp group quoted the Prime Minister saying that "Experts think that the Wuhan virus may be less deadlier than SARS". So, can we have some verification whether this is true so far?”
“In Mandarin, Sir. (In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] So, Member Mr Gan Thiam Poh meant to say that although the Minister has the decision-making power under this Bill, you can still go to Court to challenge the decision.”
“Mr Speaker, clarification in Mandarin. (In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] I have stated clearly that the Government already has a lot of power under existing legislation. They can even shut down websites.”
“(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] First and foremost, you must follow the Minister's decision to take down the message, you cannot go to Court. According to this Bill, you must comply with the Minister's order. Otherwise, you will be charged.”
“In Mandarin, Sir. (In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Our Secretary-General is in the Committee. He told us about the contents of the Committee's discussion, so we know what was discussed in the Committee.”
“(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] You assume that the Minister will not do this, but is your assumption correct? It may be correct now, but will it be correct in the future? Even the Minister cannot guarantee that, he said he cannot be sure that future governments will not abuse their power. Can you be sure?”
The complete record
Every one of 2,669 lines we hold for Low Thia Khiang, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 9 of 54.
“It is also about up-skilling and bringing in more technology and machinery where possible to increase productivity. The key thing about us going forward is this: we expect wages to go up for Singaporeans. Obviously, with wages going up, there will be an increase in cost. But this will not make sense if it is not accompanied by productivity. Going forward, our main focus is to increase productivity, force their restructuring. We know that the industries are responding. They fully acknowledge that these things should be done. At the same time, as we increase productivity, we hope that with up-skilling and training, wages will also go up for Singaporeans. That is how we intend to approach this. We have discussed quite at length with Mr Low on how detailed we can go in differentiating the DRCs. In fact, we had a session offline previously. This is an area where perhaps we need to agree to disagree. We all agree that we need to manage the overall numbers. We believe that in our framework today – it is not just a broad instrument – we have gone down one level to see how to differentiate and, within those sectors, how to nuance it. That provides the boundaries, and using the levy system as a pricing mechanism, for companies to decide how much they want or how much they do not want foreign workers. All this is accompanied at the same time by the whole effort towards productivity. So, that is my quick response to the Member. I think the DRC issue is something that we have slightly different perspectives. At the broad level, I think we are in agreement. But in terms of implementation, we feel that having operated the system and from the feedback from the companies, we find that it is very difficult to implement his suggestion in a very meaningful way.”
“But the key focus of a lot of these efforts really is about increasing productivity. We have been speaking very closely with all the different industries in the various sectors, and they have all fully taken on board the fact that there is space to increase productivity. They acknowledge that there are things that can be done. However, having operated for many years with fairly low cost foreign labour, they have become quite used to it. So, this step is going to be painful but we think it is necessary. It is exactly the point mentioned by Mr Low. This would increase cost, but this increase in cost will take place if productivity improvements do not take place. We have spent a lot of time, both in MOM and MOF, on many measures to work closely with industries to increase productivity, so that even as we increase the levies, we hope to also see that restructuring will take place and productivity increases. 6.00 pm Page: 1963 On the point whether conservancy charges will increase: this is the point that Mr Laurence Lien mentioned earlier about how we have First World salaries and incomes at the upper end, but we are consuming services at Third World rates. Especially at the lower wage levels, for example, with cleaners and security guards – two groups which form fairly large sectors which employ our low-wage workers – we feel that we need to restructure the accreditation system and we expect wages to go up for Singaporean workers there. We think it is important. We do not believe that the present level of wages is acceptable. What it would mean is that we must, therefore, as a society, be prepared to pay for these services. But at the same time, it is not just about services increasing in cost.”
“And eventually, will we end up increasing the conservancy charges, and people will have to pay more? Sir, my last concern which I would like the Minister of State to clarify is this - how sure is the Minister of State and the Government that the current approach we have taken in restructuring the economy will not lead to Singapore losing its competitive advantage, and we might end up with a stagnant economy like Japan? BG [NS] Tan Chuan-Jin : Sir, I would like to thank Mr Low Thia Khiang for his clarifications. I would say that we share many of the same perspectives with regard to competitiveness and with regard to some of the views in terms of how we want to manage the overall workforce. Let me address the first issue about opening the flood gates. I think why I raised the point was that Mr Low did mention that for certain industries where we feel that perhaps it would be difficult to draw in Singaporeans, we might think about easing off the dependency ratio ceiling instead of tightening it. What I highlighted in my speech was that in many of these industries that claim that they find it difficult to hire Singaporeans, are the same industries which contribute to a very large consumption of foreign workers. The construction industry is a case in point. By easing off the DRCs in these sectors, it would lead to having more foreign workers coming in, especially in these industries which require many foreign workers. We feel that the system that we adopt makes sense. Because by comparison, when we look at the same industry in another country, the productivity level is completely different. The Member will be correct to say that if we were to increase the levies and no productivity takes place, cost would go up.”
“Sir, I have a few clarifications. First of all, the Minister of State said my suggestion to relax the dependency ratio ceiling (DRC) in some industries where jobs are shunned by Singaporeans, will open the flood gates. I think he conveniently forgot that I also proposed that in some industries where Singaporeans would want to do the jobs, we should tighten the DRC. And this calibration is done in the national framework of a target, which the Minister of State is saying that one third of the foreign workforce will supplement the Singaporean workforce. What I am asking is to recalibrate the dependency ratio ceiling and redistribute the quota based on industry specifics and the productivity level as well as the level at which they are able to restructure to minimise the fallout. Page: 1962 Sir, my second clarification is: would the Minister of State be concerned that with the current process of restructuring in which we have a foreign worker dependency ratio, the levy plus the quota at the macro level, by using such a macro tool to tighten the supply of manpower to the industries, it would inadvertently increase the wage cost of the various industries? Would this eventually lead to a higher cost of living for all Singaporeans, because the wage cost will eventually be passed on to the consumers? For instance, if we continue to tighten the construction industry's dependency ratio and quota, it will result in one of the sub industries, like renovation, having manpower supply problems. It will lead to higher renovation costs for younger Singaporeans who got a flat and want to renovate their flat. I think it was the hon. Member Mr Heng, who was concerned that if we continued to tighten the supply of workers in the cleaning industry, then the tender costs will go up.”
“We are now going to have an International Cruise terminal, which presumably will boost our cruise industry in Singapore and bring more tourists to Singapore who will buy cruises. Should that be excluded from tourism spending forecasting or calculations? So, the way I put it is at the time this target was drawn up and the Tourism Development Fund was set up, there was a clear goal that these are the resources, this the mission that the Government gave the STB. This is the goal, this is funding available, now go forth and seek ways to make it happen, and that is what they have done. The Chairman : Ms Jessica Tan, would you care to withdraw your amendment? Ms Jessica Tan Soon Neo : I would like to register our thanks to Minister Lim, Second Minister Iswaran and Minister of State Lee as well as Minister of State Teo for their patience in taking all our questions, sharing with us the strategies as well as strategies for growth and strategies to address and ensure that the constraints that we face do not hamper that growth and we can sustain the growth. And understanding the constraints, I do beg leave to withdraw my amendment.”
“This study in and of itself will already give us some insight into what the scope of the sector is, and what are the kinds of issues that we should be thinking about. And beyond that and what we are hoping that this study will yield is also some clear ideas on how we should take this forward, perhaps specifically in areas such as if we want to understand some areas better, what are the capabilities that we would need in order to do so. And that would have to be a later consideration once the study is completed. Page: 1784 The Chairman : Mr Yee Jenn Jong, last clarification. Mr Yee Jenn Jong : Thank you, Mr Chairman. I just want to refer to my question and what the Second Minister said that why I am so fixated about this gaming revenue. Maybe I should rephrase it. I am not so fixated about it and I also understand that it is private investment. TDF will not spend on it. Maybe I will rephrase my question this way. When we set the $30 billion tourism receipt target revenue in 2005, did we envisage gaming revenue to be part of it, because gaming revenue is now a significant part of the tourism receipts by the statistics that we capture? Should we not look at the KPI of our tourism investment to be based on the $30 billion without the gaming revenue? 3.00 pm Mr S Iswaran : Mr Chairman, I thank the Member for clarifying his fixation − sorry, lack of fixation − on the matter. When the target is set, we are talking about tourism spending as a whole. In other words, when a tourist comes to Singapore, what is he spending his dollar on? We do not preclude future innovations or new developments in the market which might encourage the tourists to spend more. Let me use an alternative example.”
“But even so, the companies are on notice that they have to restructure. And what I have announced just now, the $150 million funding of R&D is to help them make this change, to restructure because they will also realise that they cannot have the same access to foreign workers in the long term compared to what they had previously. Mr Nicholas Fang (Nominated Member) : Sir, I would like to direct the question regarding what the Minister mentioned about the nuclear sector. It is heartening to note that the nuclear study has been completed but we are still a long way from making a decision. I am trying to understand. Given the fact that in the region, a few countries in South East Asia are going great guns with their nuclear programmes, are there any plans for us to at least begin developing some kind of knowledge capability, so that we can be part of the conversation as the rest of the region moves towards nuclear capability, working with our universities to start offering some courses, so that as a ramp up to our own plans, at least, we are a step ahead and that we can still bring something to the table as the rest of South East Asia, in particular, start looking at nuclear energy? Mr S Iswaran : Sir, I need to restate because it should not be misconstrued. I said the nuclear pre-feasibility study is ongoing. But I said that even if it were completed, we would be a long way away from making a decision on nuclear energy for Singapore, because the technology is moving significantly and there are significant other considerations we will have to factor in. The Member's point was whether the regional developments have a bearing on us. Clearly, they do. And the question then is, should we be developing our own capabilities in order to better understand?”
“Page: 1783 On the broader question of whether economic uncertainty will affect R&D spending − the Government component clearly is a well-defined one, and that creates certainty in the market, not just for our research institutes and researchers, but also, in general, as a signal to the market that this is the commitment the Government has made over a five-year period. In fact, if we looked back, in the previous five-year cycle, even at the depths of the recession or the downturn, we maintained our R&D spending. This was noticed around the world as a clear commitment. We will continue to do that. Then businesses, of course, will have to make their calculations and adjust according to the circumstances. Mr Low Thia Khiang : Sir, the Minister, in his reply, gave the reason why the marine industry is given such a high dependency ratio ceiling. He said that as a result, the industry becomes competitive and we will be able to generate growth and it is an important industry in Singapore. So, on the same wavelength, is he also saying that those industries which have been given a lower dependency ratio, they need not be so competitive internationally and that they are not important to Singapore? Mr Lim Hng Kiang : We have taken a very pragmatic approach in developing the various sectors and providing access to foreign workers. For example, in the construction sector and the process sector, we recognise that Singaporeans shy away from these jobs and therefore the dependency ratio or the quotas for these sectors are set higher than the average for the manufacturing sector. For the marine sector, this is historical. The Member will know the history of our marine sector. We grew from the conversion of our naval shipyards and the companies have done extremely well.”
“The other part, I would say that, in general, we do want to manage our growth in this area in a clever way, because it is not just about quantity but it is also about the quality of the tourism growth that we have. And that is why I made the point about high yield tourism. In other words, it is not just about having more people come here, but it is also about looking at how we can get the right type of people to come here more often and to stay longer and to spend more. We need to look at that. It does not mean that we migrate to just one end of the tourism market, but we need to constantly work at the mix of tourists that arrive in Singapore. Dr Chia Shi-Lu : Sir, I thank the Minister for the replies to my cut on R&D. One of the stated goals is for R&D spending to reach 3.5% of GDP by 2015, and this will include both public and private sector spending. I have two questions. One, is there a target ratio in terms of what the public and private R&D spending would be? And, two, given the uncertain economic outlook over the next few years, are there any measures in the pipeline to encourage the private sector to continue spending on R&D? Mr S Iswaran : Sir, on the ratio between public and private spending, typically, what we have seen is about one is to two, or thereabouts. But I do not think we want to be terribly formulaic about it because it really depends on the contexts of the type of industry and what they are doing. But that seems to be the general pattern. We seek, of course, to ensure that every dollar of Government investment in R&D gets its bang for the buck from private sector investment of an equal level at least, but typically we look at higher multiples than that.”
“I would like to ask the Minister whether we have the space as well as the tourism related capacity to cope with this four million increase in three years. Whether it is the hotels, the airlines, the tour guides, the F&B service staff, etc. Perhaps the Minister can give us a magnitude of that? Mr S Iswaran : Sir, I thank Mr Liang for his question. Allow me to respond to that in two ways. The first is the rate of increase that we have seen is contributed by different factors, not least of which is what has been happening in Singapore itself in terms of developments, but also the rising demand from Asia for leisure products and tourism travel. From a supply side perspective for us, if we look at, for example, a key piece of infrastructure which is our hotel stock. And if we look at what has been happening in that space over the last three years, there have been significant additions. With the advent of the IRs alone, we have added something in the order of magnitude of about 6,000-8,000 rooms, if I remember correctly, in the last few years, and there are some more to come. And then we have other new hotels coming on stream, not just at the premium end, but also in some of the budget and mid-tier levels as well. So, there is this development, and the Government continues to have land available, land sales programmes for this sort of projects. And we really leave it, to some extent, to the private sector to make the judgment call, and they will draw their inferences from hotel occupancy rates and the average room rates to get some measure of how things are going. Last year, we were averaging something around the high 80s, which suggests that we are not quite bursting at the seams, but we are operating at a fairly healthy level if we look at hotel utilisation rate.”
“We do need them but they must be for certain specific jobs when they come to work in Singapore, and they are really giving us good quality things to do in Singapore. I am sorry I do not know how to put it into words. They do give quality work to Singapore. I want to ask why there are so many foreign workers working in the marine, engineering and chemical sectors. That is the reason why I highlighted the point about foreign workers. The ratios are one to five and one to seven. Mr Lim Hng Kiang : Sir, let me deal with that question first and maybe Mr Teo Ser Luck can follow up. As I mentioned in my reply, the marine sector as well as the processing sector are very important sectors of the economy. With the foreign workers participating in the marine sector, in fact, we are able to capture 70% market share of the oil rig and production vessel sector. Without the foreign workers, we cannot be in that very strong commanding position. And it is complementary. At the workers' level, the estimate is maybe 80% foreign workers and 20% Singaporeans. But for the engineering and the naval architecture design sector, it is 80% Singaporeans and maybe 20% foreigners. So, this is how the Singaporean core is complemented by the foreign workers to make our industry competitive. If we follow what she has suggested and cut it down to one third, then I think we are putting a lot of strain on the industry, and the industry will not be able to compete. The Chairman : Mr Teo Ser Luck, would you like to add to that? No. Mr Liang Eng Hwa has a clarification. Page: 1782 Mr Liang Eng Hwa : Sir, the tourism 2015 target for visitor arrivals is 17 million and currently we have about 13 million visitor arrivals. So, this is a four million increase in three years. This is obviously a laudable target.”
“If we look at the ticks that are on electrical appliances and also to educate household members by looking at their bills and seeing which are the parts which they can perhaps trim, maybe because there is an air-conditioner in the home that they can use more efficiently and so on. This is something we are totally committed to. An important part of that effort − and I want to stress this because sometimes this comes up and, in fact, some Members of Mr Low's Party have raised this − is indeed the pricing of electricity. Because if we subsidise electricity, then we are dulling the instincts of the average consumer in appreciating what is the true cost of this very scarce and precious resource. So, our pricing strategy is an important part of this whole mix of education, targeted subsidies and industry developments on the supply side and demand side, in order to try and manage our energy constraints and ensure we have sustainable and competitive energy supplies. Mr Teo Ser Luck : Sir, just to clarify. The EDB will have to consult PSD before making the changes from now onwards. As to why it happened in the first place, there was a lapse which means that EDB did not consult PSD when it made the changes previously. That was the finding and it was published. The procedure is that whenever EDB is going to make changes, especially for the human resource aspects, they will have to consult and seek the views of PSD before making those changes. Mrs Lina Chiam : Sir, I would like to clarify. I thank Minister of State Mr Teo Ser Luck for his answer to my speech just now. I would like to clarify that I am not against foreign workers coming to work in Singapore. I do agree with Finance Minister Mr Tharman Shanmugaratnam.”
“Sir, my first clarification is on electricity tariff. I understand that there is a $100 million fund to help industry to use energy efficiently. Besides the new initiative in Punggol monitoring the use of electricity of households, would the Government also extend the same help or assistance to households to educate them how to use energy or electricity efficiently and thereby save some electricity costs? Sir, my second clarification is on the EDB. I am not clear about the Minister of State's answer. I would like to know whether there is a need now for EDB to continue to seek consultation from PSD on the changes with regard to staff, as the Minister of State referred to having an Executive Chairman at EDB and all that. Secondly, if there is still a need to consult PSD, what procedure has the MTI or EDB worked out for this consultation process? And how did the lapse happen in the first place? Did they forget to consult or they did not know at all? 2.45 pm Mr S Iswaran : Sir, I thank the Member for his question. I am glad that he agrees with us. This is an important effort to educate our households, because whilst we are doing what we can to mitigate the impact of higher energy prices, much of which is because of global developments, through specific initiatives like U-Save and what we are doing in our industry. Page: 1781 Our households have a lot that is within their control, in terms of how they go about undertaking more energy efficient ways of running a household. And that is why we have significant investments already being made through the Ministry of the Environment and Water Resources' efforts.”
“I suppose the Deputy Prime Minister knows very well that the First World countries are also basically looking at how to ensure that their own citizens are well looked after, whether in terms of healthcare or retirement. So, these are things that we are looking at today. Of course, I understand the Government is particular about outcome and the challenge exactly to this Government is: can we have the outcome of the social safety net in the Western countries, in the First World countries, without the same level of tax that we can have?”
“Thank you, Sir. The Deputy Prime Minister said earlier that the Workers' Party has shifted its position on foreign workers. Sir, this is incorrect. Nowhere, either inside or outside this House, have we said that Singapore does not need foreign workers. The main complaint of the Party as well as people outside this House is that foreign workers and foreigners are taking away Singaporeans jobs and are depressing wages of Singaporeans. To clarify further, he refers to our manifesto. Our manifesto stated that we have to carefully calibrate foreign workers in relation to different levels of industries. We also said that we welcome foreigners who can add value to Singaporeans. So, nowhere have we said that we do not need foreign workers, or we do not need foreigners to help Singaporeans. That is the first clarification I want to make. Sir, the Deputy Prime Minister said that there is no need to go into individual industries and the current levers or controls − the dependency ratio as well as the workers' levy − are sufficient at that sectoral level. Sir, I am not convinced. I am of the view that if you want to do productivity successfully, we need micro-management, and not just macro-management. Each industry has its own feature and its own difficulty. Foreign workers are a life line to them, at least it is now. So, I am not convinced that we should just use a micro lever to manage and achieve the productivity growth and the targets we want. Sir, the next clarification is this. The Deputy Prime Minister referred to my speech on First World countries' social safety net, which he says he is very worried about. It means also the kind of level of tax.”
“We invest hundreds of millions of dollars into making Singapore liveable and beautiful. But true beauty is in growing strong roots, and cultivating resilience of a thriving garden, through interdependency of the bio-diversity in an ecosystem. Our Government is the gardener who cares a lot. But amidst the urgency of the changing climate, we need to shift paradigms and innovate boldly, leverage on our assets and equity to reduce our liabilities. Singapore needs to come together as one Team Singapore – to build a more inclusive, sustainable and better city in the garden. This is a cause that concerns us all. This is the cause worth fighting for. I believe in this Government, and I support this Budget. Page: 1482”
“Barrier-free access – why not employ wheelchair bound and elderly to be our infrastructure experts and auditors? In wine connoisseur, perfume and scent-related jobs – why not employ the visually-impaired with well developed sense of taste and smell? I think you get the drift. The big question is: how are we helping each person to find their best fit to reap premiums in a job? Square peg, square holes; round pegs, round holes. Or do we continue to do more of the same of ill-fitting them into subsidised wage jobs that leave them vulnerable when the subsidies are withdrawn? Sir, social inclusion and well-being are at the heart of Singapore. Everyone deserves a dignified life. When we have demonstrated that effectively to our citizens, there will be greater social equity. Singaporeans will develop a depth of generosity and graciousness, from a position of security and well-being to welcome diversity, people who are different and people from everywhere. So I want to repeat my call to the Government. Make social innovation a cornerstone in our nation's development, not afterthoughts or ad hoc efforts. To do this, the Government can start with a mapping or auditing exercise of the social innovation landscape and players in Singapore. Consequently, establish a value chain approach from seeding ideas to fruition. Involve the schools, involve the elderly, involve the community, involve everyone on board. Leveraging on exisitng players, fund it, scale it, multiply it through collaborative innovation. This requires a whole of Government, and not just MCYS alone. I will be happy to explore and help with any Ministry or agency on social innovation projects. Last but not least, Sir, in our quest to be a city in the garden, we need to let a thousand flowers bloom.”
“Page: 1481 Next, on my favourite subject of social innovation. Again, I declare my interest. Wikipedia defines "social innovation", and I quote, as "new strategies, concepts, ideas and organisations that meet social needs of all kinds – from working conditions and education to community development and health – and that extend and strengthen civil society". In short, social innovation reduces social deficits and builds social capital that is crucial to our new social compact. In this new social compact, building an inclusive society is not just about redistributing resources to help the poor. It is about empowering our people, building mutual trust, self-reliance and resilience. Ms Judy Ho, a hearing impaired social entrepreneur, wrote a song about society's perception of the disabled. And she said, I quote, "My abilities are only limited by your imagination." This is most insightful. By our own norms and expectations, we limit the potential contributions of those who are different from us! This 3% of our Singaporeans can be our assets too, if we could shift our paradigm. The elderly alike can be and are an asset to Singapore. See not disability. See special abilities. Like savants. I thought maybe we could try a very quick brain gym exercise. You think problem, and then you think social innovation. So problem put in security – why not design vertical city farms? Land scarcity and transport woes – why not embrace Hiriko foldable green cars or even reintroduce car pooling via "show-nearby apps"? Insufficient social workers – why not foster local community caregivers' support networks. Tuition fees too high – why not embrace free online tuition and peer-to-peer sharing?”
“Let me cite an example – the little acts of service innovation that are taking place in our restructured hospitals. Recently, I visited a PAP Community Foundation (PCF) teacher who suffered a stroke and was warded at Tan Tock Seng Hospital (TTSH). I was told to pre-register my visit a day earlier to avoid long queues at the counter. Upon arrival, a SMS alert informed me that the visitor quota was currently full, so I had to wait my turn. While I sipped coffee, another SMS alert came and told me that I could now visit my teacher. Swiping my IC through the gantry was hassle-free. While at the ward, we chatted and she was, thankfully, recovering well. Then a nurse came in, entered the patient's vital statistics and signs electronically, and medicine was dispensed with the help of IT to ensure accuracy. Apparently, patients can also enter their food choices through the PDAs. Just then, I received another SMS alert telling me that new visitors had arrived and were waiting to visit. Obviously, I did the necessary. This is human technology and efficient service at work: "human" because technology adapted to the behaviour and expectations of the visitors, patients and healthcare staff; "efficient" because accurate real-time information is seamlessly communicated to users and integrated into the mainframe for better decisions. In a labour-hungry economy, we need such service innovation to help each person produce better and more, and earn more. Cross-pollination of ideas and collaboration is crucial for this to succeed. The 3Ps – from policy makers to management gurus to process engineers and design-thinking experts and users – should pull together to start a new "service innovation" industry. Will the Minister support service capital as one of our new asset class?”
“Fourth, the public sector is, in fact, the systems thinker who sets the direction, the rules of the game, an incentive framework to form an inclusive, sustainable and stronger Singapore. Perhaps the question then is: how do we get started? Here, I boldly suggest three game-changing innovation strategies to the Government. They are: (1) public policy innovation; (2) service innovation; and (3) social innovation. On public policy innovation, remember that the Government provides the incentive framework that shapes business behaviour. So, instead of working in silos, that means having one set of policies that is completely pro-business, another set to collect revenue and yet another set to fund public goods, why not have a holistic approach of crafting policies that reward good business behaviour and scale socially responsible enterprises? Go further: why not design the financial system to invest in a fairer and more sustainable economy that produces real goods and real jobs for the masses rather than maximising short-term financial gains for the few? Go even further: why not craft procurement policies that generate demand for socially responsible businesses and social enterprises? This will result in billions of dollars worth of new business to spur the growth of good corporate citizens. Such policy innovation will generate new jobs and real jobs, reduce the externalities or clean-up cost for the Government and add to our national equity. Next, on service innovation. It is ironic that while services make up 70% of our GDP, there is insufficient understanding on how productivity carrots may be applied to the service end. The concept of service innovation should be taken on a value-chain approach – from service production to service consumption.”
“Without them, Singapore could be a very different place today. Currently, our balance sheet looks good. We are in a healthy equity position, with robust assets that ranked top in the world, and social deficits that are somewhat bearable. However, it is not time to party. Not just yet. If we project this sheet into the year 2030, with ageing demography and low fertility, what would it look like? We call ourselves "a city in a garden". Indeed, our present condition looks like a flower, smells like a flower, blooms like a flower, but will also wither like a flower, if we do not provide a counterweight to market failures and externalities associated with growth. It is well documented that, ironically, wealthier urban tribes suffer from higher social deficits. Corollary, the complexity and demand for public goods also increase. The problem is that the market system has no incentive to supply such public goods. So, how can we meet the demand for such rising obligations? Sir, I think the answer lies in system thinking; the answer lies in us. In Chinese, we say: “万事皆人为”. First, we need all hands on deck, from the top to the bottom of society, to form a new alliance of responsibility, a new high-trust, high-touch social compact. In a fast-moving urban city, no one can be a free rider. We need a hand-up paradigm to build national resilience, not handouts to build dependency. This is conscious compassion. Second, the people sector has to increase productivity levels and aggressively expand to meet the rising social deficits. Page: 1480 Third, the private sector must take care of the needs of stakeholders, not just shareholders. It must create sufficient economic profits and social dividends for the common good.”
“The eyes of the future look back at us, hoping we see them now. For this reason, I wish the Budget can go further in advocating bold transformational systemic change to address looming socio-economic challenges. Let me offer a framework to think about this. As Singapore Inc transforms, our national balance sheet may look something like this − if I could refer Members to the handout that has just been given out. Note that this is a simplified version for discussion purposes, but it offers a sufficient peek into Singapore's position amidst changing times. On the left hand side, you will see that those are our assets. Assets are, of course, our revenue generators and they comprise human capital, economic capital, natural capital and infrastructural capital. On the right hand side, normally called "liabilities" that requires paying up, we have social obligations or social deficits which this Budget seeks to address quite a lot of them, and they include things like social inclusion of an ageing population, the poor, the disadvantaged; social cohesion, that of our social fabric; social disconnect of a transactional urban city environment; and social justice, especially in the midst of globalisation and the spread of Arab Spring and Occupy Wall Street movements. Last but not least, we have equity, which are existing financial and social resources that help us to weather rainy days. And we saw this financial equity prowess during the recent financial crisis. It gives us the resources to keep business running, invest in training and keep life as normal as possible. It gives us great comfort and confidence. Then, there is also this layer on social equity which, in fact, if you remember, saved our nation from tearing apart during the SARS scare and 911.”
“There are 160,000 SMEs that contribute about half of our GDP and employ more than half of our workforce. With negative headwinds in sight, businesses face triple whammies. SMEs do need some more help to get fitter. So I see the foreign-worker tightening measure as a form of an overdue business diet plan. We want fitter, not fatter companies. We want lean and mean productivity, not borrowed cheap labour. Health brings wealth. But how to fast and eat less overnight and with no pain? It is not possible. Old habits do die hard. But the good news is that the Minister for Finance is allowing time and also giving out vitamins and supplements to give companies the energy boost while achieving their fitness goals. Carrots, like SME grants, the Special Employment Credit, PIC, all of these, far outweigh the stick of tighter foreign-worker measure. The public purse is being used to help employers "do the right things", and I think businesses should take heed. Sir, Budget 2012 has many messages that are worth spreading, and there are many real deliverables that we can cheer about. But we need to be able to communicate these to the ground and also to the businesses alike. We need to do much more to spread these messages. Page: 1479 Sir, on shifting paradigms, at the IPS' Singapore Perspective 2012 Conference, the Minister for Finance, Mr Tharman Shanmugaratnam, remarked, "As we take further steps to build an inclusive society, we must be able to sustain what we do financially and not store up problems for the future." Indeed, we are custodians of our future. It is easy to call for more cash upfront, more handouts, more, more, more. But we also have to remember that if we are careless and populist in our approach, then what do we tell our children?”
“Singapore Inc 2.0 stands for Singapore INClusive. In Singapore Inc 2.0, the economy remains our basic building block. But real progress is in building an inclusive society, a stronger Singapore. So, three cheers to the Minister for Finance and the Civil Service for a conscientious Budget. In this speech, I would like to give some Budget feedback, suggest a new Singapore Inc balance sheet framework for us to think about things, and also offer three critical innovation strategies. On Budget feedback – first, social. Sir, Budget feedback has been largely positive. Many praised the efforts to address retirement adequacy, healthcare, education, demographic concerns and rising social deficits. Singaporeans warmly welcomed steps to bridge income gaps, reinstate older workers' CPF rates, make permanent GST vouchers, higher wages for social and healthcare workers, and also welcomed specific steps to upgrade and employ the seniors, the disabled and needy Singaporeans. But the Budget is not all a bed of roses. The business sector felt thorned by the measures to tighten foreign workers. We want to reduce our reliance on foreign workers, but SMEs struggle with cost concerns. Many employers I spoke to acknowledged that there are too many foreigners. But when asked whether they would employ Singaporeans, they said, "Unlikely, because it costs more and Singaporeans do not want to do the job!" Further, many SMEs feel choked by rising rentals, especially those who are in the REITs property. This has been spoken about by many of the Members here. And it makes me wonder: have we not learnt from the global financial meltdown? Real businesses should be better prioritised against rent-maximising financial instruments.”
“Many older Singaporeans are deficient in funds for retirement. This worries many older Singaporeans, especially those who do not have other means of support. The Silver Housing Bonus and the Enhanced Lease Buyback Scheme will give peace of mind to this group, having the assurance that they can now use their assets for revenues to see them through retirement. May I ask the Minister for Finance whether he can consider lowering the CPF lock-up for older residents, especially those aged 65 years and above, in order to make more funds available for them for their daily living? More affordable long-term care for patients is a necessary step in our ageing population with an increasing dependency ratio. Such assistance in step-down care makes good economic sense, as it will lessen the reliance on expensive institutions, such as hospitals. With $8 billion spending over the next five years, hopefully, home care, another type of step-down care, which is non-existent presently, to enable the sick elderly to be cared for at home, will be prioritised by the Ministry of Health to become a reality. Elderly-friendly features, schemes for home safety features and maid grant are good measures to prevent fall, injury and admission to hospitals. These schemes enable the elderly to stay independently for as long as possible in their own homes and are indeed ideal for the people as well as the State. On that note, Sir, I support the Budget. Page: 1478 3.02 pm Miss Penny Low (Pasir Ris-Punggol) : Sir, may I have your permission to distribute a diagram? Mr Speaker : Yes, please. Miss Penny Low : Thank you. [Copies of diagram distributed to hon Members.] Sir, what is Singapore Inc? No, it does not refer to Singapore Incorporated. With Budget 2012, our terms of reference have changed.”
“Page: 1477 May I suggest setting up a permanent system approach for a comprehensive community social mobility strategy; a system to facilitate identifying these families, tailoring the assistance to individual family's needs, monitoring progress and following up on a long-term basis for their children? This set-up is for the purpose of good take-up rate and to improve the long-term outcome of such families through hands-on intervention and follow-up. This will help these parents plan a better life for themselves and for their children and to increase their children's educational attainment. Social workers can be assigned to each family to look into the varying needs, such as pre-school education, after-school care, financial issues, parenting support, nurturing home environment, student care, secondary school education and so on. Early identification of such families with young children, similar to identifying children who missed going to schools, should be adopted. Work-related participation requirements might be part of a broader goal to improve long-term outcomes for entire families, such as job training and skill upgrading for both parents. Lastly, Sir, I am very passionate about helping the growing numbers of older Singaporeans to live comfortably. I am impressed by the slew of measures aimed at achieving this goal and I totally agree with these strategies. More subsidies for firms to hire older Singaporeans will tap an available valuable resource, especially in a tight market, to join the workforce, benefiting businesses and the economy. More importantly, occupation is a good way to keep older Singaporeans physically and mentally fit and healthy. This aptly applies to the common saying "use it or lose it".”
“Workforce Income Supplement (WIS) Scheme plays a significant role in lowering income inequity; kudos must go to our Government for launching WIS in 2008. Therefore, WIS should be adopted as a permanent scheme. More importantly, WIS should be reviewed yearly to ensure that pay-outs could be meaningful enough to prevent the lowest income households falling into poverty. About 300,000 low-wage workers received about $300,000 in WIS each year. This works out to an average of about $1,000 per year or about $83 per month. I suggest yearly review based on average Monthly Household Expenditure (AMHE) of this lowest 20% of households. May I beseech the Finance Minister to tweak WIS to make it truly meaningful assistance for low-wage workers? From my own calculations, those who earn about $1,200 per month will need at least twice the average presently given WIS allocation despite GST vouchers. On social mobility, I am so glad to receive reassurance from the Finance Minister when he said, "We have to do everything we can to keep up social mobility in each generation, and prevent a permanent underclass from forming in our society". I support the two main solutions: high quality education for the children and upgrading of the skills for parents. Parents of young children of low-income and disadvantaged families need special intervention to improve their predicament and to give this group an early start with more resources, such as those mentioned in the Budget statement: pre-school subsidies, MOE financial assistance scheme, student care assistance.”
“They are stuck in poverty and struggling and, thus, if left on their own, they will deteriorate further. It is reassuring to hear from the Finance Minister that "we cannot leave our social compact vulnerable to market forces. We have to do all we can to contain inequality, and to sustain social mobility in each new generation". The new permanent GST Voucher Scheme to offset 7% GST will lessen the difficulty of the lower income Singaporeans. But I am surprised that, this time, the cash component is not tied to work, unlike the Government's usual past practices of promoting self-reliance. Singapore households were better off last year in household income. But according to the Singapore Workforce 2010 report, some 400,000 workers or 20% of the resident workforce earn $1,200 or less in a month. In the past decade, the bottom 20% of households by income have had to increase their spending. In 2007 to 2008, this bottom 20% consisted of 218,280 households. In 1997 and 1998, the Average Monthly Household Expenditure (AMHE) of this lowest 20% of households was $1,693. This figure increased to $1,760 in 2007 and 2008. This group had to spend more, the income of these households could not cover all their expenditure and they were thus in financial hardship. I did a survey with 111 residents staying in HDB rental flats in my constituency. The average income per household for these families is $783 per month, but the average expenditure per household on basics is $903 per month. Those with children need to spend an average of $66 per month for each child. This survey showed per capita deficit of $81 per month for these households. The average household that I surveyed has four members but in Singapore the average household has 3.5 members.”
“Sir, is this practice being exercised in earnest in our Ministries, are avenues in place to strengthen this approach in policy making among our Ministries, from formulation stage to implementation stage? Better skills on interpersonal nuances that help connect better with the end users are an important tool. It will bridge the feedback stage to get better inputs during the formulation stage, and it gets acceptance from the communities during the implementation stage, the latter is especially so, if the policy has bitter after-taste that requires tolerance from those affected. This approach begets the question whether our present feedback system is robust enough, and whether our service-centric culture is efficient. As we grapple with increasingly complex issues, compelling various differing sections of society and higher expectations of the masses, there is a need for more options on the importance of being in touch on the ground in policy making. Most times, even the most "bitter pill" can be made more palatable with better communication and explanation. Page: 1476 My second topic is on a fair and inclusive society. I applaud Finance Minister's important move on stepping up social policy. One of the key challenges in this area is inequality. I concur with the Finance Minister when he said that the widening income gap would not go away soon. Singapore's open nature economy and globalisation have played a key part in creating income disparity here. In recent years, strong adaptations to the tax structure and Government's manpower policies towards attracting foreign talent have further intensified the problem. My main concern for the lowest income group is that they are not earning enough to cope with rising costs.”
“All these years, our policies have displayed strengths in operational excellence and effective outcome, the success of which had been the envy of many countries, especially those policies that steered Singapore out of storms, the global financial crises, SARS, the Asian Financial Crisis and so on. We have been very successful in anticipating problems and solving them. My question is whether we could have done better in the implementation of population policy recently; in relation to anticipating the impending stress on the locals, and on all the infrastructure demand resulting from such policies. My next question is whether it is worthwhile and timely to modify our policy-making model. Policy making that not only emphasises the technical, on what is feasible or unfeasible, but also on political constraint. I feel that we need to make adjustment on our policy making that caters to the sophistication of today's populace. The rational model of policy making may be more suitable than the incremental model. The rational model explores all alternatives and looks at the consequences of each alternative strategy and calculation of the probability of these occurrences. The incremental model gives analysis to a few somewhat familiar policy alternatives differing only marginally from the status quo; it gives greater analytical preoccupation with side effects to be remedied later, featuring sequence of trial, oversights and revised trials. We all know that public policy must be multi-disciplinary. This means that policies produced should be inter-crossed among fields, such as MOF, MOH, MCYS, MOT and so on. Often, policies made by one Ministry can be synergised with other Ministries to minimise duplication of efforts and for a better outcome.”
“And Mr Giam, in his reply to my request for clarification suggested that it was both – that he has some evidence and that he was imagining from that evidence, a situation he painted in his speech. I would just like to ask if there is evidence – which he feels is self-evident but it is not evident to me – could he share that evidence with us? Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song : Mr Speaker, there is a body of research that is being conducted on the concept of slowing social mobility in Singapore. Even the Ministry of Finance, as one of the Members earlier said, has mentioned that this generation would find it a bit more difficult than the previous generation to move up. Mr Speaker : Dr Lily Neo. 2.46 pm Dr Lily Neo (Tanjong Pagar) : Mr Speaker, Sir, I stand in support of the motion raised by the Minister for Finance, Mr Tharman Shanmugaratnam. Sir, this year's Budget is one that is well thought out, timely, prudent and yet responsive to many pressing social needs. I concur with the hon Member, Dr Janil Puthucheary who said earlier that this is a balanced Budget and we can be sure that the Singapore Government will not spend beyond its means. I consider this Budget to be one that responded best to the pet concerns of my 15-year tenure. I like the caring component of this Budget that addresses the plight of our vulnerable groups in our society. Page: 1475 The title of this year's Budget is "An Inclusive Society and a Stronger Singapore". Today, I would like to start my speech on an inclusive society in relation to policy making.”
“So, while they are doing OJT, they can pick up the skills and this will make Singaporean workers a bit more employable. Mr Ang Hin Kee : Well, I suppose, therefore, then what he alluded to is his opinion, and my question was really did this insight come from his reading, his views or his interactions with industry associations or with clusters of SMEs? Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song : Mr Speaker, my insights came from various sources, including research on my own. Mr Speaker : Dr Janil Puthucheary. Dr Janil Puthucheary : Mr Speaker, I have a question for the hon Mr Gerald Giam. He suggested that my children will find it harder to support me and buy me a home should I need it. I would like to know if this is on the basis of data that he is aware of or is it a speculation on his part. Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song : I think the evidence out there is self-evident in many ways that there are many families who find it hard to keep up with the pace of life, keep up with the cost of living in Singapore, and it is not a stretch of imagination to say that many children would find it difficult to afford houses for their parents. Mr Arthur Fong (West Coast) : Mr Speaker, I would like to thank Mr Gerald Giam for his concern for our workers, but may I suggest, Mr Speaker, Sir, that he should also look at some of the programmes for our workers, particularly the Place-to-Train programme where the jobs are first found and then, we train the workers and place them. That has been very successful. Dr Janil Puthucheary : Mr Speaker, perhaps I was not so clear. I was asking if it was evidence or speculation.”
“Tears welled up in my eyes when the little girl from a low-income family shared her dream of buying a house for her parents when she grew up. While I admire her love for her parents, it pains me to think that given our widening income gap, increasing high inflation, and slowing social mobility, many little children like her will find it hard to afford an HDB flat of their own, much less a house for their parents. We have a responsibility, as Members of this House, to do all we can to speak up for these young ones, to enable them to fulfil their dreams and build a better life for themselves, their children and their parents. This is what the Budget of the Future should be all about. We can do more. We must do more. Mr Speaker, I support the motion. Mr Speaker : Yes, Mr Ang Hin Kee. 2.42 pm Mr Ang Hin Kee (Ang Mo Kio) : Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to clarify some comments made by the hon Mr Gerald Giam. Is there any particular SME sector which he is alluding to concerning their manpower plight, and whether has he engaged the specific associations or the SME clusters that gave him the particular insight that OJT is the preferred solution over other options? Page: 1474 Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song : Mr Speaker, I did not say that OJT is the preferred solution. I said that OJT is a solution that will benefit SMEs significantly and we should give more funding and support for OJT so that they can have the option to be able to use OJT in order to train their manpower, train their workers, who may not be skilled at the time that they take on the job. Sir, I believe that this will help to hire Singaporean workers who are able to join the company even though they may not have the full skills-set.”
“I will share these during the Committee of Supply (COS) debate. Page: 1473 I agree with the Finance Minister that the GST is a regressive tax. The GST Voucher Scheme moderates this impact, although the policy falls short of supporting many more in need. The Voucher offsets the GST payments of only half of retiree households. Younger, low-income families also do not get their full GST payments back. To achieve its aim, GST Vouchers should cover all HDB households whose incomes are within the bottom 20%. The GST Voucher values must also rise over time to keep pace with inflation. The Budget announced the increase in CPF contribution rates for older workers. But increasing the employee contribution rates in fact reduces workers' take-home pay. Since the Government is providing an 8% Special Employment Credit (SEC) to companies for employing older workers, the increase in CPF contributions should come entirely from employers, not employees. Mr Speaker, this Budget has provided more childcare support to lower income families, which is something I welcome. However, many young, middle income families still struggle to pay well over $1,000 each month for childcare, even after subsidies. Those of us with young children would agree that childcare costs are one of the most significant expenses for families. I urge the Government to provide more childcare subsidies for middle-income earners, as this would not only lighten their burden, but may make them consider having more children. Finally, Mr Speaker, I would like to share some thoughts on the poignant video that the Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister screened at the end of his Budget speech.”
“In any case, most elderly folks prefer to remain in their current homes, rather than get displaced to unfamiliar surroundings in their old age. To give the elderly more choices, the Lease Buyback Scheme should be extended to owners of 4-room or larger flats, just like the Silver Housing Bonus. Currently, only owners of 3-room or smaller flats are eligible. This could be a reason for the low take-up rate. An enhanced Lease Buyback Scheme will enable more of our elderly to age in place, and to live their golden years in familiar surroundings, without having to worry too much about finances. Sir, moving on to eldercare, I think many families will welcome the additional grant for hiring foreign maids to help them care for infirm elderly parents. This grant adds to the existing concession for households with elderly persons. But instead of all these grants and concessions, I suggest completely doing away with the Foreign Domestic Worker Levy for these families, so as to provide further relief for them and simplify administration. Extending the maximum MediShield coverage age from 85 to 90 years old is a move in the right direction. However, would the Government consider removing the age limit completely? There are only about 9,000 Singaporeans aged above 90. Many of them would have outlived their own spouses, siblings or children, and may have no immediate relatives to care for them. We should do all we can to help this small group of seniors who have worked tirelessly to build up Singapore to what it is today, instead of pulling the rug from under their feet when they need it the most. There are several other MediShield enhancements that I believe should be made, while still keeping the insurance scheme solvent.”
“We also have a moral obligation to provide more help to our elderly citizens, who built this nation to what we enjoy now. I affirm the Budget's focus towards countering the adverse implications of our growing income gap. The Silver Housing Bonus is a good attempt to help increase the retirement incomes of the elderly. However, I believe the Bonus would be more attractive if the elderly received a greater portion of the proceeds from the sale of their previous flats in cash, rather than having most of it returned to their CPF accounts. In the example that the Finance Minister gave in his speech, the elderly couple receives only $23,000 in cash, or about 9% of their net proceeds from the sale of their flat, even after the Silver Housing Bonus. This is because, to benefit from the Silver Housing Bonus, flat owners must use the cash proceeds from the sale of their previous flat to top up their CPF Retirement Accounts to the Minimum Sum. I propose that they be allowed to pledge the value of their new studio apartment towards meeting up to half of the Minimum Sum. This will allow them to get more cash after the sale of their previous flat. Since they will still be meeting their Minimum Sum, there is no need to apportion $5,000 from the Silver Housing Bonus to their CPF Retirement Accounts. The full $20,000 Silver Housing Bonus could be given to them in cash. While a larger Retirement Account may get them more per month in CPF LIFE annuity pay-outs, many senior citizens may have more immediate needs for cash, for example, to pay their medical bills. Why not give them this option to have more cash on hand? If they want higher annuity pay-outs, they can always voluntarily top up their CPF Retirement Accounts.”
“I am glad that this Budget has made it easier for companies to claim Productivity and Innovation Credit (PIC) benefits on their in-house training costs, by removing the requirement to have these training programmes certified by WDA or ITE. I would urge the Government to take a step further and provide more funding for On-the-Job Training (OJT). OJT is recognised as one of the most effective forms of training, especially for those in vocational work. There should be greater government funding for companies to provide structured OJT programmes for their workers and new hires. This could include payroll subsidies and more funding for OJT supervisor training. Boosting OJT subsidies could help companies overcome their resistance to hiring Singaporean workers who may lack the necessary skills and experience. In addition, workers do not need to miss work in order to attend training. Sir, I would like to now share some thoughts on the social development initiatives in the Budget. The Government has always warned that we must avoid the path of excessive social spending, which could result in crippling public debts. While I share the Government's concern about uncontrolled spending or unsustainable social entitlements, this should not be a convenient excuse to hold back much needed social investments. Income inequality in Singapore is already among the highest in the developed world. There is much research that has pointed to the detrimental effects that income inequality could have on a society, including reduced social mobility, higher crime rates and increased social tension. Page: 1472 There is a pressing need to reform our social compact to not just contain, but reduce income inequality.”
“I commend the Government on this shift in the right direction. While we need to grow our economy, we also need to ensure a fairer distribution of our nation's prosperity. Sir, it has been said that "SMEs are the lubricant of Singapore's economy, without which, Singapore's economy may not survive". There are about 150,000 SMEs in Singapore, making up 99% of all enterprises. They contribute to about half of Singapore's GDP and employ about 60% of the workforce. Clearly, the SME sector is critical in our drive towards higher productivity and real wage growth. We must do all we can to uplift the SMEs as we restructure our economy. This Budget provides some support for SMEs, and I believe more can be done. One area often cited as a major challenge facing SMEs is that of manpower, especially skilled manpower. The growth of successful SMEs is often constrained by their ability to attract more capable and talented Singaporeans to work for them. Many successful SMEs pay competitive salaries and offer exciting career prospects, yet they often get overlooked as graduates make a beeline to jobs in MNCs and the Civil Service. Our Government scholarship system has been successful in bringing in and retaining many bright, young Singaporeans in the public sector. I would like to propose the introduction of an SME scholarship programme to help bring more talent into SMEs. The Government could work in collaboration with business federations and SME associations to create and administer this programme, which should be done on a cost-sharing basis. Promising SMEs could then be given funding to award scholarships to top JC and Polytechnic students who, upon graduation, will return to work for them for a minimum number of years, and hopefully stay longer to grow the business further.”
“There are nations of varying ideologies that fail to manage this, and, those that do, represent a wide spectrum of philosophies. To my mind, it is almost more fundamental than a political ideology. It is more like the advice you get from your mother, "spend within your means". Fiscal prudence – good advice for an individual, good advice for a household, good advice for a nation. This fundamental part of our policy approach should be given more prominence. Its importance in getting us to this point in our nation's story cannot be over-emphasised. We spend within our means. Fiscal prudence – choosing it as a fundamental principle imposes a certain discipline, discipline on thought, discipline on our communications, and discipline on our actions. Fiscal prudence ensures that we do not act only in our own narrow interests and trap our children in debt. Fiscal prudence means when we ask for something it makes us confront the question: "Are we prepared to pay for this?" We spend within our means. We believe firmly in fiscal prudence. Sir, taken as a whole, I do not believe that this Budget reflects a fundamental shift in our philosophy or ideology. It reflects our willingness to take the best ideas from the right and the left, and add some that are uniquely Singaporean. Sir, despite significant insightful generosity and many areas with increased expenditure, this is a balanced Budget. A Budget for our future, a Budget for Singapore, a Budget for all of us. Sir, I support the motion. 2.31 pm Page: 1471 Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song (Non-Constituency Member) : Mr Speaker, the initiatives in Budget 2012 demonstrate a shift in the Government's mindset in providing much needed support for our low-income workers, senior citizens and people with disabilities.”
“First, we must continue to support the elderly and vulnerable within our society. To do so speaks neither to the left nor the right, but to our humanity and our culture. Secondly, we should protect the subsidies and transfers that allow children from low-income families to pursue their education and their dreams. For if we choose to remove that, that would be to deny the dream of social mobility and progress that is at the heart of our nation's narrative. This is an idea from the left, and it is a good one. Third, we should keep central the idea that keeping people in work and allowing them to enjoy the benefits of their hard work drives our progress and prosperity. This is a philosophy from the right that results in low taxation and a link between work and assistance. It has worked well for us and we should continue to choose to implement. Sir, I have suggested one idea from the left, one from the right, and one that transcends political ideology as being at the core of the values that we should choose to see reflected in our Budget. The fourth and last idea is that of a balanced Budget. Many nations, First World or otherwise, are unable to achieve; some do not even feel they should try. Nevertheless, for us, it is a cornerstone of our Budget. A remarkable feat that has been quietly repeated year on year on year, but receives very little commentary – quite understandably because the headline, "Finance Minister delivers yet another Balanced Budget" is not going to sell many newspapers. But it is a remarkable feat for any nation. Where along the political spectrum does this lie? It is an idea supported both by the Government and clearly by the Opposition.”
“The importance placed on self-reliance and one's own family as the first line of support borrows heavily from the language of the right. The primacy of employment and the link between the provision of financial assistance and continuing to remain employed, exemplified by the Workfare policies, speaks to our belief that incentives should drive us to work hard and benefit from our own hard work. Coupled with our low taxation, this has made us a dynamic and responsive economy. Sir, over the next few days, my parliamentary colleagues and I will speak repeatedly on what are euphemistically known as "cuts". Very few, if any, of us will be asking for a cut in expenditure, more likely the opposite. In a time of global economic uncertainty, where parliamentarians in other nations, First World or otherwise, are arguing over which austerity measures to effect, which reductions in spending to push through and which increases in revenue to risk, we are instead going to debate how best to increase our expenditure. How fortunate a position to be in? How remarkable that we have the luxury to ask and ask and ask for more? But one question I would like to ask is: what is at the heart of our values? What in the Budget do we feel about so strongly that it defines us and the ideology of our society? What are the choices we make that can help illustrate our beliefs? There are indeed many things we need to spend on. But there are also things that we choose to spend on, and sometimes we do not even see it as a choice, but simply as a given, part of the backdrop, because we believe them to be non-negotiable, when, in truth, they are. If we examine these choices, we can begin to better define ourselves. Page: 1470 Sir, I would like to suggest four candidates for these choices.”
“I believe our current public transport system is one of the most efficient, reliable and pleasant in the world, and I benefit from it on a daily basis. I look forward to its continued growth and development. Nevertheless, we have to consider deeply where we want to go from here. What is the impact of the decision to invest $1.1 billion in the bus companies? Is it a significant shift and does it reflect the start of a fundamental change? Page: 1469 Sir, in moving to the Budget as a whole, I would like to consider how our values as a society are reflected within it. No doubt, the primacy of honouring and respecting our elders is reflected in many aspects that support seniors, assist in their healthcare and help them to maintain their homes, independence and their dignity for as long as possible. Along the political spectrum, is this an idea from the right or the left? I would suggest that in our cultural context, in our story of our nation, it transcends political ideology and is very much part of our cultural DNA. On the other hand, the subsidies and transfers that go towards assisting and funding the education of the lower income families surely derive from the language of the left. In our philosophy and in our policies, we articulate clearly that the education and opportunity presented to our children cannot be left to unchecked market forces, for fear that equality of opportunity and social mobility will be rapidly eroded. This drive to ensure social mobility and equal education speaks to a social desire for a more egalitarian society, something which has long been at the heart of many Government policies. Yet, the other end of the political spectrum is not without representation in our Budget.”
“We are neither properly privatised nor adequately nationalised. In the past, this hybridised model has been held up as an exemplar of what was possible with good governance. Sir, it may represent the best of both worlds, but has recently been interpreted as the worst of both models. Can the House and the public be assured that this hybridisation continues to be the best way forward for Singapore? Sir, despite my comments and criticisms, I remain a fan of our public transport system. I took my boys to school on a public bus this morning. I then took another to KK Hospital and I came to Parliament on the bus Number 166. All three services arrived on time. The duration of journey was as predicted on my iPhone. Most of the time, there are seats available on these services, and usually I get to read quite a few of my emails. At the end of today's sitting, I will walk over to Clarke Quay Station, and take the North-East Line, and 25 minutes later I will be in my constituency in Punggol. Our system does its job and does it well. It is safe, clean, and reliable. I agree that it has its faults and its problems, and any enterprise can always be improved. One area that I feel needs further consideration and development is that of "last mile" connectivity. Rather than just assuming that when the network is eventually dense enough, people will be happy to cycle or walk to the nearest MRT station. We need to work proactively at changing and encouraging this mindset. We need to examine footpaths, cycling facilities, lighting, access ramps and the location of amenities, with as much attention to detail as we can, as it is often these factors that alter the choice of the individual, where a choice is possible.”
“And in this model, instead of worrying about competition between and within a transport modality, this body has allowed a broader approach to be applied. This offloads the public transport systems where possible and results in a whole host of other external benefits. Can we take a lesson from London? If, on the other hand, nationalisation is too expensive and too inefficient, then why not just privatise properly? Sir, if we look at our transport operators, can we even think of them as being privatised? Yes, they are responsible to shareholders and yes they can make significant profits, but both SMRT and SBS Transit have posted operating losses mostly due to increases in staff and fuel costs. Last year, both companies submitted applications to the Public Transport Council (PTC) for total bus and rail fares to be raised by 2.8%. But instead, the PTC only approved an increase of 1%. If they were both truly private entities, they would both be able to respond based on market demand. If a service was undersubscribed or unprofitable, they can cease to offer it, thus releasing resources and assets for use where they were needed. So while our public transport operators are private entities, they operate under significant constraints and burdens that reduce their flexibility and their ability to optimise operations in response to market forces. There are examples of privatised transport systems where the public transport operators are encouraged and allowed to generate significant revenue from other sources, such as retail outlets and advertising, and thus cross subsidise fares. For this to work at maximal efficiency, a significant deregulation of our market would be needed, allowing true competition and true consumer choice.”
“However, Sir, if we consider this to be a public good, might we not accept some degree of inefficiency as a fair price to pay for the continued provision of an essential service? If there is always going to be a bus service available for the citizens, sometimes a particular bus will operate at sub-optimal efficiency. This occurs anyway, currently, as a result of the constraints on service imposed upon the public transport operators. Absent of any real competition, with no real consumer choice, can we be sure that the current model is in reality driving maximal efficiency? In considering the argument against complete nationalisation, we should not forget to factor in the ongoing cost of operating LTA as a surrogate for the effect of market forces in controlling our public transport operators. Page: 1468 Despite the significant increase in cost, there are successful models of nationalised public transport systems, such as Taipei. If one were to broaden the definition of successful, and accept a significant degree of ongoing expenditure, one could include an example, such as London, where all public transport, including cycling and walking, has been brought under the aegis of a single body, Transport for London. This has enabled a transitional approach to transport strategy, where citizens are not seen as being either drivers, or cyclists, rail commuters or pedestrians, and being potential consumers that the different modalities and the providers need to compete for. But, rather, recognising that any given individual can be all those at different times, and the correct public transport infrastructure strategy can encourage a driver to become a passenger, a passenger to become a cyclist or a pedestrian.”
“Can the public be assured that the funds will go to benefit the citizens and not the shareholders? How will the Government measure the return on this investment in terms of buses and support of operating costs? How far will we go in providing Government and public support to private transport operators? If the taxi industry suffers, will the Government provide funding for it as well? What will happen in the future as our MRT network expands in rail length and cross-connectivity? There had previously been a push to rationalise some bus services, especially closer towards a hub and spoke model, so as to move ridership to the MRTs. If the bus companies are already struggling now, what will happen with the increased competition from the MRT and further manpower shortages in five or 10 years from now? Will the Government then 'bail out' the public transport operators? If the ridership of the bus companies falls over 15 years, might the projected planned investment in this year's Budget in buses possibly be used to defray some of the costs of replacing the existing fleet rather than lead to a genuine expansion? Is this just the start of a creeping nationalisation? If so, why not just nationalise properly and reap the full benefits, instead of suffering the worst of both worlds? Sir, some of the factors in support of the nationalisation of public transport are that it can potentially bring about lower fares and better performances in terms of availability. Factors that argue strongly against it include a greater inefficiency, a dependent mindset amongst transport operators, and that it is very, very expensive both in the first instance and in terms of ongoing expenditure.”
“There has been a lot of thought and discussion about whether this Budget represents a fundamental shift in the philosophy and ideology of government. The question as to whether this signifies a "shift to the left" has been brought up. Our Government has generally considered itself as taking a centrist approach, reaching out to all citizens, but the external perception of both the party and the majority of our society has been that we are moderately conservative and pragmatic. People assume we swing to the right because of our macro-economic policies. However, in truth, we have adopted a mixed stance depending on the needs of our nation. There are many examples where our social policies have been developed from leftist ideas that were appropriate for our society, especially in helping the most vulnerable. Page: 1467 One of the new policies, it is now argued that demonstrates a shift to the left, is the announcement that the Government will be spending $1.1 billion on buses. This sum needs to cover more than just the cost of buying the buses, and will need to take into account the manpower and operating costs associated with the expanded fleet. Sir, does the Finance Minister see this as representing a shift towards the left, where transport companies are being further subsidised by the Government? The overall approach of our public transport system has been to incentivise private companies to make a profit within a tightly regulated market. As private entities, should it not be the responsibility of the companies to manage their operating and manpower costs? Why is there a need for the Government to fund publicly-listed companies, such as SMRT and SBS Transit, which, at the end of the day, are accountable to their shareholders?”
“Mr Low Thia Khiang : Mr Speaker, Sir, may I have your permission to clarify my speech because I made an error in the figure that I have used. Mr Speaker : Yes, please. Mr Low Thia Khiang : Thank you, Sir. Sir, I mentioned an S-Pass figure, instead of the employment figure on the second part of the comparison. I want to correct it now but it does not affect the point I made in my speech. Sir, in Mandarin, please. (In Mandarin): [Please refer to Pg 1555 for Vernacular Speeches.] Sir, earlier in my speech, I said that in 2011, we had approved 176,000 Employment Pass applications, and compared to the 113,000 Employment Pass applications approved in 2010, that is a 63,000 increase in the number of Employment Passes approved. The figure in the second half of the sentence is wrong. It refers to the S-Pass numbers. I am sorry that I have misread. The correct figure should be: in 2011, the Government approved 176,000 Employment Pass applications as compared to 142,000 Employment Pass applications approved in 2010. That is an increase of 34,000 in the number of Employment Passes approved. 2.14 pm Dr Janil Puthucheary (Pasir Ris-Punggol) : Mr Speaker, like many of my Parliamentary colleagues who spoke before me, I am glad that Budget 2012 continues and expands upon this Government's policies that address the needs of the vulnerable in society – the elderly, especially older workers; the disabled and the poor. This reflects the values that are central to a compassionate society and a fair and inclusive Government. Longer term challenges in society, such as the ageing population, education, healthcare and reducing the income gap for low-income families, are also addressed. I believe these measures will serve us well for building an inclusive and stronger Singapore.”
“However, I want to stress that a Government needs to draw a balance between short-term and long-term interests. If it only focuses on immediate interests at the expense of long-term interests, there will come a time where it can no longer turn the situation around. Just as it is said in the Analects, he who is not farsighted is bound to encounter problems in the near future. For the better of Singapore's future, I think there is a need to pass an effective mechanism to ensure that our younger generation can express their views on national issues and give suggestions for its long-term development. They need to broaden their perspective and be far-sighted to look beyond immediate needs. I suggest setting up a youth parliament to create a platform for young people to air their views – besides economic development, it should also pay attention to ideologies and social culture. While it fulfils young people's desire of participating in social management through vibrant discussions, it should also strengthen social cohesion and sense of commitment. Page: 1466 Fan Zhongyan, a prime minister in the Song Dynasty, once said that the interest of one's nation and people should be put before oneself. Indeed, the noblemen in ancient China had such heart for their country, I believe there are also such noblemen among our young people. Therefore, we should give them the opportunity to express their passion, talent and creativity in national matters and this would be beneficial to our country. In conclusion, I want to borrow a quote from Mao Zedong to express my hopes for the third generation who are running the next lap of the race: for truly great men, look at this generation.”
“Other countries, like Japan or America, are going on a downward trend in the hands of their third and fourth generations after experiencing 40 to 50 years of prosperity. However, even a broken ship will contain some valuable materials, Japan and the US have strong foundations, as long as they are willing to endure hardships now, they would be able to make a comeback in a matter of years. Singapore, on the contrary, must be careful as any misstep would drive us into the deep end. Since Independence, Singapore has entered the era of the second generation. My parents' generation had been working hard in this land since the 1940s. Their generation had created a miracle and brought Singapore from the third-world to the first-world in a matter of 30 years after our independence. I am considered a second generation Singaporean and, like others in my age group, we have worked hard to build the nation in the past 20 to 30 years. I am now in my 50s. In another 10 years' time, the third generation has to take over the baton to continue the race in this marathon that has no ending point. The third generation has to face more challenges and shoulder more responsibilities, thus they have more stress. To break the curse of "wealth does not last for three generations", besides nurturing the spirit of progress, innovation and overcoming oneself in our youths, they need a crisis mentality and not take what we have today for granted. To have a sense of preparedness even in good times as people tend to let down their guard when things go well and dangers often lures when one is unprepared. Since last year's General Election, all quarters focused on bread-and-butter issues and the Government has also put in efforts on all fronts and adjusted policies to fulfil the people's wishes.”