Mildred Tan
Singapore
“I urge the agency, the Singapore Deposit Insurance Corporation, to continue its good work of educating the public on its role, and the strength of Singapore's financial system as the fundamental issue remains one of credit, and even more basic – that of trust.”
“I thank the Minister of State for her comprehensive reply. I just have one quick question. With this growing trend, what is the Government's stand in ensuring the continuous upgrading of competencies in this field? There is a phenomenal number of people in this sector and the numbers keep growing every year.”
“A young worker recently told me that she was very happy when her HR in her company introduced a flexi-time policy in her workplace where workers are allowed to report to work anytime between 8.30 am and 10.00 am, so long as they clock in the required eight hours a day. So I said, "Is that not a good thing?”
“Do not be quick to anger, to judge or moralise. Who knows why the man lost his job, could not find another or why he could not visit his mother? Who knows what happened between a mother and her daughters?”
“The third recommendation proposes that, in view of environmental concerns on wastage due to unnecessary construction, the age and state of repair of buildings be included as factor in the STB’s evaluation of the application for CS.”
“I therefore suggest that a tripartite organisation be set up to help schools to engage parents and community, including religious organisations, work together to address social issues and moral education.”
The complete record
Every one of 61 lines we hold for Mildred Tan, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 2 of 2.
“However, I am surprised that we have not leveraged much on developing social enterprises. There appears little support for this, including investments in know-how and how to do so. Cooperatives are good examples of how this can be done. But aside from very successful ones such as FairPrice and Income, there appears to be few social enterprises that have succeeded to that extent. Sir, I think we ought to ask the Finance Minister if he could support social enterprises more but, at the same time, social enterprises themselves need to do some asking. Social enterprises in the UK, for example, are active and viscerous. There are estimates. They have a combined turnover of £27 billion and contribute £8.4 billion to GDP. They have a manifesto to triple their contribution to the economy over the next 10 years. They see social enterprises as a way towards a fairer and more sustainable economy. Among the policy initiatives it calls for are tax breaks for social investment, laws to help communities buy and run their own assets and routine collection of information on social enterprise movement. In Singapore, we could learn from them too. There are about 150 social enterprises in Singapore today and a social enterprise association where two Chairs are Members of this House. Hence, I hope they will support me in the following remarks. When we speak of inclusive and socially responsible growth, these ought to be in the forefront of our discussions. I believe Budget should be making provisions for the growth of social enterprises. This Budget sounds like it is tailor made for social enterprise with its focus on inclusive growth and allowing all Singaporeans to enjoy a better quality of life.”
“However, what happens at the workplace? Often times, when they return to their jobs, they are still doing the same things at the same pay, and their wages will stay more or less the same if nothing changes at the workplace? Can the Finance Minister consider increasing incentives, not just to increase productivity via process improvement but also organisation redesign initiatives at the workplace. For example, provide grants and subsidies to companies or initiators which will help process improvement and organisation redesign for increased productivity. Perhaps look at the double tax deduction or even the enhanced tax deduction for process improvement and organisation redesign expenditure, similar to the tax treatment for donations. While I agree it is good economics to increase productivity as much as we can, it is unclear what some of the short term impact will be. Like some of the other Members of the House, I believe the increased foreign worker levy will drive business costs up in the short term, and our local companies will be less competitive as business costs goes up and there will be likely a time lag for productivity initiatives to catch up. Indeed, the Finance Minister laid out many incentives in this year's Budget. But as I go through each one of them, I wonder if there is a more comprehensive and integrated way to conceive this year's collection of incentives and benefits. Perhaps, even more importantly, I do hope we will have clear public communications to help companies understand who are eligible, when and where one can apply and how to take advantage of the different schemes. Thirdly, to foster socially inclusive growth, can we consider developing the social enterprises? Sir, I think there is a great deal of desire to do more for society.”
“Quite aside from the social and quality of life gains from a diverse workplace, promoting effective communication will enhance productivity and ensure higher workplace safety. It will create teams to spur creativity and innovation. Secondly, productivity and innovation need to capture the hearts and minds of our workforce. The Government's investment in training, reskilling and continuous education and learning will not have a competitive edge it seeks if it does not capture the hearts and minds of our workforce and the people do not bind into this proposition. Productivity can be defined in so many ways and takes on different interpretations. But does the word "productivity" captures the imagination and envision of people to what the future is? I believe our younger Singaporeans, the Gen Y, seeks aspirations to innovate, to be agile and to make a difference. We need to identify an impetus or driver of change to galvanise and harness the collective energy to change the mindsets of our people to be more agile and mobile. This is a strategic imperative. Whilst companies must embrace productivity and innovation transformation from a strategic perspective, companies can also be helped at the tactical or operational level to improve its efficiency and effectiveness at the ground level. These changes must go hand in hand with training and skills development. Sir, I am a partner at Ernst & Young and therefore some of the following comments are from the business advisory and tax domains. Fundamentally, companies may need to have a deeper look at how they do things and redesign jobs, and organisations to help them leverage workers' skills and use them more effectively. One concrete example is workers today are offered many different training programmes to help them develop.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, thank you for allowing me to speak. Like the ESC report, I think this Budget will enable us to stay competitive and propel us to become an advanced economy. It will bring us far but it is important to consider how far and how long this journey will take. In reality, we are living in a new world order that requires multi-dimensional balancing act. How do we become more resilient to shocks that remain flexible enough to grasp new opportunities? How do we maintain proven business perspectives while accommodating very different demands of emerging markets? How do we deepen our local know-how while delivering global economies of scale? The proposition, therefore, is how to compete in a new business environment at a time when the rise of companies and where emerging markets have changed the game and the outlook for businesses. Given this new world order, I would like to offer four perspectives. Developing our local enterprises to be global players require us to embrace diversity. We need to enable our local companies to grow regionally and internationally and I therefore welcome the incentives for the small and medium-sized enterprises to grow their businesses outside of Singapore. Our domestic market is too small. We need to think about how to strengthen our SMEs regionally and beyond, and to evolve our companies to be relevant global players. It is therefore imperative as companies deepen and broaden their presence in the international markets for management teams to be also culturally diverse. Therefore, in this regard, I believe more effort and attention should be made by the Government to help companies embrace diversity and inclusiveness in the workplace, both at the management as well as the workers' level.”
“Mr Speaker, I would like to thank the Minister for his comprehensive reply. One quick supplementary question: does he feel that the budget that is being allocated is adequate? Assoc. Prof. Dr Yaacob Ibrahim: Sir, we have to work within what we think is reasonable. The $1 million budget was actually a bottom-up process in which we discuss with the various agencies on what needs to be done. This, of course, has been approved by Cabinet, and we think this is sufficient for us to start with. It is a lot of money, but a lot of it will go into building up capabilities within the industry and the various sectors. I mentioned earlier the funding for the building sector, for example. It is a very huge sector for Singapore, especially the number of existing buildings. Based on the assessment by MND, the funding at the moment is adequate. But if we think more needs to be done, we probably have to go back and ask for approval. We will start with what we have and with the budget that we have, plus the additional funding that I mentioned earlier, we think we are able to implement this blueprint at this point in time to achieve the 7% to 11% reduction that I mentioned earlier.”
“Would the number of sign ups to the EduTrust mark be made a KPI too? Or better still, can we make it compulsory to all PEIs? We can, of course, let the market decide, and let consumers distinguish between the good and the bad. Here, too, I feel that we ought to move away from market forces. People sign up for these courses not as consumers but as students. They ought to regard themselves, not as buying a degree but gaining an education. Can the Senior Minister of State tell us if students will be given some guidance on what they ought to look out for? Can the Government set up a helpline for foreign students? This will not only protect the students but also preserve the integrity of Singapore's reputation as an education hub. Sir, that is the crux of the issue. With the Brookes Business School affair, as well as a string of other failures of regulation, Singapore has lost some ground in her reputation. Let us now work towards regaining this trust by ensuring not just stricter but more widespread compliance in enforcement with higher standards and therefore protect and ensure Singapore's reputation and brand abroad as a centre of education and academic excellence remains intact. Mr Speaker, Sir, I support the Bill. 4.41 pm”
“But here is what I feel we ought to be thinking about. That is to say, it really has to work on regaining people's trust. And the way to do so is by changing the philosophy of private schools – and this has to do with both private providers, regulators as well as the students. As continuous learning becomes part of our lives, we ought to regard private education as part of mainstream education. We ought to hold both education providers as well as ourselves as students to a higher standard. Education providers are professionals. They ought to be respected – and to respect themselves – as such. This regard needs a clearer recognition in the law. As mentioned, the number of private schools in Singapore has grown from 305 in 1997 to 1,200 today in 2007. But only about 350 of these are CaseTrust-certified. Even though we expect the majority of these are expected to opt for the voluntary EduTrust scheme, this still means that the majority of private schools here are relatively unregulated. Can the Senior Minister of State tell us how these schools will be regulated? Should they be called schools at all, if they operate differently from those who have the EduTrust mark? What protection is there for students in these schools? Today's Straits Times reported that local students have a different level of protection from foreign students. Can this anomaly be addressed? Second, can the Senior Minister of State tell us what are some signs that MOE has that the law has worked? That is, what would a good state of affairs look like? What are the key performance indicators (KPIs)? Would they include a lower number of complaints about private education providers? Or is it the result during the quality review?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I thank you for allowing me to speak on this topic. I must first say that this is a very comprehensive Bill that is sufficiently broad to achieve two aims – one is to protect consumers and second is to strengthen the industry. However, I feel that there is a third part that is more important and perhaps more difficult to achieve. I feel that the Government has to set high standards in the education industry and, in this instance, we ought to mediate this viewpoint that "education is yet another commodity that can be bought in the marketplace, and let the buyer beware if the education he buys is what he pays for." First, let me say that the Bill represents two very positive steps in the right direction. The first is that this Bill offers increased protection for the consumers. The new law will require private schools to get permission from the authorities before they can offer any course to the public. More importantly, they will undergo a strict quality assurance scheme in order to enrol any students. Second, I believe this Bill will strengthen the industry. Now, I think it would be inaccurate to say that the label of "CaseTrust" has taken a beating. The Consumers Association of Singapore (CASE) – has said that there is only so much that they can do to regulate private schools. The Straits Times, for example, has reported that CASE has said that it is not its job to conduct academic checks. And I quite agree. Therefore, this brings me to my third point. CaseTrust is primarily a consumer-based scheme. Under the proposed law, it will be replaced by EduTrust. This latter scheme spells out a list of almost 30 different criteria, including academic quality, student welfare and soundness of finances, that the schools have to satisfy.”
“Here, Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to declare that I am also a partner in the firm, Ernst and Young, and that we had made this point earlier to the Ministry during a public consultation exercise. I am pleased to note that in a release from MOF just last week, it said that this has now been accepted for further study and IRAS will consider if there is a similar scope to extend treatment to ships in subsequent amendments to the Act. We ought to make the law as good as we can and as soon as we can. I urge the Minister to consider including this point under this round of amendments. Sir, in conclusion, I rise to support the amendments to the Bill and would like the Government to make similar provisions to the shipping industry. This even-handed approach is not only good business practice but, I believe, has good long-term benefits to the overall economic development for Singapore as well. :13 pm”
“There is no amendment made to the definition of "a ship" under this amendment. Under the supply of aircraft parts, GST-registered businesses can apply for zero-rating relief when they sell or lease aircraft parts that are exported from Singapore. This requires businesses to maintain the relevant export documents to substantiate that the parts supplied are physically exported. Businesses therefore devote a lot of resources to manage GST-compliance documents in order to be able to charge zero percent GST when supplying aircraft parts for export. Under the amendment proposed, businesses in this sector should find it easier to manage their GST compliance. This is because zero-rating would apply on the sale or lease of qualifying aircraft parts so long as the parts are certified as airworthy and are designed and built for exclusive use on a qualifying aircraft. The zero-rating relief will apply regardless of the delivery, location of the aircraft parts and the location of customers. In other words, zero percent GST will apply even if the qualifying aircraft parts are sold and delivered locally, leased to a local customer. This eliminates the need for businesses to maintain the relevant export documents that are required currently and hence reduces the GST compliance cost. Again, there is no similar provision for the supply of parts for ships. This implies that businesses in the shipping industry that are required to maintain relevant export documents, be it purchase orders and delivery orders, to substantiate the parts that are physically exported. Businesses in this sector will therefore continue to devote a lot of time and resources to manage the GST compliance in order to be able to charge zero percent GST when supplying parts for export.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, thank you for allowing me to speak on this issue. Let me, first, say I welcome the changes to the Goods and Services Tax (GST) Amendment Bill, especially on the issue of aircraft parts. This I see as part of Government's pro-business policy and something to be supported. However, what I would like to ask is why the Government chose not to extend similar benefit to the shipping industry as both industries have always shared similar treatments in the GST legislation. First, the zero-rating relief for aerospace industry. The changes reflect the fact that Singapore is already a leading aerospace hub in the Asia-Pacific region, particularly in the area of maintenance, repair and overhaul of aircrafts. The GST changes announced for the aerospace industry will help to enhance Singapore's status as an aerospace hub. They are also timely, given the on-going redevelopment of the Seletar Airbase into an aerospace park. Under the current law, aircraft qualifying for the zero-rating relief GST at zero percent, instead of 7%, are limited to those that are not used for recreational or pleasure purposes. With the amendments, the definition of a qualifying aircraft will be changed to include those used for recreation or pleasure as long as they are internationally bound. Hence, qualifying aircraft will include all international bound aircraft regardless of whether they are used for commercial, recreational or pleasure purposes. The definition of "a ship" under GST legislation is a bit of a mouthful. It is "a ship", including an oil rig which is not designed or adapted for use for recreation or pleasure and excludes any vessel licensed under the Maritime and Port Authority Singapore Act as a passenger harbour craft or pleasure craft".”