Ng Eng Hen
Singapore
“I think we try to keep this virtuous state of affairs as long as we can to make sure that we can invest steadily. Year-to-year fluctuations would occur, whether it is economic, not so much in COVID-19, but remember the Global Financial Crisis? Everybody needs to take a haircut. If you have to take a haircut, you have to take a haircut.”
“Mr Chairman, as the World around us becomes more unpredictable and changes, the more we need to keep the strongest commitment to strengthen our own defences and, if needed, we must be willing to do more. Singapore celebrates 60 years of Independence this year.”
“MINDEF will continue to work with partners to encourage Singaporeans to raise their digital literacy, develop and maintain good cybersecurity habits, protect sensitive data and guard against scams, fake news and disinformation so as to make the digital domain a safer and more secure space.”
“The Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) conducts regular mobilisation exercises (MOBEX) of our National Service (NS) forces. In a silent mobilisation, NSmen are notified through their personal contact numbers. Open mobilisations include the broadcast of unit code-words through mass media.”
“In 2020, the Ministry of Defence replied to a Parliamentary Question on this matter that the relocation of Paya Lebar Air Base (PLAB) would likely occur around 2030 or beyond, after Changi Air Base and Tengah Air Base have been expanded to house the existing assets at PLAB.”
“When incidents or near-misses happen, as it did where one Hunter armoured fighting vehicle rear-ended another during Exercise Wallaby in Australia, thorough investigations are conducted and lessons learnt shared across the units.”
The complete record
Every one of 2,266 lines we hold for Ng Eng Hen, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 32 of 46.
“To answer both Mdm Halimah and Mr Seng Han Thong, we do have existing programmes to help professionals. As Members know, the Strategic Manpower Conversion Programme which we first started was applied to help nurses because there was a demand for nurses at that time. This was in 2001 and 2002, where there was quite a lot of restructuring and professionals were affected and they asked for help, and we launched that. It was very successful. I met many of those on course - ex-architects, ex-bankers, ex-lawyers - who for a variety of reasons felt that their calling was actually in certain profession. And subsequently, more importantly, the head nurses, the doctors, and the management staff of the hospitals who had these mid-career changes gave very good feedback. They said they were more mature in their views and they were very positive. We extended that scheme, if Members remember, to teaching aid assistants as well and, again, it was very positive. So I thought these two initiatives give us a lot of encouragement to extend it. Mr Seng Han Thong has rightly remembered that I said 1,000 PMETs costing $20 million over two years. The implementation date is targeted at 1st April of this year. And the amount that was arrived at is based similarly on how much it actually costs to convert someone. Because as Members realised, when you try to do that at the mid-level, it does cost a lot more resources. It costs us about $20,000 a year for training a nurse. When it was about two years, it was about $40,000. So $20 million, about $20,000, some would require shorter; and some would require longer. While I think beyond the resourcing which I will be happy to extend or increase if it proves successful, it is really to see how we can improve efforts.”
“Mr Chairman, the issues that I brought up regarding the CPF changes, the Workfare and WIS schemes will strengthen the CPF system. In addition, the relaxation in top-up rules will open up ways for family members who have accumulated adequate amounts to help their family members and spouses, even ex-spouses, and we are studying more ways to help members achieve higher returns in a reasonable risk climate.”
“So, I said that over the next five years we can expect 450,000 jobs if our economy grows, ie, 90,000 a year, but we only have 30,000 local workers to supply. Mrs Josephine Teo asked: “Shall we look at the ratio?” If we really need to have 90,000 jobs and we only have 30,000 local workers to supply, the Mathematics speak for themselves. Should we then stop foreign workers from coming, saying, “Out! Before we allow you in, I want to make sure that our local manpower wages rise up.”? After a while, it will be self-defeating because, as Mrs Josephine Teo rightly pointed out, businesses will move elsewhere. So, we need to move away from the mindset that keeping others out will help Singaporeans. This is giving false hope. No country has succeeded in doing this. It has not worked in Europe. I know that when we attend labour conferences and the unionists will tell you that the unions in Europe are suffering. They try to protect jobs, but companies leave. In fact, these protectionistic policies have worsened the situation. We can only ensure jobs for Singaporeans if we set the right conditions for the economy to grow and these include allowing businesses to meet their manpower needs. If business demand goes up and we do not have an adequate local supply, we should be prepared to allow more foreign workers in to grow the economy. So, for this point, I am keeping the quotas. But if businesses pick up, if the IRs come in, if the BFCs gets built and more restaurants, F&B, entertainment or tourism industry grows, it will be silly and shortsighted of us to try to stick to the quota. We will have to monitor the situation and respond.”
“They are now about 30,000 S-pass holders across the different sectors, reflecting the broad-based market demand for this group of workers. More than half of these are employed in the services sector. I would like to assure Mdm Halimah that my Ministry monitors closely the impact on employment of this group, in other words, the local diploma holders, because that is where the S-pass is pitched at. Since the introduction of the S-pass, the unemployment rates for local diploma holders and university graduates have not risen and, in fact, have fallen and the mean monthly gross starting salaries of polytechnic graduates have gone up. Last year, it was $1,700. It has gone up 6% from $1,600 in 2004, where we introduced the S-pass. I had also mentioned yesterday that nine out of 10 fresh polytechnic graduates found jobs within six months after graduation. So, the introduction of the S-pass has not reduced the employment opportunities or the wage levels of our diploma holders. It shows that the employment of these groups, ie, the local diploma holders and graduates, is driven mainly by general labour market conditions, rather than the inflow of any specific group of foreign manpower. Our foreign workforce, including S-pass holders, has, in fact, enabled us to support business manpower needs and grow beyond the limits of our indigenous workforce. Yesterday, I mentioned that last year we created about 180,000 jobs, but we could only supply about 30,000. If you push hard enough, get your older women to come into the workforce, stop people from retiring, you may be able to ramp up the supply by up to 60,000. That leaves you 120,000 short. If we do not allow businesses to meet those needs, we are going to constrain our growth.”
“Mr Ong Kian Min brought up a point about this in terms of the parents using cash to help their children buy a house and then when the child sells the house, the parent does not get back anything. T he cash component that is required for buying houses has various purposes. One, of course, is to make sure that there is no speculation and there is some upfront, if you like, deterrence to make sure that speculation does not go awry. So, I think that is correct. The second rule is that CPF monies ought to be returned into your account, and I think that is right again. He has suggested that we change the order. But that gets a bit complicated because we do not know where the cash came from as there is no cash trail. We will study what he has suggested. But I think that both these aspects should be separated. I am not sure that we can change our CPF rules to address family problems. In other words, in this case, the parent used the money to help the child, thinking that the child would repay their kindness. I think our CPF rules are right, but we will study his suggestion. Mr Chairman, before I close, I also want to address certain points. I apologise that I chose to speak before Mdm Halimah had made her cut on S-passes and that was because I was not sure I could have finished yesterday. She had brought up some points about S-passes having an impact on our local diploma holders and university graduates because we have increased it from 10% to 15%, but the overall ratio remains the same. The S-pass was launched on 1st July 2004 and this was because businesses said they needed a lot of middle manpower and our own projection showed that we were short of manpower at the diploma and post-secondary levels. Mdm Halimah asked for some figures.”
“In other words, if the member had used his CPF for the property, but the Court had ordered that the ownership of the property be transferred to the ex-spouse, we will no longer require the member to refund his CPF in cash before a transfer can take place. We will actually allow the property to be transferred. Instead, a charge should be created in the ex-spouse’s interest, so that she will need to refund the same amount into her CPF account when she sells the property. L et me just say that we are doing this not because we want to encourage divorces, but we recognise that separations are a fact of life. Sometimes, we have to pick up the pieces and move on, so we want to facilitate those episodes. I have also decided to address another practice not quite in line with our Minimum Sum policy. When members sell their properties, which they have used CPF money to purchase, all of us know that they must return the CPF money into their account, plus accrued interest from the sale proceeds, and this is to secure the payment of the Minimum Sum. This is existing policy and common knowledge, but we have not enforced this policy for those above 55. We enforced it uniformly for those below 55 because the Minimum Sums have been changing. We have not enforced this uniformly for those above 55. What we have been doing now is we are only recovering the property pledge, but not the cash short-falls. So, I have asked the CPF Board to rectify this practice and apply the rule uniformly to align the policy. However, to give prospective home sellers, who are above 55 years old, adequate notice, we will enforce this from 1st January 2009. So I am giving advance notice.”
“This protects your CPF money and most of us agree, but when you get divorced, even if, for example, you split the property, the sum of money that was used must go back to that person's account. So, if the wife does not have money to return the CPF sum, the house cannot be divided, it has to be sold off, in some cases. In the division of matrimonial assets, in other words, under the CPF Act, there is currently no discretion to allow some portion or all of the CPF monies used to go into the other spouse’s account. This has created practical difficulties and, in some cases, the wife has had to sell the property even if the husband is willing to transfer the house to the wife. MOM has studied this and I am pleased to announce that later this year, we will make changes to the CPF Act to bring about a smooth and equitable distribution of CPF monies arising from the division of matrimonial assets to either members' accounts. These changes will allow an immediate transfer of CPF monies from a member to the ex-spouse's CPF account. So, for example, for a matrimonial property, $100,000 is used. Under the current rules, all the $100,000 will have to go back to the member's CPF account, even if the Court has awarded the ex-spouse half the proceeds. The Court has no discretion under this. We will change the rules so that the Court can do that. We will also be making amendments to facilitate the immediate transfer of property to the ex-spouse by allowing CPF monies embedded in that property to be transferred, provided that a charge is placed to secure the refund of CPF monies in the event of the sale. This refund will go either into the CPF member’s account or the ex-spouse’s CPF account. Let me put that in plain English.”
“It is very low. So, I understand that purchasing SGS (Singapore Government Securities) can be cumbersome. I have, therefore, asked the CPF Board to consider playing a facilitative role to help members earn higher interest rates, and they will study this. 12.45 pm Along this line of options which provide acceptable risks, but possibly higher returns than the current 4% in the Medisave and Special accounts, I have also asked the CPF Board to study more options for members. Some exposure to equities, bonds or other asset classes may provide better returns over the longer term. As previously mentioned, we are studying the proposal for the CPF Board to play an aggregator role. We have made progress in this study. It is clear from our public consultation that, in this case, having more choice is not necessarily better. What we want to provide is a simple system, with acceptable risks and returns that people can understand and the majority of members can participate in. Any such scheme should be positioned over the long-term horizon so as to offer better rates than the 2.5% and 4% which members get now. I ask members to be patient because this is a complex aspect. There are different members with different risks, different age groups, but we want to reassure everyone this is very much on the radar screen and when ready, we will put out more details. Mr Ong Ah Heng asked whether we can help facilitate division of matrimonial assets. My quick answer is, "Yes, we've agreed." He brought up a point that divorced wives who get very little from the sale proceeds of the matrimonial property because our current CPF rules require the husband - actually it is not the husband, it is the spouse - if he uses his CPF and he gets divorced, that CPF must go back into his account.”
“We have indeed been reviewing it and we are tightening it to help members, because we are now setting more stringent criteria as well as how much a fund can charge in terms of the expense ratio. In February 2006, we capped the sales charge from July 2007, and we are capping expense ratios from January 2008. However, I also agree with Members that between the risk-free 2.5% and 4% and CPFIS - we now have two options - in between, there would be avenues for investment options with acceptable risks and volatility and possibly higher returns that can be provided. I think there is a space there in between to help members. We should look out for these opportunities - some low-hanging fruits that we can quickly pluck to help increase returns. One possible low-hanging fruit is to increase the returns on Ordinary Account, which now pays 2.5%. The OA account functions, basically, as a withdrawal-on-demand account. We use it for housing, education and we can withdraw. So 2.5% interest rate is reasonable. However, many members do not withdraw from their Ordinary Account continuously. A member bought his house and there are sums there and left it for a few years before buying his next house or not at all, because he has purchased his house and does not intend to use his OA any more. They do not want to transfer it to the Special Account because they do not want it to be locked up, as they might want to buy something. The yields for short-term instruments, like the 3-month or 1-year Singapore Government Securities, are currently above the Ordinary Account interest rates. They are now around 3%. And we do allow members to use their OA funds to purchase these and earn more than 2.5%. They could technically now earn 0.5% more. We allow this. And I asked my staff what is the update.”
“And this is why expense ratios for higher risk CPFIS funds are, on average, about 2 to 3 times that of lower risk funds. Exposure to equity markets is accompanied by higher risks, which is why we cap it to 35% on the proportion of your CPF savings which can be used to purchase shares under the CPFIS. So, indeed, Mr Ong and other Members are quite right - there is no running away that commensurate risks are inseparable from expected returns. Even a balanced portfolio, as mentioned by Mr Ong, can mitigate but not eliminate market risks. There have been bear runs in the past that were protracted. Between the peak in March 2000 and the trough in September 2002, the MSCI World Index fell 48% - over three years, it fell by half. All types of boats fell with the sinking tide. So, I think that as a mainstay of our pension system - the CPF system - the present scheme is correctly positioned. Members do not have to worry about the interest rate environment. They do not have to worry about yields and they do not have to worry about stock market volatility. They have the full assurance backed by Government and earn risk-free returns of 2.5% on their Ordinary Account and 4% on their Special, Medisave and Retirement Accounts which, by and large, are above the market rates when compared against products of similar risk and tenure. To achieve better returns, members can transfer their CPF savings from their Ordinary Account to their Special Account which yields a higher interest rate. For members who have an appetite for higher risks, they can choose to invest their CPF savings under the CPFIS on their own. Dr Lily Neo asked whether we should review it.”
“Fixed deposits and short-term bond instruments, like Singapore Government Treasury Bills or some low-risk Singapore bond funds, provide 0.5% to 3% at minimal risk. Further along this risk/tenure spectrum are capital protected or guaranteed funds. In the case of capital guaranteed funds, the bottom line is that they promise the depositor that if he puts in, say, $1,000, there is a guarantee that after X years of investment, his original sum of $1,000 is guaranteed less the sales charge - that is, in the worst case scenario; in other words, there is no yield or interest, and a small outlay as commission to the bank or broker. The capital guaranteed and protected Unit Trust funds that are outstanding under the CPFIS currently have earned annualised returns before sales charge of between -0.10% and 4.85% over the last three years. So they are performing as expected. At the other extreme are those that offer higher returns but with higher risks. For example, there is a fund called APS Alpha Fund. They do not charge any fees or expenses unless it beats a target return of 6% per annum. They tell the depositor, "You invest with me, I will promise you 6%. If I perform below that, I am not going to charge any fees." But they are not guaranteeing the depositor that if they do not perform, the amount that he puts in with them will not reduce. They do not guarantee his capital. It may actually be lost. But if they perform over 6%, they will take 25% of anything above that. Basically, a depositor's higher risk tolerance allows the fund managers to adopt a more aggressive investment stance, and if they lose money, well, that is his luck. If they do meet his expectations, they will recover from him a higher cost to cover their downside.”
“Indeed, this is exactly what one member of the public wrote in response to Mr Ong Kian Min's impassioned speech to seek for higher returns from CPF. Let me quote from Mr Philip Ang's letter on 6th March published in Today: "Mr Ong's expectations of an 8 to 10% yield is rather unrealistic ... the CPF Board should not take more risks for its members in search of higher returns as there are significant risks involved. We should not look at only one side of the coin where private bankers are expected to make 8 to 10% returns for their clients. What about those whose performance pale in comparison to CPF returns? For Mr Ong's suggestions to come at the tail-end of a stock or property bull market, it seems we have not learnt from the painful past experiences. The element of luck in investment should not be discounted. If the CPF Board had introduced policy changes prior to the 1997 financial crisis or the 2000 Internet bubble and had allowed CPF funds to be managed by fund managers, many will probably not be looking forward to retirement today." I understand that he has had trading experience as a professional. This is a mature and balanced view of investments, their risks and rewards. Let me put the issue of expected rate of returns on investments into perspective by giving a brief survey of what exists currently in the market. Investment 101 will tell you that returns on investments are a function of risk exposure and the tenure of your investments - how long you put your money in any particular product. For example, as I have listed in the chart, low-risk bank savings deposit - you put in your money and you can take out any time - attracts 0.3% interest.”
“that investors in aggregate would earn in a world of constant interest rates, two percent inflation, and those ever hurtful frictional costs, it would be six percent ..., that is 4% in real terms." So even someone who is as wise as Warren Buffett - realistic of him - says that that would be the average return that one would expect - 4% in real terms. As all investment products point out religiously in their brochures, past results do not guarantee or predict future performance. It is caveat emptor. And as Mr Ong himself pointed out, expected higher returns do require higher risk tolerance and volatility. As I was listening to him and reading the newspaper the next day, even within a short span of two weeks across this Budget debate, the STI plunged by about 328 points. He expected 8%-10%. He was correct but the STI dropped south - not went up north - down 10% within two weeks. To reach Mr Ong's putative 8%-10%, we will have to deliver 20% over the next 11 months. So there is volatility. Volatility and possible losses are inherent in any investment. Every investor knows that he is exposed to market risks. He may decide to ride through a bear cycle. If he comes through this week's turbulence on the stock market and he holds his stocks and, in the next few months, there is positive returns, he congratulates himself and says, "I've been astute. I have nerves of steel. That was a correct decision." But if he suffers losses, what does he do? He licks his wounds and says, "Well, better luck next time, better learn about the next cycle." But we can expect the reactions, especially in a protracted bear market, to be quite different if the CPF Board invests on behalf of members.”
“About 9% of members covered under the Minimum Sum Scheme have chosen to purchase annuities - a very small number. Younger members who are below the age of 55 and who want to prepare early for their retirement can also purchase deferred annuity policies under CPFIS. We will study Dr Neo's suggestion seriously. But the main problem is to educate members about how annuities work. As Dr Neo said, annuities pool risk for the same cohort with different life expectancies. But a feature in our population is that most members, as loving and caring parents, wish for their CPF sums to revert to their children rather than to the pool, and that is why they do not purchase annuities. Their thinking is that if I live longer, my children will support me. If I am unfortunate and if I die young, I hope that the money will go to them. That is their thinking, and that is why the purchase of annuities is very low. A number of Members - Dr Neo, Mr Ong Kian Min, Mr Christopher De Souza and Ms Olsen - have also asked whether returns to CPF monies can be enhanced. Mr Ong - I listened to his impassioned speech and I was lifted to the throes of investment ecstasy during the Budget debate - asked if people like Warren Buffett and George Soros can earn super normal returns, why could the CPF savings not attract higher returns? Like him, I too wish that we could identify people like them who could guarantee higher returns for all us. It will solve many of our problems. But Mr Ong, of course, I presume, was using extreme examples to exaggerate the point, and not seriously expecting that our CPF funds offer a return of 21.4% annually, as Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathway Fund provides. In fact, Warren Buffett, whom Mr Ong Kian Min quoted, himself said, "If I had to pick the most probable return ...”
“As announced by MOF, a tax relief for cash top-ups of up to $7,000 a year will be given if the sibling receiving the top-up earns not more than $2,000 a year and is 55 years or older. I will also now allow top-ups for spouses and siblings below the age of 55. The top-ups can be made into members' Special Accounts, subject to limits. These changes will take effect from 1st October 2007, except for top-ups to members below the age of 55, which will take effect from 1st January 2008. The difference is because of tax reasons and to get our systems ready. Basically, the purpose of the top-up scheme is to build up the CPF for long-term needs. This will allow family members - some are better off and some are not - to transfer their funds, so that, overall, the family is more sufficient. Top-ups are not meant as a way to allow premature withdrawals. Appropriately, top-up amounts must be kept in the CPF accounts and cannot be withdrawn as a lump sum but to provide a steady income stream. The remaining sums from the top-up amounts will revert to the donor, in the unfortunate event of the demise of the recipient. In other words, it will go back to the donor. As I said, the CPF will release the details later. Fundamentally, we want to send a message that family members should take care and help one another, and we are facilitating this. Dr Lily Neo suggested that we make annuities, at least of some amounts from the CPF funds, mandatory to all members. It is a good idea. People are living longer. What happens if a member runs out of his CPF funds? Can we annuitise it so that it pays as long as the member is alive? It is a good idea, in principle. Indeed, MOM welcomes this initiative. We do encourage members to sign up for annuities. It is currently allowed but on an opt-in basis.”
“We agree with you that it makes sense. These relaxations are particularly to help those who are not working. To achieve this, we will expand the CPF top-up scheme. First, to encourage top-ups, we will use the present Minimum Sum level, in other words, the Minimum Sum level today to determine the top-up limits for various age groups amongst the elderly. This is a significant increase as the current scheme uses the Minimum Sum level of the recipient, not today's Minimum Sum. In other words, for someone who was aged 55 in 1987, the Minimum Sum then was only $30,000, and there was a property pledge. That was the top-up limit we allowed. I am moving it up now, for various age groups, the top-up limit. The Minimum Sum level of today is about $90,000. So it is a significant increase. It varies for different age groups but we will come out with the details. This will allow, basically, older Singaporeans and their family members to receive a regular income over a longer period. In other words, Singaporeans can top up their parents' account and other recipients, so that they get larger balances, and it can be drawn out as a sum or to buy annuities, as suggested by Dr Lily Neo. 12.30 pm Second, apart from raising the limit, I am going to expand the list of recipients. Currently, members can only top up their grandparents' retirement accounts using cash. We did not allow them to use their CPF funds. We will now allow grandchildren to transfer funds from their CPF Ordinary Account to their grandparents' retirement account, subject to both meeting the top-up criteria. We will also now allow, as a new initiative, members to top up their siblings' retirement accounts with savings from their own CPF accounts, or in cash.”
“Her question actually touches on a larger issue about some informal working relationships which would be eligible for WIS. When would we consider them eligible? And, indeed, when we were thinking of this scheme, we expect many variations of such informal working relationships for which we would have to decide whether they are eligible or not. Let me just state principles. For these cases, we want to guard against flagrant abuses of the system because if we allow that, then it would, over time, undermine the whole concept and derail the entire purpose of Workfare. However, in instances where there is genuine work and where specific details of work are honestly provided, with the prescribed Medisave contributions, we will be sympathetic. That is clear enough. Sir, let me now move to CPF-related issues which some Members have brought up. Many Members in this House have touched on the need to use CPF to better prepare ourselves for a greying population. I agree wholeheartedly. This is indeed why we link Workfare for low-wage workers to CPF. We have also increased CPF by 1.5% points for the rest. The 1.5% points is not trivial. Let me give you some numbers. Suppose you are aged 21 and have entered the workforce and earning $1,700 a month. Over time, this 1.5% increase will result in a 12% increase in the CPF balances by the time you reach 55. It is a sum of $17,900, in real terms. For someone who is aged 45, earning, say, $3,000, he will actually enjoy a 6% increase in the CPF balance at age 55, or $6,000 in real terms. So it is substantial. I also want to announce today certain relaxations to enhance measures for family members to help one another build up their CPF balances. A number of Members have asked for it. We have looked at it.”
“I think we are on good precedent and well-founded grounds. If POSB had done it before, if we decide to do this, there may be better avenues. We are not encouraging gambling, but if there is an incentive and a lucky draw does actually encourage the self-employed to contribute into the Medisave, then I say, why not? As to the list of prizes that he has suggested, I will consult him if we decide to implement this scheme. But the idea is a good one. We will also take the suggestion to work with the principals of the self-employed. He mentioned insurance agents and taxi-drivers. That group is where they are self-employed, but there is a management layer. Can we also work with them to make sure that they help these self-employed make regular contributions? But we need to emphasise that, ultimately, the self-employed, like formal employees, are responsible for making regular contributions into their own accounts. A number of MPs, including Mr Seng Han Thong, Mdm Halimah Yacob, Mrs Josephine Teo and Ms Indranee Rajah during the Budget debate, had expressed concerns about getting informal workers to be paid CPF. Let me reiterate very clearly in this House that employers are liable to pay the CPF of all employees, formal or informal. To MOM, there is no differentiation. If you are the employer, you pay CPF. We will be sympathetic to employers who had previously not made CPF contributions but who wish to do so now. But going forward, we will intensify our efforts to improve the compliance rate. Dr Lily Neo asked whether we could allow grandparents, who look after their grandchildren, to qualify for the Workfare Bonus and, presumably, for the Workfare Income Supplement scheme.”
“Mr Chairman, some Members raised issues related to CPF changes and Workfare Income Supplement (WIS) during the Budget debate. Most of these have been addressed. Some other issues have been raised during this Committee of Supply. I would like to focus on those aspects. I agree with Mr Seng Han Thong when he suggests that we should make it easier for self-employed to make regular contributions. He said that many people do not disagree with the idea that they ought to contribute into Medisave to benefit from the Workfare Income Supplement scheme. It is a good scheme and, as he says, they are not contributing to Government, but they are contributing to their own account for their own medical needs. So the idea is a good one. But how do you facilitate this? In fact, there are already different channels that the self-employed can make contributions now. Apart from their cheque payments, they can use e-payments via the CPF's website. I know that many of them do not know how to use or may not be familiar with Internet access, but they can use NETS or their cashcard or any AXS station. They are also allowed to pay by monthly instalments by GIRO. And, indeed, about 51,000 of them actually do so. But his point is, and I agree with him, the key is to encourage them to put away small sums on a regular basis so that they do not have to wait for a lump sum and do not have enough to put into their Medisave contributions to benefit from WIS. We will work out other schemes and we will facilitate this. In this regard, I would welcome innovative ideas from Members on how best to achieve this. Mr Seng Han Thong has suggested lucky draws. It is useful that he reminded us that, in fact, the Post Office Savings Bank (POSB) had such a scheme. I had forgotten. He refreshed some memories.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I beg to report that the Committee of Supply has made further progress on the Estimates of Expenditure for the financial year 2007/2008, and ask leave to sit again tomorrow.”
“Mr Chairman, may I seek your consent to move that progress be reported now and leave be asked to sit again tomorrow?”
“As our economy restructures, the first thing that I would tell Members is that more, rather than fewer, PMET openings will be in the job market. I think that is a source of comfort, but let me give Members some numbers. Last year, the PMET-type of jobs made up 37% of job openings and, indeed, we expect this trend to increase because we are moving up the value chain. Out of the 450,000 jobs which I have mentioned will come onstream, and we project in the next five years, over half, 50% to 60%, will be PMET job openings. Consistent with these statistics, many industry sectors have indicated that they will indeed need more PMETs in jobs such as software engineers, electronic engineers, budgeting and financial accounting managers as well as nurses, to name a few. Many of these jobs will need to be filled by people who transit from one sector to another because you cannot stop sectors from downsizing or upsizing. We do not have the ability. No government has the ability to try to control it in such a way that you really know what to do because you cannot be ahead of the curve, and you can only respond sometimes. WDA indeed does help them and we placed about 3,800 PMETs to available jobs, but I think we need to think of better strategies.”
“Not a large number to crow about but it is a start, and I want them to ramp up this programme. Another way we can help this group is through the Job Re-Creation Programme (JRP), a point raised by Mr Low Thia Khiang and Ms Cham Hui Fong. The JRP identifies jobs, upscales them, re-creates them to increase the pay and productivity. Members have asked for some numbers. Last year, it re-created about 12,000 jobs and placed over 7,000 workers. Of this, more importantly, 50% were mature workers and 54% were lower skilled. To tap on the good opportunities in the labour market for Singaporeans, we will expand the JRP. This is the right time to do it. It is going to increase from 23 to 27 sectors to include banking and finance, call centre, manufacturing as well as the electronics and spa industry, on top of the existing ones such as retail, tourism and F&B. Members have touched on PMETs (Professionals, Managers, Executives and Technicians) in this Budget Debate - Dr Lim Wee Kiak, Ms Denise Phua, Ms Jessica Tan, Mr Zaqy Mohamad and Mrs Josephine Teo. Sir, let me turn my attention to this. They are quite right. We do need coordinated support. We need to make sure that our programmes are coherent, and they know where to go. But I want to sound a word of caution. It does get more difficult. I want to be realistic. For the low-wage workers, we have instituted Workfare systemic measures. As we move up the spectrum, it becomes a bit more difficult because the PMET is his best value. He finally is the one that needs to be convinced because he is a professional, well-educated and well-qualified. Some of them, as Members have rightly pointed out, are over-qualified.”
“Let me first say that the situation has improved. One of the lessons learnt is that a rising tide does indeed lift all boats, including the ones who are structurally unemployed, or at risk or vulnerable workers. In other words, somehow, the labour market absorbs these people who were deemed less employable. The long-term unemployed - which is a proxy, if you are unemployed for more than 25 weeks - is now 0.8% of the resident labour force, which is about 15,000 residents. From 2001 to 2004, it rose to as high as 1.5%, so almost double that. I need to put that 0.8% into context. All societies, as the economy is developed and becomes higher value add, will have a layer which they find it hard to keep up. Our structural unemployment rate or long-term unemployment rate is actually substantially better compared to many developed countries. For example, in the US, it is 1%; in Germany, it is 6.7%; in France, it is 5.8%. So much of Europe has got much higher rates of about five to ten times what we have. That is no excuse for us to let up our efforts but I want to give Members a sense of the perspective that as we move up, there will be a group that will find it hard to catch up and we must spend more efforts. But let us not be discouraged by that number. WDA and the self-help groups developed a new CareerLink Plus Programme in August last year - self-help groups like Mendaki, CDAC, SINDA and other groups - specifically for the long-term unemployed. I think that is the right way to do this - through community help groups which have a better reach to this group, and the programme offers counselling services to better prepare this group for the changing demands of the job market. Together, they helped about 540 cases and placed more than 200 individuals.”
“Before starting in this new job, he attended the Retail Workforce Skills Qualification (WSQ) training. It helped him understand customer needs and brushed up on his communication skills. Yunos has been in his new job for six months, and he is learning and growing. It is examples like these that bring home the point that our programmes are working; they are reaching down to groups that need help. So we will step up our efforts to establish a national qualification system based on the WSQ framework and employability skills system (ESS). We will build more quality institutions to deliver high-quality training. Because it is only through high-quality institutions that will allow Singaporeans to have portable qualifications, which take into account their previous work experience. And when they pursue further training, they have the assurance that their skills obtained will be recognised by their next employer. We cannot guarantee that retrenchments would not occur - a point raised by Dr Lim Wee Kiak. Even as the economy grows, there were about 10,000 retrenchments. That is the nature of this globalised world. Product cycles are short. There is a quick turnaround. Obsolescence is quick. Workers need to be retrenched but you have to get them new jobs and train them. We will progressively cover more sectors through our WSQ framework. Last year, 32,000 received WSQ and ESS Statements of Attainment. While the numbers are encouraging, we will do more. Let me now touch on specific initiatives for groups of workers who face specific challenges, which Members have mentioned. Mr Low mentioned older workers. Mr Yeo Guat Kwang and Mrs Josephine Teo also talked about the structurally unemployed, including those whom we call contract workers.”
“How do we ensure that Singaporeans, above all, benefit from this growth? MOM will work with our tripartite partners to ensure that Singaporeans can make full use of these opportunities, and this was a point that Mr Seng Han Thong raised. I agree completely with him. How do we do this? We will do it in three ways. First, we will spend more on training. I agree with Mr Low that this is the time to ramp up training, not scale down when the economy does well. We will spend more on training to equip our workers to make the most of the future. Secondly, we will strengthen initiatives to help specific groups of workers. Even as we improve, not all groups of workers are moving along in tandem. There are some groups that find difficulty. So we have a targeted approach. We will grow at the same time and focus on these aspects. Thirdly, we must ensure that even as we do all these to help our workers keep up, we must not lose the opportunities that present themselves. Otherwise, businesses will go elsewhere. If we do not help businesses meet their manpower needs, we will lose the opportunities. Let me elaborate on these three aspects. The Life-long Learning Endowment Fund will be topped up by $100 million this year to $2.2 billion. Together with the Skills Development Fund, WDA would have at its disposal more resources to help workers reskill or upskill, as Mr Low pointed out. In the medium term, the Government will triple annual expenditure of Life-long Learning to $500 million. With more resources, WDA will be able to help more people like Mr Mohamed Yunos s/o Fakir Mohamed. Yunos used to work as a cleaner, but he was excited about the retail sector. Yunos is 38 years old. He joined the new Ikea store in Tampines as junior sales assistant.”
“From this particular consultancy - Hudson - 58% of companies said that they had to increase salaries by more than 10%. Kelly Services, another HR consultancy, reports current salaries of accountants at $4,000-$6,500. So, if you are under paying your accountants, please beware. Somebody else will poach them. A distribution manager in logistics could draw $4,500-$6,000. Sales managers can get a salary of $5,000-$7,000. A regional business development director in pharmaceuticals could earn $13,000-$15,000 a month. Many other sectors also need more workers. 15,000 new jobs in the marine sector are expected in 2007, of which 3,000 are higher-skilled roles for engineers, technicians and foremen. Dr Lim Wee Kiak asked what proportion is for PMETs. Are these good jobs that are coming onstream? At least for the marine sector, they are higher-skilled roles for engineers, technicians and foremen, which are jobs well suited for Singaporeans. The process technology sector - this is the sector that supports our petrochemical and pharmaceutical sectors - will require 10,000 additional supervisory jobs over the next three years. Likewise, between now and 2010, the infocomm industry - a point asked by Ms Cham - expects 10,000 new jobs in IT, telecommunications, networks and digital media. In the tourism industry, the two Integrated Resorts will each create about 30,000 jobs economy-wide when fully operational. From software engineers to process engineers, retail supervisors to manufacturing supervisors, systems analysts to financial analysts, more job opportunities will be available. All in all, we can expect more than 450,000 jobs to be created over the next five years, if the economy grows by 4.5% to 6.5% each year as projected. Members have asked the most salient question.”
“We have been rewarded for having a harmonious industrial climate and a flexible labour market, because we are able to respond quickly to the fast-changing demands of a dynamic economy. We have put Singapore on the map to attract global talent, a point made by Mr Gautam in the debate on the Budget speech. We have created jobs for Singaporeans. Our workers are productive and adaptable, earning good wages that are justified by their skills and productivity. We have chosen this path rather than stick to the self-defeating and unsustainable protectionist policies. Sir, we must continue with these right policies that have brought us growth and jobs. Members have asked whether Singaporeans have benefited. Above all, it is Singaporeans who have benefited from these policies, as it should be, with more jobs with higher pay. The demand for manpower is now well above what we can supply locally, and I will give some figures. For example, last year, nine out of 10 of our fresh polytechnic graduates found jobs within six months after graduation. Some have jobs waiting for them even before they have graduated. Average monthly gross salaries of these fresh polytechnic graduates have risen by about 3.1%, compared to the preceding cohort. It is now $1,700, the average monthly gross salary of a fresh polytechnic graduate last year. Hudson, the HR consultancy, has reported that employment expectations are rising, particularly in healthcare, life sciences, banking and professional services, and Infocomm. Mrs Teo and Ms Cham Hui Fong have asked for some sectors. I will give examples of the growth sectors. To better attract talent, companies are having to increase remuneration packages of new hires at the managerial level.”
“Sir, let me thank Members for their comments and questions that will allow the Ministry to focus on certain issues. There have been a number of issues raised by various Members. I will address in this reply the manpower challenges and the job prospects. I will leave it to the Minister of State Gan Kim Yong to talk about older workers and the ADVANTAGE scheme which Mr Low Thia Khiang asked about. I will address the issue of CPF and lower-wage workers tomorrow. Sir, as Members have commented, the job creation over last year has been quite dramatic. It is gratifying. Let me just spew out the figures. As Members pointed out, 173,300 jobs were added, of which about 88,000 went to locals. We have a total workforce, as Mrs Josephine Teo pointed out, of nearly 2.5 million - the largest ever. A record 76% of working-age Singaporeans were in employment. The working-age is 25 to 64 because, basically, people are starting work later. Average overall unemployment is down to 2.7%, with almost 24,000 fewer unemployed compared to 2003. Average monthly real earnings up by 2.2% to about $3,500 last year compared to the year before. What do these numbers tell us? Simply, that Singapore and Singaporeans are among the winners in this age of globalisation. We have succeeded because we opened ourselves to world trade and trends. Instead of resisting change, we have reshaped our economic landscape quickly, and put ourselves in positions of advantage to better capture opportunities. In other words, our positive results were not serendipitous or by chance. It was active measures that put ourselves in a position to be able to capture opportunities when they came.”
“Sir, as I mentioned in my reply, we do give deferments for training. I am not sure what particular instances Mr Sin Boon Ann is referring to. But in terms of, say, In-Camp Training (ICT) call-ups, because of the advance notice, we try to minimise the disruption. But the principle is, the unit commander, whom we hold responsible for the operational readiness of his unit, is given that responsibility and we give him the authority to decide who gets deferred. In general, we defer those who have contingencies, for example, a new job or a new baby comes along. So our commanders are not insensitive and, where they can, they do grant deferments. But as everyone understands, in order for them to be training effectively and to reach certain standards, we do it sparingly. If you talk to the servicemen, they do know that deferments have been granted.”
“Sir, first let me thank Mr Siew for bringing them up. As he said, these are anecdotal incidents. We have various committees. We have the ACCORD and we interact with employer organisations and we have awards for employers. Perhaps we should invite Members of the House to attend these to give a sense of how we engage the employers' community. By and large, our feedback from them is that there is no, if you like, systemic discrimination against NSmen; in fact, the reverse is true. Many of them had fed back that they actually value, as I said, the Certificate of Performance. They want to know how Singaporeans have performed in NS. We have one story where the employer said he had so many applications, he wanted to shortlist them, so he said, "OK. Show me those who have done well in NS and I will just concentrate and start there." But if there are specific instances that Members know, then, of course, please forward them to us and we can look at them. In terms of his question about calling up NSmen and losing out business opportunities, I admit there might be many instances where Singaporeans have to sacrifice, whether it is opportunity loss because of specific instances. We will try to reduce them because we give advance notice for deferment. But I accept that out there, in terms of our NSmen, there could be opportunities missed. That is why we choose other ways to recognise, through RECORD, through our NS bonuses, and, this year, in the GST offset credits. It is a very small token never commensurate with the sacrifices that our NSmen have to make but, nonetheless, there are certain ways that we can show that we appreciate their efforts and sacrifice.”
“But our average shows that each year, we only add about 33,000 locals for the past. In other words, for the last two years, especially for last year, we have exceeded that to about two or three times what the average number of jobs created for locals. I think a better way of measuring this would be to move towards employment data. I will speak a little bit more about this during the Committee of Supply. That will give us a better sense of all available citizens within an age band how many are working. That number is quite determinate and that is where most countries are moving towards to give accurate employment data. SITTING ON SATURDAY 3RD MARCH 2007 (Business Motion) Resolved, That Parliament do sit on Saturday, 3rd March 2007. - [Mr Mah Bow Tan]. PROCEEDINGS ON THE ESTIMATES OF EXPENDITURE FOR FY2007/2008 (Motion) Resolved, That, notwithstanding the Standing Orders, the allotted days for proceedings on the Estimates of Expenditure for FY 2007/2008 be on 2nd, 3rd, 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, and 9th March 2007 and the Estimates be taken till 6.45 pm on each day. - [Mr Mah Bow Tan]. SUPPLY AND SUPPLEMENTARY SUPPLY (FY 2006) BILLS (Motion) Resolved, That, notwithstanding the Standing Orders, the Second and Third Readings of the Supply Bill for FY 2007/2008 and the Supplementary Supply (FY 2006) Bill for FY 2006/2007 may be proceeded with immediately after the conclusion of the proceedings on the Main and Development Estimates for FY 2007/2008. - [Mrs Lim Hwee Hua]. ANNUAL BUDGET STATEMENT Order read for Resumption of Debate on Question [15th February, 2007], "That Parliament approves the financial policy of the Government for the financial year 1st April, 2007 to 31st March, 2008." - [Second Minister for Finance]. Question again proposed. 12.14 pm”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, our employment data is based on the resident or local population which captures Singapore citizens and permanent residents as a single group. In other words, our system enters it as one component. We do not separate them as at this moment. If we wanted a sense amongst the local population - what proportion of Singapore citizens vis-a-vis PRs - as a snapshot, we do have the breakdown of proportions within the general population – we take the census or when we do our surveys - for example, in June 2005, out of a total population of 4.34 million, the Department of Statistics said that 72% were citizens, 10% were permanent residents and 18% were non-residents. So if it is 10% PRs out of a population of 4.34 million, we have 430,000 PRs, and we assume that some of them are children and housewives, and assume that a number are working and then try to minus the number of what you get from our labour data, you could come up with a guesstimate, but it is just a guess work. It would be difficult to extrapolate this to derive accurate employment data for the various groups, because we must also take into account the change in employment numbers. The employment numbers fluctuate and we are not sure which group is changing at that point of time - foreign workers and PRs moving in and out of Singapore as well as the fact that PRs change their status and become citizens across periods. What we can say is that for locals, 2006 was a record year for employment creation. Another way of looking at it and addressing the NMP's point is whether there were adequate jobs created for Singaporeans. Out of a total of 173,300 jobs, which was a record year, we know that more than half were for locals - 88,200.”
“The Tripartite Task Force in January 2004 recommended three specific measures for companies to adopt: (a) A maximum-minimum wage ratio for the same job at 1.5 or less; (b) A Monthly Variable Component ; and (c) Payment of bonuses if Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) are achieved. Our data show that at end 2005, 81% of the private sector workforce was under some form of flexible wages (ie, that their employer has implemented at least one of these three measures). 90% of the workforce in large enterprises is under some form of flexible wages, as compared to only 68% of the workforce in small and medium enterprises. In terms of the specific measures, the narrowing of the maximum-minimum wage ratio has been most extensively adopted. The least common measure is the introduction of a monthly variable component in the wage structure. This is found in 37% of large enterprises and 13% of SMEs. We will continue to work with the tripartite partners to facilitate the adoption of the recommended measures to make our wages more responsive to changing business conditions. APPENDICES”
“Sir, we will always be gracious judiciously. We are not out after, say, itinerant employees, hawker assistants, coffee shop assistants. These are not the groups that we are going after. We do target those who systemically deprive employees of their CPF. As we have said, we have noted that some of these are cleaning contractors and security agencies. For those who want to now contribute to CPF, let me welcome them and say that we will take their actions at face value and they need not fear that we will do anything harsh if they do make their contributions. CONCEPT PLAN TO ACCOMMODATE POPULATION GROWTH 4. Dr Lily Neo asked the Minister for National Development (a) what is the plan to accommodate population growth in Singapore and (b) what is the target population growth in the next 10 years.”
“On the issue of removing the mandatory employee’s contributions for those earning less than $1,000 per month, this indeed has been done as announced in the Budget Speech, and we are making it easier for them to contribute less but to get more in terms of Workfare.”
“Sir, the CPF Board monitors and detects each month those employers who are late in their payments. In addition, the Board also regularly audits employers’ CPF payments and wage records, and we do it in a targeted way, because we want to focus on those with high default rates - companies with high default rates such as cleaning contractors and security agencies. Defaulting employers have to pay a penalty interest on their late contributions, on top of the arrears. As a result of these measures, the average number of employers with outstanding CPF payments owed to their employees for at least two months has fallen from 677 a month in 2004 to 559 in 2005, and now to 549 in 2006. As a proportion of all active employers, this default rate roughly translates to 0.56% for 2006. So it is less than 0.6% for last year. Last year, we prosecuted 275 cases, and this involved 228 employers which led to convictions. The rest of the cases were either compounded, or resolved by the employers making payment before the court hearing. Employers convicted of non-payment of arrears will have to pay a court fine in addition to the arrears and interest. The Members have asked whether we prosecute the employees. We do not, because under the CPF Act, the obligation is for the employers to pay the correct CPF contributions to their employees. In other words, even if an employer chooses to collude with the employee and not to pay, the Act prescribes the responsibility on employers, and the employer will have to pay up his late contribution and also the contribution of the employee. The employee does get away scot free but, beware, employers who want to collude.”
“Sir, can I have your permission to take Question Nos. 2 and 3 together?”
“Mrs Josephine Teo asked the Minister for Manpower (a) how many employers or employees have been prosecuted in 2006 for not making CPF contributions; (b) whether there are employers or employees who have been convicted more than once; and (c) will his Ministry consider removing the mandatory employee contribution for those earning less than $1,000 per month so that they can take home more money.”
“Sir, I have already said that we have addressed some of that concern through reducing the Medisave contribution rate. Let me put it in perspective. Say, a formal employee who works for a company earns $600. He is now required to pay about 16% of his wages into his own CPF account. If he earns $600, he has to pay about 16%. If you are a self-employed earning the same wage, he used to be required to pay, depending on his age, say, 7-8%. We have increased it by 0.5%. So it is 7.5% or 8.5%. We have now reduced that rate to less than 3%. So there are significant reductions, and the scheme is designed to incentivise people to enter the CPF system. As a starting point, it is a correct one. How do we then help those who find that they are not earning enough to meet their needs and that they find it hard to save? Sir, we can encourage them in a number of ways, but we should not, in the process of trying to address this group, then undermine the entire larger system which addresses and helps 90-95% of our employees. So I think we will have to find other ways to help them. But if you are earning $600 and pay 3% with some savings, you can contribute. And the amount of CPF you get is a few times what you put in. So I think it is a fair system. EMPLOYERS/EMPLOYEES PROSECUTED FOR NOT MAKING CPF CONTRIBUTIONS 2. Ms Ellen Lee asked the Minister for Manpower (a) if he will provide an update on the number and percentage of employers who did not make CPF contributions for their employees over the last three years; and (b) what enforcement actions have been taken to reduce the numbers 3.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the Government recognises that low wage workers do have financial difficulties in meeting their needs. This is the reason why Workfare, as the fourth pillar and a long-term commitment of work-related social support, is being introduced. Because Workfare will be a structural long-term feature in our system, we must be careful to start it on the right principles. Otherwise, as other countries have experienced, it can slide into welfarism and become unsustainable as costs escalate. So we have been very careful to base it on right principles. Requiring some Medisave contribution from the self-employed or informally employed to receive Workfare benefits is designed to draw more self-employed and informal workers into the Medisave net, which is one of the fundamental pillars for provision of healthcare needs. It will underscore the principle that each individual must set aside for his own needs. It is consistent with promoting self-reliance and effort before Government assistance is sought or given. The long term goal must be to try to include every worker, including the self-employed and informal workers, into the Medisave system. This can only be achieved if each contributes to his own Medisave account, even if he is earning a little. However, to allow more of such workers to enter the Medisave CPF system and to benefit from Workfare, Government reduced the contribution rate for the self-employed, as suggested by NTUC.”
“Maternity leave was extended from eight to 12 weeks in 2004, after extensive consultation with employers and trade unions. The additional four weeks of maternity leave can be taken flexibly over a period of six months. As for the first eight weeks of maternity leave, the feedback from employers and workers was that the existing arrangement for it to be taken at a stretch is acceptable and has worked well. Hence, there was no need for it to be changed. Since the implementation of the additional four weeks of maternity leave, it has been found that more than 92% of mothers have opted to take their leave in a continuous stretch of 12 weeks. This indicates that the demand for more flexible maternity leave periods is not high. WRITTEN ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS UPDATE ON PROPOSED LEGISLATION (Spam Control Bill, Data Protection and Electronic Transactions Act) 1. Mr Siew Kum Hong asked the Minister for Information, Communications and the Arts if he will provide an update on the status of the proposed Spam Control Bill, the proposed data protection legislation, and the proposed revisions to the Electronic Transactions Act, and when these pieces of legislation will be introduced.”
“The Singapore Workforce Development Agency (WDA) introduced the ADVANTAGE! Scheme in October 2005. The Scheme was one of the key recommendations of the Tripartite Committee on Employability of Older Workers. It provides a comprehensive package of incentives to companies to undertake initiatives ranging from job redesign and automation, to wage restructuring, to facilitate the employment and re-employment of mature workers. Companies have responded positively to the ADVANTAGE! Scheme. As at December 2006, 303 companies have already come on board the Scheme to introduce age-friendly employment practices. A total of $8 million has been committed to funding various projects by these companies. The 303 companies have committed to hiring more than 2,200 mature workers and re-employing more than 3,400 workers beyond the retirement age of 62 years. These companies come from a wide range of industries including Transport, Retail, Education, Healthcare, Finance and Hotels. The ADVANTAGE! Scheme has proven to be an important vehicle to promote and facilitate the change of mindsets of employers to employ more older workers, and re-employ those beyond the retirement age. MOM/WDA, together with the tripartite partners, will continue to encourage companies to tap on the ADVANTAGE! Scheme. MATERNITY LEAVE (Flexibility) 44. Mr Seah Kian Peng asked the Minister for Manpower whether more flexibility in maternity leave provisions can be given to mothers, as the current regulations require such leave to be taken at a two-month stretch.”
“Ms Jessica Tan Soon Neo asked the Minister for Manpower whether the ADVANTAGE! Scheme has been effective in the re-employment of older workers and, if so, in which industries.”
“According to the most recently published Labour Force Survey (in June 2006), 5.8% or 85,400 of all resident employees in Singapore were on contracts of less than a year. This is an increase from 4.9% in 2004. The majority of such workers were in lower skilled jobs such as cleaning and labouring, sales and service, as well as clerical work. Nonetheless, 16%, or 13,700, were Professionals, Managers, Executives and Technicians, or PMETs. MOM works closely with the unions and employers to ensure that employment laws are complied with. Our laws confer the same level of rights for workers and impose the same level of obligations on employers irrespective of the length of the employment contract. Each year, MOM successfully handles about 3,700 claims of non-compliance of the Employment Act by employers. MOM also initiates targeted enforcement in industry sectors where employment standards are detected to be falling. For example, MOM has successfully worked with the private security industry and unions to ensure that employment laws such as over-time payment are complied with. There had also been several cases where workers hired by an outsourcing company were not paid their CPF contributions. MOM intervened by raising the matter to the client company, and the issue was successfully resolved. While MOM will continue to adopt a conciliation-based approach to resolve these matters, it will also prosecute errant employers for persistent non-compliance. In November last year, SAM Security Service Pte Ltd and its director were each convicted of 58 charges under the Employment Act for requiring their security guards to work more than 12 hours a day and fined $29,000. ADVANTAGE SCHEME (Effectiveness in re-employment of older workers) 42.”
“Mr Gautam Banerjee asked the Minister for Education in light of the increase in the number of international schools in Singapore, whether there are programmes in place to promote the exchange of ideas and best practices between local and international schools.”
“More employers have adopted more family-friendly policies in order to attract and retain valued workers. A 2006 survey by MOM revealed that 12% of private sector establishments provided paid family-care leave. This is a five percentage point increase from 2004. This translates to 23 percent of all private sector employees whose employers provide paid family-care leave, as compared to 15 percent in 2004. However, the most common form of paid family leave has been for employees' children, rather than parents. Specifically, the percentage of establishments with paid sick parents leave remains low, at 1.7%. As Singapore's population ages, more employers are likely to respond to the needs of their employees by considering how they can help them to look after their parents. In order to promote the adoption of good workplace practices, the Tripartite Committee on Work-Life Strategy revamped the Work-Life Excellence Award in 2006. One of the factors taken into consideration in assessing candidates for the award is their policy on paid family leave. Amongst the 70 award recipients in 2006, 55 of them have already implemented paid family leave. MOM will continue to promote the adoption of comprehensive and sustainable work-life policies through the Work-Life Excellence Award and other efforts. LOCAL AND INTERNATIONAL SCHOOLS (Local teachers on placement and exchange of ideas) 23. Mr Gautam Banerjee asked the Minister for Education whether the National Institute of Education, as part of its normal teachers' training programme, regularly places trainee teachers in international schools so that they get an opportunity to experience different teaching methods and practices.”
“The mean and median monthly amounts of CPF funds used for mortgage payments* were $662 and $500 respectively, as at end December 2006. Number of members Mean Median End December 2006 690,067 $662 $500 * Public Housing Scheme (PHS), Residential Properties Scheme (RPS) and Non-Residential Properties Scheme (NRPS). Column No : 1325 REVENUE FROM ELECTRONIC ROAD PRICING (Figures for FY2001 to FY2005) 8. Ms Sylvia Lim asked the Minister for Transport if he will provide an annual breakdown of revenue collected from Electronic Road Pricing for the last 5 years from FY2001/02 to FY2005/06.”
“Our work pass policies are designed to be flexible and responsive to changing industry needs and economic conditions. Hence, we do not set out to allocate foreign workers to particular sectors, but allow market forces to operate. Similarly, the change in foreign employment would also depend on Singapore’s economic growth, and is difficult to forecast accurately. We control inflows of work permit holders through dependency ratios, levy and skill requirements. The dependency ratio requires employers to hire Singaporeans before they can employ foreign workers. For S-pass and other employment passes, criteria such as education qualifications and salary apply to ensure that only professionals and executives who are adequately qualified can work here. Column No : 1325 CPF FUNDS FOR MORTGAGE PAYMENT (Mean and median monthly amounts) 7. Mr Siew Kum Hong asked the Minister for Manpower what are the mean and median monthly amounts of CPF funds used for mortgage payments.”
“Please refer to the attached annexes* which are derived from the CPF Annual Report showing statistics on the distribution of CPF members’ balances by age group and gender, the distribution of active CPF members by regrossed balances and age group, and the distribution of the number of active CPF members by monthly wage level and age group. The annual report can also be downloaded from the CPF Board website. * Cols. 1329-1334. Column No : 1323 ISSUANCE OF EMPLOYMENT PASSES TO FOREIGNERS (Estimated figures and types of industries) 6. Ms Sylvia Lim asked the Minister for Manpower (a) if he will provide a projection, for the next five years, of the number of foreigners to whom the Government will issue or renew employment passes, personal employment passes, entrepasses, S-passes and work permits; and (b) which sectors or industries will be given priority for each of the aforesaid categories.”