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 34 of 46.
“Sir, of active CPF members who turned 55 last year, 40% of them were able to set aside the Minimum Sum. This was $90,000, the Minimum Sum requirement last year. The $90,000 comprises half in cash and half in a property pledge. I would like Members to note that this 40% was after withdrawing 50% of their net balances at 55. Of this group that set aside the Minimum Sum, half did so fully in cash and did not use a property pledge. Among all active CPF members that turned 55 last year, the median Ordinary Account and Special Account cash balance before applying the 50% withdrawal rule was more than $66,400. The percentage of active CPF members who met the Minimum Sum last year is unchanged, compared to 2004. Whether members can meet the Minimum Sum at age 55 depends on many reasons. Those who work longer and contribute regularly to their CPF, who were prudent in property purchases and had less medical expenses would be best able to meet this Minimum Sum level. The Minimum Sum is being raised to cater for increasing life expectancy and will reach $120,000 in 2003 dollars by 2013. We must help Singaporeans work longer so that they can put aside more in their CPF. The Government has accepted the recommendations of the Tripartite Committee for the Employability of Older Workers chaired by Mr Gan Kim Yong. To enhance returns on CPF savings, we have recently announced measures to tighten the CPF Investment Scheme to reduce costs and improve the quality of products within this scheme. The CPF Board has also formed an International Advisory Panel to study ways to enhance the retirement adequacy of members in the long term.”
“Sir, in a sense, I did. I said that last year there were 61,000 jobs created for everyone. So the first question to ask is: are there enough jobs created for Singaporeans? When we create 61,000 jobs for Singaporeans, obviously, if your average number of entrants per year is only 31,000, you have actually created quite a lot of jobs. Then the issue becomes: can the person do the job? This is where we can help the older workers. We will consider the idea of a dedicated centre for older workers. I am not sure whether that works for or against us. So, let me study that. But let me say on a programmatic basis, we do have specific programmes catering to older workers. She mentioned, for example, whether we can give certain wage supplementation for certain aspects. Indeed, wage supplementation for certain programmes in electronics and other sectors is for older workers. And, indeed, the Workfare Bonus, there is an age criterion - Many of you tell me that I cannot use "age 40 and above" and I cannot call them "older workers" - so I do not know what I am supposed to say, but it is meant for this special group of people with special age characteristics but, indeed, that is what that programme is called.”
“But we should also draw from the experience of others, taking advice from local and foreign experts. To facilitate this, I am, therefore, pleased to announce that we have set up the International CPF Advisory Panel, chaired by Mr Koh Yong Guan, who is also the Chairman of the CPF Board. I will ask the Clerk to now distribute to Members a press release to be issued by CPFB today on the composition of the Panel. As you can see, the Panel will comprise both local and foreign experts in pension funds and investment management. We do not need to reinvent the wheel. We can learn from their mistakes as well as their pluses. Their advice will help us to better achieve our objective of enhancing returns for members. Sir, our combined efforts on these various fronts - low-wage workers, older workers, CPF adequacy, medical benefits - will improve conditions for Singaporeans. It will ensure that we work and progress together.”
“This will ensure that Medisave contribution lasts beyond retirement, where most medical costs are incurred. So, to reiterate, as long as the person is working and contributes to his Medisave, and has enough in his Medisave account to pay for his premiums for MediShield, even when he is not working the premiums are still paid, he is still covered. Mr Yeo Guat Kwang asked for helping CPF account holders gain better returns. I agree. Mr Inderjit Singh and Dr Teo Ho Pin raised similar issues in the Budget debate. As a first step, many Members will remember that, as on 1st February, we tightened the criteria for entry of new funds. Now they have to meet the benchmark of the top 25 percentile in their global peer group and their expense ratios must be lower than the average. But beyond that, we will help members understand the factors that impact the fund's performance, and make available tools and information through CPF's website. We will also encourage greater disclosure by fund managers and publish information on fees and costs to help members make comparisons. The second strategy is PM's suggestion in September last year of a default pension plan which is optimised for the needs of a typical member. Such a scheme would basically aggregate members' funds for long-term investments, to reap economies of scale and lower costs. We are presently studying this, but it will take time. Because it is not just about designing a scheme that is more cost-efficient. The greater challenge is to explain to CPF members that nothing is for free, that higher returns will be accompanied by higher risk. The improvements that we need to make to the CPF system will have significant implications for all of us and so I am going to take my time.”
“I think the revisions in MediShield, in fact, work for older workers, because they were set to protect larger hospital bills, and it is the older workers that are likely to have longer hospital stays to incur larger bills. So, companies, therefore, do not need to be biased against hiring older workers for fear of being saddled with high medical expenses. Now, the tripartite partners are studying how medical coverage can be increased, but that is different from portability. 5.00 pm One idea, as Mr Yeo Guat Kwang pointed out, is to convert what the company spends on medical benefits for its Workfare into individual contribution. Then the worker purchases coverage for himself. The civil service, for example, moves to an individualised system. This is known as the Medisave-cum-Subsidised Outpatient System (MSO), where in-patient subsidies were replaced with 1% additional CPF contribution in the civil servant's Medisave account. This may be a model that the tripartite partners can study. But MPs have also asked to increase coverage to reduce deductibles and co-payment elements. That is quite different from increasing the portability. I want to issue an universal caveat that nothing is for free. For the same premium paid, you can either choose to buy a policy that insures against a big medical bill or a different policy that pays for your smaller bills but less of your big bills. It is a necessary trade-off. But if you want a policy that comprehensively covers the first dollar from the smallest bill to the biggest bill, then your premium must go up. As most big bills are incurred when one is older, I think it is prudent to opt for a system that covers more of your bigger bills through higher deductibles which excludes smaller bills.”
“Members should understand that this is a de facto national scheme that providers will have to subscribe to and cannot cherry pick. In this way, premiums for essential coverage under MediShield are kept affordable. If you think about it, this, in fact, enhances the portability of medical benefits. I want us to be careful, when Members talk about portable medical benefits, where indeed, they may not be talking about portable medical benefits, but about comprehensive medical coverage. Let me explain. As long as someone has enough in his Medisave to pay for the premiums for MediShield, even if he is not working or has retired, in essence, he is covered for basic medicare. And the MediShield premiums are affordable. Let me give you an example. We keep saying that it costs a lot to hire workers and we work against ourselves because the messaging is conflicting. We actually reinforce that notion that if the older worker is hired and he falls sick, you have to pay a very high medical bill and if he does not have MediShield, maybe the employer has to pay. The truth is not there. Let me explain why. What is the annual premium for MediShield for someone age 40? It is $40. For age 50 it is $80, aged 60 it is $160, and aged 70, it is $275. This is the annual premium. This means that even a worker who earns a few hundred dollars a month would have enough Medisave to pay for his annual premium plus many more years' premium even if he is not working. So the key to portability of medical benefit is you must work long enough and accrue enough in your Medisave. So we should not send mixed messages.”
“WDA is piloting a 12-month programme to help individuals become self-employed and earn a living by starting and managing a business. This is a pilot programme where they are taught how to start and write business plans. One participant in the pilot that has been done so far is Mdm Toh Ah Tuan, who is 45 years old. She has two young children, relying on her husband's monthly pay of $800. Mdm Toh joined this pilot scheme and was put through a three-month job attachment programme at McDonald's, where she was rotated to do different types of work. She also attended the Retail Workforce Skills Qualification course and in February this year, with the help of the mentor, Mdm Toh rented a stall at a coffeeshop to sell fish soup. Her business is doing well and they tell me that she takes in about $180 a day, not bad. The mentor will continue to guide her for the next nine months. I give you this individual example to explain to us that it does require hand-holding and helping for these processes to move along. In response to Mr Yeo Guat Kwang's earlier question, and also Mr Chew Heng Ching who also talked about looking at re-employment legislation, we will be looking at the legislation that Japan puts in where older workers beyond age 62 are given a re-employment contract. To answer Ms Irene Ng, we do issue tripartite guidelines on re-employment, medical and other benefits that need to be adjusted. These were formulated with the inputs of employers and workers, so it is a set of guidelines that form the yardstick and benchmark. Mdm Cynthia Phua and Mr Yeo Guat Kwang asked about portable medical benefits. Last year, MOH reviewed and revamped MediShield. The changes are to protect Singaporeans against the financial burden of large hospital bills, at least at the Class B2/C level.”
“For a start, the Silver Connection Office has hired a 60-year-old Programme Consultant on a one-year contract to manage this set-up. Programme executives will be hired to staff the office and go through a preparatory Diploma in Counselling Psychology course, subsidised by ADVANTAGE's training grant. This office aims to re-employ about 80% of its retiring employees. Translink Express is another company that has come on board. Translink Express helps food service chains like Coffee Bean and Tea Leaf to deliver food products from the warehouse to the outlet. Originally, the products were transported in pallets and this required physical strength to lift them. Further, you have to do it in two trips because you have to do it for chilled and non-chilled, so delivery workers had to do it twice and this required manual strength. This favoured younger workers. The company recognised that they did not want to change that and with the help of ADVANTAGE! scheme, they found a solution. Instead of using pallets, it now uses containers and cages which can be used to pack both chilled and unchilled, and this saves the workers one extra trip. They are wheel-mounted for easier movement, and productivity has gone up and is suitable for older workers. These are simple examples that you can do, company by company, process by process, to be able to move this initiative forward. I know it is slow sometimes but we need to persevere. I encourage more companies to come on board and we need to get business leaders and there are many enlightened business leaders who will come on board. During the Budget debate, some MPs - Dr Teo Ho Pin, Mr Wee Siew Kim and Mdm Cynthia Phua - asked whether we can help older and less educated workers to set up their own business.”
“I presume near retirement, they would say that these are options that you can tick off, that you do not have to retire, you can either be redeployed, job-share at lower grades, phased sabbaticals, reduction in working hours, and secondment to other companies. There is a menu of choices, and we will learn from these examples. Employers who act now will find it in their best interest, but we have to work with industries. This is something that you cannot grandstand and say that this is good or this is what you want. You have to engage the industries to slowly change their practices. Workers also need to change their mindsets, in terms of being redeployed and being adaptable to flexible working schedule. In terms of specific measures, what have we rolled out? I am pleased to report that even though we launched the ADVANTAGE! scheme quite recently, 31 companies have come on board. Together, these 31 companies who hire more than 800 older workers retain 480 workers approaching or above age 62, and implement job redesign projects that will improve the work of 4,400 older workers. They span various sectors, including manufacturing, F&B, retail, public transportation, and healthcare. Let me give you one local example. SingHealth has tapped on ADVANTAGE! to set up what they call a Silver Connection Office. I promise you that you will get a slew of these new initiatives coming up. It is called the Silver Connection Office run by mature workers for mature workers, something like what Ms Irene Ng said, a dedicated centre for job search for older workers. The Silver Connection Office will recommend working options, new roles and older worker-friendly policies as well as run activities, workshops, and counselling services for SingHealth's 5,200 mature employees.”
“Minister Teo Chee Hean has answered on what the civil service position is. To just add on to his reply, civil service is aware and is in tune. In fact, they were very much involved in our discussions. There are certain organisations that require certain aspects. We do need a vibrant and young SAF to be optimal but where the civil service can move in certain areas. We will work with them to develop some of the programmes that can redeploy some of the older workers. At the end of it, we have to convince businesses that there is a business advantage for hiring older workers. Forward-thinking companies around the world have already started changing their employment and work practices to accommodate older workers. In essence, they are turning the problem on its head and using an ageing workforce to its business advantage because they know that that is the group that is growing the fastest. Let me give you one example, IBM in the United States. IBM was concerned about the shortage of IT workers, and it looked at post-retirement employment, alternative work schedules, benefits, mentoring, and ways to transfer knowledge. The company is now working to engage former IBM alumni. They have an IBM alumni where they worked for the company, they keep a database, if they move and the company needs them later, they will bring them back. This is an on-call-on-demand workforce which they are capitalising. Some of these retirees are engaged via intermediaries to work on projects. The scope may not be long but it may work both for the company and the employee. BT Group in the United Kingdom is another forward-thinking employer. It started a programme called NewStart and this challenges employees' expectations about retiring early. The programme provides flexible options.”
“Some have suggested an Equal Opportunities Commission. Let me say that Government feels as passionately as Members, but we need to translate your passion into real results, and that is our job. And we want to take a very pragmatic approach that works. I would want to caution ourselves that this would take time. We will need to work with industries and every industry that we succeed in will be a step forward. But there will be very few magic bullets that we can shoot. We do not agree with the quota system and for good reasons that the PM mentioned. If you move down that way, it will be no different from having moved down, and, in my last reply, I talked about how when you asked for quotas for older workers, it will basically rigidify your labour market and it is very inflexible and people can work around it. If there are quotas for older workers, why not we have quotas for women or other groups? In the end, you are left with a very small group that would not have a quota, so it is reverse discrimination. In other countries where quotas have been applied, it has not worked. We think that we ought to change practices pervasively and work very hard at it. But we have acted on some of the Members' suggestions, and one way to go is the Tripartite Alliance for Fair Employment and Practices, which is one suggestion of the Tripartite Committee to promote mindset change of employers and employees. They will go on a roadshow sometime this year. This is in response to Mr Chew Heng Ching and Mr Ong Ah Heng. We will publicise examples of good employers and excellent older workers. We will facilitate sharing of best practices and pilot projects that have worked. Many of you have asked for the civil service to take the lead.”
“Let me assure Members that the purpose of the income declaration exercise is to facilitate those without CPF contributions and who not have received an income tax return to receive their Workfare Bonus if they fill up that declaration form. It must be a true declaration because we can verify in some cases and the penalties are quite stern. But if it is a true declaration, the purpose of the income form is to facilitate the Workfare Bonus. If during the process, they decide that they want to complain against the employer, we will act. Finally, on Workfare Bonus, Mr Seng Han Thong has suggested using this exercise to promote the concept of Workfare. We agree, because we believe that for Workfare to work, we need to help that layer of Singaporeans who find it hard to cope with restructuring. Yes, there will be skill gaps, attitude gaps and aptitude gaps, but if we resort to an unconditional need-based, in other words, if you need, I give it to you, we would have done them a disservice because they will expect the next handout every time they need it. So we have to couple it with these efforts to make them self-reliant and I take that some difficulty there will incentivise them. Let me now talk about employability of older workers. Sir, this has been close to many Members' hearts in the past. Assoc. Prof. Koo Tsai Kee, Mr Loh Meng See, Dr Teo Ho Pin, Mdm Cynthia Phua, Dr Lily Neo, Dr Ahmad Magad and, recently, Mr Seng Han Thong talked about training that we ought to incentivise this training, and we agree. Many Members - Mr Leong Horn Kee and Mr Chew Heng Ching - have now asked that we ought to ask employers and industries not to view older workers negatively, and to highlight enlightened employers who hire older workers.”
“So we want to encourage them to try to enter the economy, now that the jobs are there, to find a regular job. I know that it will cause some pain on the ground, but workers will have to adjust. I think it is the right thing to do, and we will need, as we said, help from the community, as well as business and unions, to achieve that. Our counter staff at the various CCs, CDCs and CPF Board have been trained to direct the unemployed who cannot qualify to the Distributed CareerLink Network and the job centres to allow them to have more comprehensive assistance. Mr Chiam pointed out that those who work hard and then exceed the upper limits may not receive the Workfare Bonus. I agree with him that for that person who has worked very hard and does not receive it, he may feel that this is not equitable. But all of us recognise that we are targeting that assistance to the lower-income group and that there has to be a ceiling to that, and we have chosen $1,500. In response to his example of the $2,500, he has forgotten that that family can benefit from the housing grant, which is not a small sum by any measure - $20,000, $15,000, $10,000 and $5,000 - and this is on top of other housing grants that we have given out. I do not think that we should cast it as if Singaporeans will not get anything if they work very hard. That is not the message, but we are targeting our assistance to lower-wage workers. 4.45 pm During the Budget debate and COS, both Dr Lily Neo and Dr Warren Lee highlighted that some workers would be afraid to sign up for the Workfare Bonus in case they got themselves and the employers into trouble for not paying their CPF.”
“The ultimate goal, through the next election and every election thereafter, is to ensure that Singaporeans progress together, as one people. I quote from the report, chapter 1, paragraph 10: "The common vision of Singaporeans working and progressing together must carry on through to the next generation. We must help those who can work to find meaningful jobs and earn adequate wages to support themselves and their families. They should be able to own their homes, educate their children and put aside enough for their medical and retirement needs." All Singaporeans must share in the fruits of our progress. These are not just short-term aspirations but long-term goals that this Government has committed itself to. Let me now address some of the specific concerns and questions about the Workfare Bonus raised by Members during the Budget debate and in this COS. In response to Mr Seng Han Thong's question, we assess regular work based on the number of months worked, rather than on the number of days worked. We know that there are cases that need special consideration. We are not completely inflexible. As the hon. Member rightly pointed out, we have already made one adjustment by relaxing the six continuous months' rule to six months over one year for those who have really genuine difficulties. But I would like to remind Members that the thrust of the Workfare Bonus scheme is to incentivise long-term goals, to make sure that the worker keeps a steady job, for at least six months or more, to be self-reliant. That is the overall goal of the scheme. This is why the Workfare Bonus is deliberately divided into two portions, so that those who did not qualify for it this year will do so next year.”
“While we are gratified with the resonance and affirmation, it would be prudent to focus on the fundamentals of our recommendations on how we should assist low wage workers. First, continued economic growth and job creation is the best assurance of a better future for low wage workers; Second, the efforts to help low wage workers must reinforce our strong work ethic; Third, increasing opportunities for upward mobility should be the main means to help low wage workers; and Finally, we will focus on raising the skills and know-how of the next generation, to create hope for their future. These are the four fundamental principles which we listed in our report. The Government has approved the recommendations and set aside $1 billion to implement them. While the Workfare Bonus has attracted much attention during the Budget debate, I want to refocus attention on where the main emphasis of our recommendations lies. Yes, the Workfare Bonus was meant to incentivise work and help meet short-term needs. This was a practical response to the reality that the incomes of low wage workers were held down as a result of globalisation. We understood that. And it was positioned as a one-off scheme over two years for reasons spelt out by the Prime Minister. But I want Members to note also that the larger share of $630 million of the $1-plus billion is to meet long-term goals through recurrent spending. Not one-off. $230 million will be spent on enabling work, expanding job opportunities and training for higher skills. About $250 million will be spent on helping the children of such families move ahead in life. Another $150 million will be spent to help them own homes and have assets as a reward for their work. These recommendations are not an election ploy, as some have suggested.”
“Mr Chairman, Sir, let me first thank the many hon. Members who have spoken in support of the recommendations from the Ministerial Committee on Low Wage Workers. This is in specific reference to Workfare and other initiatives. Indeed, many MPs - Dr Tan Cheng Bock, Mr Wee Siew Kim, Mr Ong Ah Heng, Dr Amy Khor and Mr Ang Mong Seng - had previously in this House raised the need to look after the lower-income group and to help them cope with the effects of economic restructuring and globalisation. It was in response to these calls and public feedback that the Prime Minister set up the Multi-Ministry Committee in July 2005. In formulating our strategies, the ministerial committee consulted widely and listened attentively. Members of the committee met with employers, unionists, community and social leaders, low-wage workers themselves - we had some sessions with them - and the general public. This gave the committee an in-depth appreciation of the poverty traps, the vicious cycles of the low-wage workers and their families that kept them down. Most Members of this House would have read the report that we had circulated, and will be gratified that the majority of stakeholders that we consulted, like many Members in this House, and indeed the low-wage workers themselves, argued against "unconditional needs-based assistance." Many understood that such an approach was not sustainable and, in fact, did not help workers over the long term. Workers wanted help to contribute to the economy and gain self-reliance. This is what they told us. The recommendations were crafted, taking in their feedback and views. After the release of the report, the committee received positive feedback from diverse groups of Singaporeans.”
“Sir, I did not quite say that I did not think they were useful. I was saying that it was very hard to measure under-employment - not unemployment. It is under-employment which is Mr Low Thia Khiang's point. In other words, if we took a survey of 1,000 workers in a particular company and say, "How many of you think you can do a bigger job than what you are currently doing?", you may get answers. In fact, the service worker may think that he or she should be manager. But how do I act on it? A survey of under-employment is a measure of aspiration - what I want to become or what bigger job I want to do. Very few countries track that, honestly. The only proxy that we have is asking somebody, "You are working part-time, do you want to work full-time?" That is quite objective. That is based on time. But if you ask him, "Are you working to the fullest of your potential?", I would venture a guess that many Members in this House would say that a good proportion would say no and, therefore, you are under-employed too. So it is a difficult metric to measure and it is not useful from a planning point of view. What we want to do is to make available training courses and provision for workers to step up, so that if they want to, we provide the training to the best of our ability. And then, they must also go and market themselves in the marketplace to move to a better job. So, it is not that we do not find it useful. It is that the data is quite subjective. But we do look at other issues, in terms of part-time, full-time, employment rate, wages and the percentage share of PMETs' jobs. Workfare”
“Sir, it is a valid and good point. Our overall strategy is to ensure that our growth benefits Singaporeans first. That is the cardinal rule and over-arching strategy. But, of course, there are realities. For example, whether it is the bio-medical manufacturing sector or aerospace, where we, first, wanted to establish an aerospace MRO - maintenance, repair and overhaul - we needed to ramp up. The airline industries were willing to send their planes here, but we did not have the technicians. And it takes at least two-three years to go through a polytechnic course and another four years for experience. To train our local pipeline, we only train them for what RSAF needs, for example, for some of our planes, and this would mean that we have to hold back. We recognise these practical realities. But at the same time that we allow more foreign workers initially, we slowly scale back, and this is indeed what happens. This will happen for every sector. As some Members may have read, Macau is facing a shortage of workers in IR industry. And I am sure that we will face the same shortage. So we will calibrate it. But, overall, I think the figures will give some assurance - as I said, our unemployment has dropped - that the value of the jobs has gone up and Singaporeans have gone up the value chain. So it is a metric that we watch very closely. We will ensure that Singaporeans have good quality jobs and that their wages can go up.”
“And we will develop WSQ and quality schools in key service industries. This will allow service workers to pursue their training. WDA is currently developing national customer service indicators. We want to know whether we have improved nation-wide and sectors. So we need to build some indicators. Sir, before I close this section, let me address Mdm Ho's point about talent shortage, in terms of R&D. She is quite right. We need to understand whether we have enough, and we will conduct regular dialogues with HR and industries - to get from them a sense whether we have a steady pipeline to support our growth initiatives. There are some issues - portable medical benefits and contract workers which Mr Yeo has brought up. With his indulgence, let me defer to answer later together with other Members who have also raised cuts on those issues too. In summary, Mr Chairman, people are our most precious asset. We will increase efforts and resources to invest in our workers - young or old and of all educational backgrounds because, indeed, that will be investing in our future.”
“Similarly, Members would remember the Strategic Manpower Conversion Programme (SMCP) for the healthcare sector, and it has helped registered nurses and diagnostic radiographers. Since its inception, 282 PMETs are currently undergoing training. We have also placed jobs for PMETs. About 15,000 PMETs were attended to and about 4,300 found new jobs. Mdm Ho Geok Choo asked that we monitor this talent shortage, and this was the point that Mdm Halimah Yacob said, "Can you give some forecast?" Indeed, we do. We have the National Manpower Council which is a multi-agency and we meet together - economic agencies, manpower - and we give some forward projections. I agree with the Member that we need to give out more information. This is an area that we need to, not only for PMETs, but also for lower-skilled workers and across-the-board so that people can make career choices and decide what they want to go for training. So we will do that and we will work with industry, and that will form somewhat, as Mdm Ho suggested, a network hub for an advantage scheme. I need to be realistic and be honest to say that it does cost more to help one particular PMET. For example, a conversion course for healthcare nursing could, theoretically, help 50 lower-skilled workers. But we recognise the investment and we will pour some investment but there is a need to allocate resources. We will go the extra mile for service, as many have rightly pointed out. Mr Yeo Guat Kwang says we should up our service capabilities and we will spend $48 million over the next three years to build service capabilities and cultivate a service mindset, because that is where the majority of jobs will come from. I think it has helped. There is a nation-wide service awareness that now occurs.”
“Some Members have also expressed concern for PMETs - professionals, managers, executives and technicians. Specifically, Mdm Halimah Yacob and Mdm Ho Geok Choo urged for more help for this group. Again, I have good news. The first point is that we can render help to these workers if we create enough jobs. The economy will take care of them and, indeed, it has. In the last two years, it benefited PMETs, more so than other groups. In 2005, PMETs formed the biggest share of private sector job vacancies at 37%. In other words, of all the jobs in the private sector, 37% were due to PMETs. This is in contrast to 1995 when only 19% - it is almost double - the proportion of PMET jobs in our economy in the private sector. On average, in 2005, 65% of retrenched PMETs managed to find a job within six months, which is higher than the overall re-employment rate of 61%. This is the highest re-employment rate experienced by retrenched PMETs in four years. So it has improved. Similarly, the unemployment rate for degree and diploma holders above 40 years has dropped to 1.8%. This is the unemployment rate. For degree holders, it is 1.8%; for diploma holders, it is 2.1%. A year ago, it was double that - 3.6% and 4%. So the unemployment rate has halved. We do have specific programmes for PMETs, including in the SME sector. The SME Manpower Scheme (SMS) is one example. It was introduced in December last year, just recently. This was to recognise that SMS restructured and de-layered. There may be fewer jobs. But our SMEs sometimes have many job openings. So this was to help PMETs make a transition to SMEs, and we started this programme in areas such as finance, business development and human resource.”
“The Singapore General Hospital is reviewing the job responsibilities and career paths of staff in nursing and nursing support - enhance their job scope so that they can earn more and professionalise the jobs. Two weeks ago, the Prime Minister launched the JRP and gave out some awards. Each story was an inspiration, but let me just mention one that has made a difference to a JRP, Ms Thilagarani. Ms Thilagarani is currently undergoing training in the ITE Skills Certificate in Health Care, and when she graduates, she will work as a Patient Services Clerk at SGH. Once the job redesign has been implemented, Ms Thilagarani will take on the non-nursing tasks and some of the nursing duties currently performed by enrolled nurses. She can expect to receive a higher pay, ranging from $1,100 to $1,300. In fact, many beneficiaries of the JRP have enjoyed higher earnings - between $1,000 and $1,800. So we take Mr Chay's point that the JRP is not just giving money. In fact, under the job redesign incentive, each company can get up to $120,000. They can use it for job redesign, and this includes consultancy, procurement of equipment and training. This reflects the multi-faceted aspect of job redesign. Mr Yeo Guat Kwang pointed out that older and lower-skilled workers can encounter difficulties. We will put in $30 million over the next three years to help these workers - about 45,000 of them can benefit -for basic aspects of IT literacy, workplace literacy and numeracy. WDA will provide another $4 million for SMEs, because we recognise that workers in SMEs also need training. As at end of last year, more than 4,000 workers have been trained under ESS. Again, these figures can get bland, they can get dull, but they represent individual lives which have been touched by these programmes.”
“To become MSCs, the taxi drivers will undergo training to acquire patient handling skills, I suppose, how to move people on wheelchairs, and to familiarise themselves with the hospitals. With the enhanced job scope, the taxi drivers can expect to take home higher pay. By providing a transfer service for medical tourists between hospitals and airports, the project will also support Singapore's development into a regional hub for international medical services. It is a smart idea. He brings the patient to the hospital, and the family would also want to do some shopping and sightseeing and he also recommends to them. The economy wins. So this is what NTUC means by a win-win-win formulation. I agree with what Mr Ong Ah Heng and Mr Chay Wai Chuen have said, that it really is a complete supply chain that you need to work it out, in terms of job redesign. We need to look at a range of solutions. And I was very thankful to Mr Chay that he brought up the Tanjong Pagar Town Council, because that is one classic example of how, as he pointed out, we have to only change the landscape in terms of contract, we have to change on how we mechanise and what we need to do to finally make a change in the industry. I will tell Members that that is a very good example of how partnership between Government and the unions have allowed us to navigate through difficult circumstances in restructuring. 4.00 pm We are going to move on to more industries. For example, in healthcare, the National University Hospital is implementing a flexible work scheduling system. This will allow nurses to enjoy a better work-life balance.”
“That is very tangible, and in many sectors, much needed for workers. It is very hard to get. Some of their stories are simply uplifting. To give hope to the masses of workers to say, "I can compete at my own level. I can have the confidence. I can move up. I, indeed, can see my wages go up. I can see my life being better", is something that very few unions in the world, and many have promised, but I tell you very few have delivered and NTUC should be given full credit for what they have done to the JRP. The Government will show its support by giving $40 million over the next three years to support this programme. The $40 million will be used to recreate existing jobs and they work with companies. The unions have an enormous and extensive network that knows the ground, so they are going to work with companies, and as Mr Chay and Mr Ong Ah Heng have pointed out, it is not just giving money. You have to raise productivity, enhance job worth, improve the image, train workers to do the job well. So you see Mr Lim Swee Say wearing different costumes, depending on which month you flip back in the newspapers - one month is a baker's hat, then it is a security guard, and I am not sure what he is going to wear next. The point is it is a total package. We have other programmes. WDA and NTUC are supporting the Singapore Taxi Academy and this is to enhance the job scope of local taxi drivers. Sir, the idea that NTUC and the JRP had was: how do you increase the value add? So, not only restricted to a taxi driver, but can he be a medical services chaperon? Because he is the first person to meet the patient, can he be a medical services chaperon (MSC) to ferry patients to and from hospitals?”
“Let me just say, to be fair to the CDCs, that they have done a very good job. They have placed more than 16,000 job seekers in 2005, 55% of whom had secondary and below education. When we met with the Mayors, as we started this, and some Mayors will remember, I was very careful to point out that the CDCs can actually make their lives easier by choosing only the more and better qualified ones, the ones with good education, and that makes their placement rate very high, but they may not need their help. But as you and I know, some of the cases that come to us during the meet-the-people sessions, indeed, it is quite challenging for anyone to look at face value and say, "Well, I am going to employ you." They need a lot of hand-holding, training and confidence-building. And for the CDCs to have placed 16,000, including some of these job seekers, is indeed an achievement. 53% were aged 40 and above. So the CDCs cannot be accused of selecting the best ones to place. 58% of those directly placed in jobs by the CDCs remained in their jobs for at least three months. So let us be fair to them. We know the type of people that we send to CDCs to ask them to place and they are not easy, they are not the ones with sterling resumes or, some, to be frank, with good job attitudes. So, I do not think that removing the CDCs from the Distributed Careerlink Network will serve us better. In fact, we will lose them as valuable partners. I constantly assure them that we will support them, and we will continue to support them. The second key focus is the Job Recreation Programme (JRP) and this is spearheaded by NTUC and has been very successful. The most important element in my mind, the most significant success that NTUC has done in the JRP, is to give hope.”
“I want to explain to Members that, indeed, we are moving towards a work-assisted programme rather than pure unconditional handouts, and new terms beyond "Workfare", the CDCs have come up with "WorkSupport", "WorkAssist" - there is always a "Work" in front - which is what we are trying to move our system towards. That, "Yes, you can come and we can help you, but you also must put in some effort and we can tie up social assistance and employment assistance at the CDCs". That is actually what the Mayors, MCYS and MOM want to do. In fact, that indeed is the correct direction. So I think there are possibilities because we have, as you said, decentralised it. These possibilities include things like micro-enterprises and even an informal sector. The CDCs offer out, for example, local licences to sell ice-creams or other items, and they can integrate these programmes because it is very geographically-based. But let me assure Members that we do not adopt a hands-off approach. Far from it. WDA supports, and will continue to support the CDCs in several ways, in addition to more funding. It will work with the CDCs to constantly review on how they can improve their placement, and draw on best practices. We also organise and train on profiling and career counselling of job seekers. You actually need trained professionals who know how to do it. It provides IT support and information on jobs and we also deploy managers to head certain job centres. Sometimes, WDA seconds managers to head these job centres. We will regularly monitor and review the performance of these job centres with the CDCs. So although job placements are done at the CDCs, there is quite a strong coordination and support. But I agree with Members that we will review, learn and improve.”
“It placed about 27,000 job seekers through the various job centres in the Distributed CareerLink Network. Mr Leong Horn Kee has suggested that MOM should centralise certain job functions. Yes, we will see how we can improve, but let me just explain that we do centralise some functions. We have already created a nation-wide Integrated Job Bank where every CDC or, even WDA and partners, see the same thing. It is data-linked. It is the same job bank. There are common user items that we also share. But, as he has pointed out, the CDCs do offer wider geographical outreach and access to job seekers. Many of us at the MPS have recognised this. It is more convenient. I am very happy that the CDC, as a job centre, is in Toa Payoh, because as long as I tell my residents where it is, they just hop over to the interchange. It is very convenient. So that geographical access is important. Also, there are other micro-trends that are also important. For example, the CDCs have quite a good understanding of what are the local trends and unique challenges. If you speak to the Mayors in different sectors, in fact, Dr Teo Ho Pin knows that there are certain industries that have a particular flavour and need. Other Mayors would have also understood there are different dynamics, and they have been able to, for example, organise job fairs which suit their districts, because people also do not want to travel very far when they want to work, if they can. Mr Leong Horn Kee said the CDCs may have a particular mould and they may get a stigma.”
“You could have, say, a CEO who earns half a million dollar and still wants to earn a million, or wants to do a bigger job, and by that definition, he would also be under-employed. So, it is a difficult measurement. The way to look at it is really unemployment rate, the types of jobs created and the wages. What type of jobs has the economy created over the last 10 years? And this is to address the impression that the jobs we created are low-quality, low-class, which is far from the truth. Let me give you some figures. You take two contrasting marks, June 1994 and June 2004, a 10-year difference. Look at the occupations and you separate them. If you look at managers, proprietors and senior officials, in 1994, they formed about 11% of all occupations. It has risen now to 14%, a 4% jump. Professionals are up by 7%. Associate professionals and technicians are up by another 4%. In fact, the ones that have shrunk are really the lower quality jobs in terms of plant and machine operators, production craftsmen, service and sales workers. And wages have also gone up in terms of real wages and nominal wages. So, I want to assure Members that the Singapore economy, as we have done our restructuring, has delivered in terms of providing good quality jobs to Singaporeans. Now, there is a skills mismatch between what Singaporeans have and what the jobs want. But that is a very different argument from saying or giving the impression that our economy has not provided good jobs. We need to help those with the skills that they have and the skills that the job or economy needs. The first area is employment assistance. Our training programmes are geared towards this objective. WDA trained and placed about 3,000 job seekers last year.”
“In other words, if you have an idea, whether it is micro-enterprise or a small idea, you come to us in terms of financing, outlet, licensing, being able to cook in the house, and I will offer you a one-stop shop front. This will take time to develop. I must say that a number of Mayors have already launched these initiatives in the CDCs and have some success. But he is quite right that this is an area we feel that they can supplement their income in an informal economy. As more jobs have been created, let me also give some good news to Members that even those who were vulnerable to structural unemployment have found jobs. The number and share, which is the proxy we use, of the long-term unemployed, that is of those who were unemployed more than six months, have fallen sharply. Preliminary estimates show that 13,200 or 21% of the unemployed residents in December 2005 have been looking for work for at least 25 weeks. This is a significant improvement from the 21,300 workers or 28% of the unemployed, a year ago. The long-term unemployed, that is, those unemployed for more than six months, has also reduced. The figure now is 0.7% of the resident labour force, and this is down from 1.2% in December 2004 and 1.5% in December 2001. In other words, compared to December 2001, the long-term unemployed has fallen by about 1.5% to 0.7%, which is half. But, despite these improving trends, I agree with Mr Yeo that we must continue to assist those aged 40 and above, and as Mdm Halimah mentioned, especially those without secondary qualifications. Mr Low Thia Khiang asked about under-employed, in other words, someone wants to rise higher than what he is in his current job. As Members can well imagine, it is a difficult proxy to measure aspirations.”
“This institute aims to upgrade the skills of at least 5,000 existing retail workers, and to train a further 1,000 new workers in 2006. We will add more quality institutions. So, just as we have done for the pre-employment training, we are striving to build top-notch quality institutions for our workers, because we believe that investing in our workers is investing in our future. WDA will also collaborate with top international institutions such as the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, William F Harrah College of Hotel Administration, to develop WSQ for executive training in the Meetings, Incentives, Conventions, and Exhibitions (MICE) industry, in anticipation of the growth in that sector. So, I assure Members that even though the economy is doing well and there are jobs, we will not let up, because as you have rightly pointed out, we need to invest in our workers. But I share Members' concerns for the vulnerable segments of our workforce, the low wage and older workers, who face more difficulty coping with economic restructuring. Mr Low Thia Khiang and Mr Chiam See Tong gave good ideas. Sir, I have not been to Morocco. I would certainly like to go there and see what he saw. Let me say that we recognised and, actually discussed, the idea of having an informal economy in the Inter-Ministerial Committee on Low Wage workers. We recognise that in neat and cookie-cutter-style Singapore, it is sometimes very difficult and daunting for, say, a housewife who wants to sell kueh, nonya, Malay, Indian, or whatever, to enter into the market place, because there is sometimes a huge bureaucracy that they have to confront. So, one suggestion which MCYS is willing to champion is for it to be the one-stop centre.”
“As PM announced in his Budget speech, the Government will top up the Lifelong Learning Fund with another $100 million. This will generate another $4 million per year in interest. Even though the economy has rebounded, let me assure Members that we will not let up in our efforts in skills upgrading. On the contrary, we will invest more resources to raise training standards and enhance outcomes to benefit all Singaporean workers. The Government has set aside $100 million to develop the Workforce Skills Qualification (WSQ) system which is a national framework for vocational skills and this is recognised and accepted by industries because we worked with industries to develop this. WDA has implemented the WSQ in the retail, finance and training sectors and we will also include new industries like infocomm, food and beverage and tourism by the end of this month. Other industries, such as education and creative industries, are in the pipeline and to date, we have more than 6,000 workers trained under WSQ. I take Mr Yeo's point that we should include Mandarin. I am not sure whether we do or not, but if we do not, I agree with him that we might have to include some of the material in Mandarin. 3.45 pm Having industry and training providers participate in the WSQ framework is similar to Dr John Chen's suggestion brought up during the Budget debate. In addition, we are building WSQ training institutions to make sure that the delivery of training is high. These institutes will research how adults learn, undertake industry outreach, and ensure that training is tied to jobs. We have the first of such institutions, which is the Singapore Institute of Retail Studies (SIRS), jointly set up by WDA and Nanyang Polytechnic in October 2005.”
“With the shrinking rate of growth in the labour force, Singapore's economic growth could be stunted if businesses cannot find sufficient workers here because you are adding too few and, secondly, sufficient workers with relevant skills. We need to encourage older workers and, as Mr Yeo has pointed out, women to stay in the labour force longer and remain productive. The second challenge is economic restructuring. Due to increased globalisation, we recognise our workers are facing wage pressures from millions of workers from China, India, Eastern Europe and Latin America. That is why we must continually upgrade their skills and maintain their cost-competitiveness. Sir, I want to thank many Members who recognised and understood these challenges and spoke in support of our policies. When we set up the WDA in September 2003, Members gave very good suggestions when I moved the Bill on setting up WDA. Let me quote from what some of you said. Mr Seng Han Thong said, "priority should be given to the industries which are vulnerable to the New Economy". Mrs Yu-Foo Yee Shoon emphasised generic employability skills training. Other Members also rallied our workers. Mr Ahmad Magad pointed out, "Today's world takes no pity on the individual who gets lazy about training". Mr Loh Meng See reminded us that "the Government can only do that much if the workers do not exercise personal responsibility." We have taken your suggestions to heart and indeed many of the ideas that you have put out have been translated into programmes. Through the employers' contributions into the Skills Development Fund and the Government's Lifelong Learning Fund, I am happy to report that 166,000 received training in 2005. Of this, 40% were aged 40 and above.”
“I will give a fuller picture when I address PMETs that some Members have asked. But these have been good jobs and, in fact, the percentage rise has been higher for professionals, managers, executives, and technician jobs and wages for higher percentiles, the better jobs, have also increased. So our economy has provided jobs for Singaporeans with good wages and good quality jobs. Mr Loh Meng See raised some concerns during the Budget debate that labour productivity rose only 1.9% but he has to understand this was against the background of very strong employment creation. There were many more jobs added in that flow and things may round up, and that is the reason why our productivity only increased by 1.9%. Our economy is forecasted to grow by 4%-6% this year. Barring any external shocks, such as the avian flu outbreak or rising oil prices, there will be enough jobs for new entrants and unemployment is likely to remain around the current levels. Most of the jobs will come from the services sector. Manufacturing and construction sectors are also expected to create jobs but with higher value add and skill levels for Singaporeans. But amidst these strong economic and employment performance, I agree with some Members - Mr Yeo Guat Kwang mentioned structural challenges that continue to persist. He is quite right. We do face a shrinking workforce growth as a result of our aging population and the decline in fertility. He said that MOM must meet long-term manpower challenges and indeed he has a point. Beyond 2010, labour growth will slow significantly because our baby-boomers would have passed the age of 50 years by then. It grows about two-odd percent every year. It will shrink about 1.2%, about half the rate of growth.”
“First of all, more jobs went to Singaporeans than foreigners. But 61,000 is the highest annual employment creation on record for locals, not only the last few years, but even exceeding pre-Asian crisis level. We looked back at the statistics and we never had a year of such strong local job creation. Two-thirds of the jobs, or close to 72,000 jobs were in the services sector. In the services sector, of all the jobs created in the services sector, 70% were taken up by locals. The gains in local employment were mainly in business, wholesale, retail, trade, financial services. Over the last five years, the average number of new labour entrants that enter into our labour market was only around 31,000. So for the fact that we created 61,000 jobs in that year shows that our economy is buoyant. It translates to jobs and Singaporeans benefit. It indeed has been jobs, jobs, jobs for Singaporeans. In fact, we created jobs for locals in every year since 1999. If you look at the figures that I have shown you in the table, foreign workforce bore the brunt of the economic downturns. The total number of jobs shrank but it was the foreign workers that bore the brunt of this. For locals, there were still net job creation. This tells us that we have struck the right balance in our manpower framework because companies are able to adjust their manpower needs quickly, in good and hard times, and this reduces the adverse impact on our own workers. MOM will release more details later this month in its annual report on the state of the labour market. Have these been good jobs? Members may have been given the impression that just because we have concentrated an Inter-Ministerial Committee on Low Wage Workers, that all jobs were poor quality jobs. That is very far from the truth.”
“We are in a much better position having gone through the difficult periods. Many jobs have been created for Singaporeans. Mdm Halimah asked for a particular breakdown and I would give her the figures later. But let me revisit the key strategies that were put into place which ensured this job creation. First, in response to calls from many of you, we pushed for skills upgrading and supported strongly NTUC's efforts in job recreation. That made a big difference. We set up the Singapore Workforce Development Agency (WDA) which many of you called for in September 2003. I would like to remind Members that WDA is a relatively infant organisation, but much needed. This was to help unemployed Singaporeans gain employment and to upgrade their skills. Second, we maintained flexible wage and labour market policies. We worked with employers and unions to reduce CPF and implement more flexible and performance-based wage systems. That we did this in a downturn was a significant effort and has enabled us to better cope with further downturns and hence protect jobs. Third, we maintained the fine balance of allowing companies to have access to foreign workers while having jobs for Singaporeans. In 2004, we introduced the S-Pass to give companies access to more mid-skilled manpower. Last year, to help companies meet additional demands, we allowed them to hire work permit holders beyond the prevailing Dependency Ratio then, but at a higher levy of $500. These three major efforts have produced results. Mdm Halimah Yacob asked how many of these jobs created last year went to Singaporeans. From preliminary estimates, last year, we created 110,800 jobs, and the majority of 61,000 jobs went to locals. That figure of 61,000 has to be explained.”
“But in contrast, our economy and employment rebounded vigorously in 2004 and 2005 and we created together something like 181,000-182,000 jobs. These two periods served as very useful periods of contrasting fortunes and indeed, they provide for us valuable lessons that should guide our efforts and strategies, moving forward in helping all Singaporeans find jobs, earn decent wages and remain employable. Lest we forget too quickly, it would be useful for us to use this occasion where the economy is up and jobs have returned, to recap broad policies that have worked, many of which were prompted by Members of Parliament in this House. But we should also learn from the ideas that were not taken up or those, if implemented, would have created problems for us today. In the midst of these difficult times, let me just say that I was very encouraged that Members supported the Government when we did not resort to quick and ineffective fixes. We did not succumb to calls for protectionist policies to shut out foreign workers and impose minimum wages. We avoided unemployment insurance. These policies would have led to economic stagnation and more job losses. Members in this House would have read recently of press articles about how these very same protectionist policies in some European countries have increased unemployment rates there. They do not insulate workers from global competition, but worsen their plight. In contrast, we face challenges head-on, press on with restructuring to remain competitive and relevant in a global marketplace. And because we persevered with sound policies, and unions were able to persuade workers to bear some hardship in the process, with some sacrifices, we now have a more resilient and competitive workforce to deal with challenges that lie ahead.”
“Mr Chairman, let me thank Members for their queries. Before I answer them specifically, let me just, as a preamble, address some general remarks. Compared to previous years, this Committee of Supply is held amidst much better economic and employment conditions. If Members of this House will remember, and certainly those who stepped in with me to this august Chamber in 2002 and that was not long ago, where the spectre of a jobless recovery loomed in the aftermath of several difficult years, when Singapore's unemployment peaked at 4.8% in September 2003. The corresponding resident unemployment rate then was 6.3%. I remember the prevailing mood then was one of despair and despondence. But in contrast to that bleak period, the economy grew by 6.4% last year, and the outlook for this year is favourable. And Members will also remember that there were concerns during that period that even recovery would be a jobless one. It has not happened. Growth has translated into jobs for Singaporeans. Overall unemployment fell to just 2.5% by the end of last year. The situation has turned for the better and indeed, there are jobs, jobs, jobs for Singaporeans. I have asked for a table to be distributed. If you look at the table, years 2002 and 2203, we have GDP growths of 4% and 2.9% respectively, and they were indeed very difficult years. Following a negative GDP growth in 2001, if Members cast their minds back, our GDP shrank by -2.3%. This was compounded by SARS and other factors. And because of that, if you look at the chart, 2002 and 2003 combined, those two years, we actually lost jobs, in other words, the economy, in terms of jobs, shrank about 36,000 in those two years.”
“Sir, MINDEF recognises that, because certain batches will finish earlier and not synchronised with university timetables, there will be a greater lag before the next starting term. My sense is that the higher education landscape is quite competitive and the institutions will also change their timetables to accommodate. As Members know, we have foreign universities which are setting up here, and some of these universities are used to the southern hemisphere timetable and they may very well decide to start their term in January or February. Singaporeans can do their calculations. Our local universities will be hard-pressed not to compete. So I am quite confident that our universities will adjust to this and also make allowance for students to start earlier. But that is a different proposition from saying that we should disrupt them early, shrink our NSF from two years to one-and-a-half years, ie, 18 months, because they want to go and study. As we have said, we understand this is a sacrifice, something that we ask our young men to do and, therefore, which was one of the reasons why we said it must be only for a critical need. But it must be applied across-the-board. Otherwise, as I have said, you can easily find a university to start term any time before you finish your NSF liability. The education landscape now offers you that choice. And we cannot grant two months' deferment for this first batch and five months' deferment for a second batch. Then, it will just effectively mean that NSF has been shortened even further. 6.00 pm”
“Sir, let me first address the point about disruptions. The disruptions for PSC scholars are confined to 30-odd scholarships, and it is a signal that these are key talents, they are limited, and this is a number that can be controlled. We are quite fixed on principles, but neither are we completely inflexible. And, as we have done, we have allowed certain groups a certain latitude, to pursue also other national policies. On defaulters, even as we have rationalised our policies on not allowing deferments for universities, I do not want to give an impression that it is a major shift which affects thousands of people. As I have said, from past records, this policy affected only about 75 to 100 people every year. As I have pointed out in my reply, for most students who did their pre-university education overseas, the majority of them actually came back in the past to complete NS here before going to universities overseas. So, I do not want to give the wrong impression when indeed it is not so, ie, that many students who went overseas for pre-university actually did pre-university education overseas before coming back to do NS. In fact, under the old policy, we have only granted deferments for about less than 100 students every year, which now means that this 100, the same numerical number, will have to do their NS first.”
“Sir, as I have explained, the rules are very clear. If we allow two months' deferment for NSmen, it would indeed be untenable, because, for example, if half the pre-university cohort who had finished their A-levels were called up in December, two years from then, all of them, that same cohort, would apply for two months' deferment to start university in September, ie, a deferment for the whole cohort. So, indeed, it is untenable. It means shortening NS and it does not make sense. First of all, I have said that we need to base our deferment policy on a clear reason why we call people up for NS, and this is a strategic reason. This is for a critical need to serve NS. We had allowed disruptions or deferments for selected cases where the university landscape more or less had fewer choices and we could control the numbers. But now that the educational landscape is indeed open and students can find choices to start university any time of the year in essence, we have limited it to basic educational qualifications near 18 years, and the starting point is 18 years. In other words, by right, for operational needs, we should call up every one when he turns 18. But we have allowed some flexibility and will continue to allow flexibility, based on the aspects that I have explained earlier.”
“Ong Soh Khim asked the Senior Minister since the official launch of the Credit Counselling Singapore (CCS) in 2004 (a) how many indebted consumers have approached CCS for assistance; (b) what is the distribution of these indebted consumers in terms of age groups, monthly salary, amount of unsecured debt, number of debtors and race; and (c) how many of these indebted consumers have signed up for debt management programmes to structure their repayments to the banks.”
“First, we have to understand that foreign workers, as a composite of flexible labour market policy, have created jobs for Singaporeans. As our economy is largely export-driven, wages in Singapore are also affected by wages of workers in other countries, such as China and India. For example, if we did not have the foreign construction workers, we will not complete our projects on time. The supervisors, safety officers, architects, quantity surveyors and engineers, who are mostly Singaporeans, will not be able to take on new projects. So it is not meaningful to look at the wage equation only as a function of whether they are foreign workers or not. In the first place, as I said, our economy has created jobs and given jobs to Singaporeans. If Singaporean workers continuously upgrade themselves and acquire the skills needed and increase productivity, they will enjoy higher wages. In fact, in 2005, they did enjoy higher wages. It is not true that wages did not rise. Average nominal monthly earnings rose by about 3.5% - real earnings by about 3%, because our CPI index for inflation was 0.5%. With the economy projected to grow by 4%-6% this year, wages of workers are also likely to rise this year. In summary, our flexible labour market policies have allowed us to be competitive, grow the economy, create jobs for Singaporeans and increase the proportion of Singaporeans as professionals, managers, executives and technicians with good-paying jobs. Column No : 483 CREDIT COUNSELLING SINGAPORE (Indebted consumers seeking assistance) 5. Assoc. Prof.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, flexible labour market policies, including the access to foreign workers, have enabled our economy to remain competitive, because many companies use foreign workers to meet skill shortages or to lower costs to compete for business. This has allowed our economy to capitalise on growth opportunities which, in turn, has created jobs for Singaporeans. Let me give Members the numbers. Last year, the economy created 110,800 jobs, and 61,000 of these jobs, or about 55%, went to locals. 61,000 is the highest annual employment created for locals on record, even surpassing pre-Asian financial crisis levels. I want to remind Members that every year, Singapore only produces about 31,000 new labour entrants. So we have created twice the number of jobs for locals. Foreigners currently comprise 29% of the workforce, or about 670,000 persons. This percentage is lower than in some previous years. Mr Steve Chia asked for a comparison. First, it is not meaningful to compare the percentage of foreigners in the workforce, because it depends on factors such as population growth, economic and industry needs. For instance, if you want a comparison, the United Arab Emirates has 90% of foreigners in their workforce. So it is really what your economy needs. We have about 90,000 Employment Pass holders, including approximately 25,000 S Pass holders. There are about 580,000 Work Permit holders. Of these, 160,000 are foreign domestic workers, and 135,000 in the construction sector. Mr Chia has asked for wage data for foreign workers. We do not have the specific data, but we have wage data across sectors and occupations which we publish regularly. Mr Chia has asked whether foreign workers lower the wages of low-wage workers.”
“The number of employed residents above the age of 62 for 2001 to 2004 is shown in Table 1. Table 1: Number and Share of Employed Residents Aged Above 62, 2001 - 2004 (As at June) Number Share (%) 2004 44,800 2.7 2003 47,800 3.0 2002 44,400 2.8 2001 40,100 2.5 Source: Labour Force Survey Most of the employed residents above the age of 62 were in lower-skilled occupations, namely, cleaners, labourers and related workers (31%), service and sales workers (21%), and plant and machine operators and assemblers (15%). Another 10% were engaged as working proprietors. A minority were employed as managers and administrators (5.1%), associate professionals and technicians (4.3%) and professionals (3.6%). The rest were distributed among the occupations of production craftsmen (5.6%) and clerical workers (5.1%). DISABLED PERSONS (Figures) 8. Dr Chong Weng Chiew asked the Minister for Community Development, Youth and Sports if he will provide (i) the total number of disabled persons in Singapore; and (ii) a breakdown of this number by age groups, types of disability, gender, causes of disability, education levels, employment status and annual salaries.”
“This is a specific programme tailored for this group and will help those who are currently not working because they have to take care of their dependants. What it involves is that it will offer enhanced social assistance as well as help for such persons to find a job. This programme also provides assistance for skills upgrading so that they can better secure a job for their careers. POLYTECHNICS AND INSTITUTE OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION (Fee increases) 8. Dr Amy Khor Lean Suan asked the Minister for Education (a) what is the basis for the recent polytechnic and Institute of Technical Education (ITE) fee increases; and (b) how will polytechnics and ITEs ensure that all students who have genuine difficulties paying their tuition fees are assisted.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, Prof. Ong asked how Workfare will help needy Singaporeans, especially those who work in non-CPF contributing occupations, and those who are unable to work. Let me first reiterate to the House that Workfare - as the Ministerial Committee on Low-Wage Workers debated and finally formulated, conceptualised and put forth its recommendations - is an assistance package based on work and not need. This needed to be articulated explicitly. Because Workfare aims to ensure that all who can work will find meaningful jobs, earn adequate wages and support themselves and their children. And through Workfare, we hope that they will gain self-reliance, through their own efforts own their homes, educate their children, and put aside enough for their medical and retirement needs. For those who are truly needy, as Prof. Ong has asked, but physically or mentally incapable of work, ComCare will continue to be the safety net. For the Workfare Bonus Scheme, eligible low-wage workers who are employees will qualify for the bonus based on their CPF contributions. Eligible self-employed persons will qualify if they have declared their income to IRAS. For those low-wage workers without CPF contributions or have not made declarations to IRAS, we will provide avenues to facilitate these workers to get their bonus, and more details will be announced after the Budget. Prof. Ong also asked for those who could not work because they have to take care of their dependants. We sympathise with them. We paid special attention to this group during our deliberations. MCYS, in conjunction with other agencies, has started a WorkSupport programme.”
“Yes, we have to enforce but the key is that we have to get the industry working with us, which is why the Workplace Safety and Health Council is pivotal to this. If we move too fast, the industry will say, "Well, I can't take it. I am going to cut corners." We will have to move them along. And as we looked in the UK and Sweden, it can be done. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, this Bill allows us a framework to put in many other pieces which will move us to a safer Singapore. But as I said in my Second Reading speech, if we are going to be effective, and as Dr Amy Khor said, we have to reach to the last man in the workplace. Because, at any given time on any given day, when there is rain and he has to work at night, safety may be the last thing on his mind. And our challenge is to make sure that it is not the last thing on his mind. That will take the combined efforts of legislation, promotion, making sure training is adequate, making sure that it is a safety ordered system, and safety inspectors making sure that management is on board. Since a number of measures have taken place since 2004, I must tell Members that there has been an increase in engagement, and this is a good sign. I am not quite satisfied about the pace but I am quite encouraged that there is now a framework that we can ramp up our efforts. And with the commitment that should be sustained and with MOM pushing this and with Members' assistance, I am quite confident that we will achieve our targets before the set deadline. Question put, and agreed to. Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House. The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. - [Dr Ng Eng Hen]. Bill considered in Committee. [Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Chew Heng Ching) in the Chair]”
“Many Members asked about reporting of accidents. They are quite right. We want to have a framework where there is information. Many of you asked and I am quite astonished with your memory that you remember what I said last year that we will put out information out there. Let me give you an update. Yes, we are on course to do that. But in order to do that, I need to effect a reporting system. I do not want to capture information that employers or workplaces have the ability to decide what information goes in. I want to capture the novel information as it occurs. So I need to strengthen the system, which is the mandatory reporting system. This is something that we will work at. I want to know accidents that occur at workplaces. It may be, for example, accidents that require a worker to take three days MC in some other countries. In other words, any accident that occurs at the workplace that requires, say, X number of MCs must be reported or there is a liability. It will take time, but we will do it soon. We will put in a system that requires safety reporting so that when we gather this information, it is robust. In other words, the report card is sensible. It cannot be just because they are finding loopholes and are persuading their workers not to report it. With that information, we will put it out to the public so that developers who use contractors or other principals downstream will know what the safety records are. I completely agree with Dr Amy Khor that it cannot just be penalties. And the reason why the Second Reading speech has been stanced this way is because this is a reading of the Bill. But if Members remember, last year, we also had taken proactive measures.”
“How do you put in processes so that there is some protection, not only of the individual workers standing up against the system and being terrified of having to come up with a system? I think, in the extreme, we know that MOM and the unions would protect them. But in between, we will give them much more comfort levels. So let us explore that to see how we can expand, even apart from clause 18 which protects whistle-blowers, their comfort space. The best position, as Mdm Halimah says, is where management welcomes somebody and does not even see him as a whistle-blower, but as providing active feedback. If we move towards that culture, we have succeeded to a great extent. But in the process, let us see how we can liberalise or increase that space in which workers can also contribute without fear or retribution. Dr Teo Ho Pin talked about reducing further risk from design. He is quite right. Some jurisdictions compel or have legislation to even affect architects and designers. I think that is the position that we want to move to finally, where you can reduce risk from design. It is a goal but this framework allows us to move towards that goal and in time, we will get there, which brings me to the point of setting targets. I do not want us to give the impression that just because I set a 10-year target for 2015, I will be happy if I reach there. That is not the stance. It is a target that I deem realistic knowing all these factors. But let me assure the House that we will work very hard and if we accomplish those targets beforehand, I will celebrate it with you and you can tell me, "Let us push to the next target", as I know you will. But it is a working target. Rest assured that even though it is 2015, we will work very hard to achieve that together with Members.”
“We have enhanced penalties and the penalties are meant to reduce risk-taking. And risk-taking also means working your employees to such an extent that they are so tired to disregard safety, in that sense. There were some other issues that were talked about. I just want to address them briefly. Mdm Halimah asked whether exemption of certain groups meant that they were not bound. And she quite rightly pointed out that certain groups were exempted - the SAF, the Police and the SCDF. All of us understand that given their mission, they require that operational flexibility. But let me clarify that exemption from the current Workplace Safety and Health Bill does not exempt you from all Acts, for example, the Penal Code still applies. If there is a criminal negligence, in terms of other laws that govern them, they are still governed by other laws. This is not the only law that compels reasonable behaviour. But having said that, as it pertains to this Workplace Safety and Health Bill, we are working with these various agencies. While we understand the reasons for exempting them, we are working very closely with them. These agencies, I must say, have come on-board, to want to make sure that their structures and their processes comply in spirit as well as the requirements of this. Some Members have asked whether they have safety and health management committees. That is an issue that we want to address and I think many of them have. Mdm Halimah also asked whether these safety and health management committees work out processes by which, whether you are exempted or included in the law, they can bring up these issues. That is something worth considering.”