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 41 of 46.
“Sir, these are the very issues that are discussed at the various seminars and workgroups. While the Taskforce will attempt to create common platforms for the various groups to understand what we are talking about and to have common aspects, ultimately whether a company grows depends on its management and its ability to enhance its inherent resource. We understand, and we recognise, that various companies will have individual challenges, and it is not up to this Taskforce to be able to help companies grow. We can create the structures and the environment for them to speed up change. Having said that, I must say there have been congruence and agreement among the principals. In fact, the union leaders, NTUC in particular, have been driving and pushing for these wage reforms because they understand fully well where flexibility is a means towards reducing retrenchments when the times are hard. So the impediment is not in the unions. The impediment is equally sometimes and even more so in terms of employers, and we are trying to bring them on board. And I think many of them have come around to understand that flexibility will help their competitiveness and also improve their companies' performance. We will have this National Tripartite Conference. But we recognise that the implementation phase will be longer than this. Following that, my Ministry, together with the Workforce Development Agency and the unions, will go to the ground and help the individual companies reform their wage structures. >ASSISTANCE TO THE UNEMPLOYED 11.”
“I am glad to note that the Minister has envisaged that and mentioned this as the second objective of the Board to conduct examinations overseas and awarding the successful candidates the Singapore certificate. I propose that we consider dropping "Cambridge" from the name of the examinations altogether at an early opportunity. I suggest we consider a tie up with our own university, perhaps the NUS Kent Ridge university, and call the Singapore national certificate the Singapore Kentridge Examinations.”
“We can find their programmes advertised regularly in the newspapers. In their desire to provide university education for their children, many parents might spend most of their savings to fund their children to attend such programmes. However, Sir, the job market does not value such degrees in a consistent manner. If the proposed Board could provide some certification or a form of certification of such a programme, maybe the parents would have a better way to decide whether to send their children to such schools offered by such private enterprises. Clause 11(2) of the Bill seems to allow the Minister to instruct the Board to provide this particular option. Sir, once the Board is established and begins to take over control of the Singapore national examinations, how would we ensure that such certificates, as listed in the Schedule, would be recognised overseas? Today, the Singapore version of the "O" level and "A" level examinations allows our students to skip certain first year courses in the US universities and to go straight to the senior level courses. After this, would the Board make the effort to inform such universities overseas about the new Singapore standards so that our students could continue to enjoy such privileges, ie, to gain admission to the best universities in the world and continue to enjoy the recognition they do today? Sir, finally, looking down the road, when the Singapore brand of examinations becomes successful, it is possible, as the Minister has pointed out, that other school administrations in the neighbouring territories or other countries worldwide might want to offer the Singapore curriculum.”
“The new broad-based curriculum under the JC review, introduced recently, will serve to develop our students more holistically and more adaptive in the knowledge age. Besides, in this age of conflicts of ideologies where extremists increasingly resort to the use of terrorism on a global scale, it is of paramount importance that our efforts in national education must be sustained. We must teach our children values, attitudes, instincts, skills and knowledge to ensure social cohesion, to accept diversity in cultures and religions, and to resolve differences democratically and peacefully. Sir, it is time to establish a Singapore brand of our education. It is timely that this Bill is before the House. This Bill seeks to set up our own national examinations at the primary and secondary levels that will support the goals and objectives of the Singapore education system. I support the Bill. Sir, I have a few questions for the Minister. It seems to me that this Bill is crafted with the premise that the Board focuses only on the Government funded public education system. Would it embrace private education system, such as the commercial schools as well? There are several successful commercial schools in Singapore offering post-secondary education courses, including one listed on the Stock Exchange. Would the Minister consider allowing the Board to assess the standards of such schools and, where such schools meet the standards, award a certificate of excellence so that the Singapore brand would begin to gain reputation worldwide? Furthermore, Sir, we have many commercial enterprises offering tertiary programmes, based on foreign institutions, leading to a degree offered by overseas universities but students attend classes locally.”
“Sir, on the other hand, some of our children have found our system rather competitive and their parents have lamented why we could not be more like the Western countries. They asked why we could not make learning fun and motivating to the young children. Sir, our education system cannot just cater to the desire of making learning fun and interesting and stress-free. We must take into consideration the needs of our young people being able to find jobs and to apply themselves in the competitive world. In the UK and Europe, a school of thought in education, known as the Parity of Esteem, has crept into the school system. Basically, what Parity of Esteem means is that one must take into consideration the maintenance of the esteem of the student so that he or she could not be labelled as a failure. Sir, this concept is seductive and is leading to less vigorous academic standards in those countries that embrace it in one way or another. As a result, the UK "O" level and "A" level examinations are no longer what they used to be. Our versions of the "A" and "O" level examinations are different and distinct from them. This, the Minister has already elaborated. In the US, even SAT is being reviewed to accommodate more students from disadvantaged families. Singapore cannot go that way. Not if we want to remain economically competitive. Not if we aspire to be the Education Hub of the region. Sir, furthermore, we have debated vigorously in this House how our education system must change to prepare our children for the knowledge-based economy. Our school curriculum has been changed to put greater emphasis on thinking and communication skills. We seek to promote creativity and independent thinking among our students.”
“The main source of funding for the Board will be in the form of subvention from MOE and fees or commissions charged for assessment services provided. Clauses 32 to 38 provide for the transfer of property, assets, liabilities and employees to the Board. Property, assets and liabilities as may be determined by the Minister for Finance will be transferred from MOE to the Board. Examinations Division staff in MOE will be transferred on terms no less favourable than what they have received before the transfer. Clauses 39 to 46 are general provisions. Clause 41 provides for the preservation of secrecy. Conclusion Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, we have always recognised that our national examinations represent a key anchor in our education system. Establishing the Examinations Board will build up our capacity to design and manage a rigorous and reputable examination system. It will be a flag bearer of our high educational standards and strengthen the international standing of Singapore's education system. Sir, I beg to move. Question proposed. Dr Wang Kai Yuen (Bukit Timah): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, since our independence 38 years ago, our nation has consistently focused on education. As a result of this singular focus on developing our human resources, we have acquired a certain reputation for excellence. The quality of our education system is recognised, not just by students from the neighbouring developing countries, but also by academics from the developed countries as well. Our secondary education system is of the highest quality. Our students are admitted to the best universities and are viewed with the highest regard by professors in these universities.”
“The new Board will have the operational flexibility to meet demands for testing and assessment services beyond our national schools, in Singapore and abroad. It will contribute to Singapore's development as an Education Hub. Key Provisions of the Bill Sir, I now move on to the key aspects of the Bill. The Bill sets out the broad regulatory principles governing the Board. It empowers the Board to operate an examination system to meet national needs, and also to provide assessment services abroad. The Bill also puts in place safeguards to ensure that the integrity and standards of our national examinations are maintained. Clause 5 of the Bill provides for the membership of the Board. To ensure accountability of the Examinations Board, the Minister for Education will appoint the Chairman and all directors of the Board. This is essential because the national examinations are a key pillar supporting our meritocratic educational system. The integrity of and public confidence in our national examinations are vital. The Ministry will thus retain responsibility for oversight and control of the Board. Through the appointment of Board members, we also ensure that the examination services provided by the Board respond to the evolving needs of the national education system. Clause 11 sets out the functions and duties of the Board. The Board will develop and conduct national examinations which support and promote the goals and objectives of Singapore's education system, and will be able to organise and conduct other assessments in Singapore and abroad. Clauses 16 to18 pertain to appointments of the Chief Executive, and other staff of the Board. Clauses 19 to 31 are the financial provisions.”
“The PSLE is a Singapore examination, in name and in substance. Both the 'O' and 'A' levels have evolved to cater to our needs, and are no longer tied to equivalent examinations offered in the UK. For the 'A' levels, MOE has now taken responsibility for development of syllabuses and examination formats, setting of standards and awarding of grades - in other words, all key functions except the setting of questions and marking of scripts, which we outsource to the University of Cambridge Local Examinations Syndicate (UCLES). We will be doing the same for the GCE 'O' level examinations from year 2006. The new statutory board structure will serve two strategic objectives. First, it will facilitate our efforts to take greater control over the examination system. Establishing the Examinations Board will enhance our operational capacity and flexibility in running our national examinations system. It will help in developing local examination expertise, and facilitate research and development in assessment. New developments in assessment will be needed to match ongoing changes in curriculum and teaching methods as Singapore continuously improves its education system. The second objective for establishing the Board is to position it in the long term as a centre for testing and assessment services in the region and beyond. The success of our schools and achievements of our students in areas, such as Mathematics and Science, have attracted overseas interest in our education system. This is reflected in the growing number of visitors to MOE, increased collaboration with foreign agencies, and requests for assistance from around the world. This strong international standing of our education system presents us with a unique opportunity.”
“It will develop and conduct national examinations, which serve the objectives of our education system and uphold standards in our schools. Over time, it will also look into meeting demands for other assessment services, both in Singapore and abroad. The Board will establish Singapore as a centre of excellence in testing and assessment. Strategic objectives of the Board Sir, let me explain the rationale for the formation of the statutory board. We have a robust education system. The quality of education in Singapore is widely recognised and our students rate exceptionally well in most international comparisons. The strength of our education system is underpinned by a quality teaching service, a strong and coherent national curriculum and a rigorous examination system. The capacity to design and run a rigorous examination system, closely aligned to our curricular objectives and anchored in high standards, is therefore key to maintaining a sound and effective education system in Singapore. The assessment of students is an integral part of the learning process. How and what we assess reflects our educational objectives. The assessment and examination system therefore cannot be static, and never has been. As our educational objectives evolve to meet the needs of the future, as we develop new emphases in our curriculum and take on new methods of teaching and learning in our schools, we have to evolve our assessment methods and review and update the content of our examinations. Control over the examination system is therefore necessary to ensure that it remains in tandem with changes in the Singapore education system and helps prepare our students well for the future. Today, Singapore exercises some degree of control over the examination system.”
“Sir, let me thank the Member for his support of this Bill. I acknowledge that NTUC has been in the forefront of pushing for portable medical benefits. This has resulted today in two legislative amendments, both in terms of the tax as well as facilitation under the CPF Act. I agree that disruptive employment will occur more often and that workers will be caught up in between jobs, and this is the first of many more that we can do to try and protect them. We will, together with our tripartite partners, continue to facilitate, promote and monitor the effectiveness and application of the PMBS and the Transferable Medical Insurance Scheme. The Member has made the point that there needs to be a rationalisation of these portable medical schemes with the 3M framework. We will continue to study this together with MOH and, together with our tripartite partners, to increase the coverage and protection of Singaporeans. 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; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. SINGAPORE EXAMINATIONS AND ASSESSMENT BOARD BILL Order for Second Reading read. 5.45 pm The Acting Minister for Education (Mr Tharman Shanmugaratnam): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." Introduction Sir, the Bill before this House seeks to establish a statutory board to be known as the Singapore Examinations and Assessment Board. The Board will take over the functions of the Examinations Division in the Ministry of Education.”
“· According to MND, prices of direct purchase flats offered in 2002 are as follows: 3-room HDB flat 4-room HDB flat 5-room HDB flat Price Range $39,000 to $125,000 $85,000 to $297,000 $161,000 to $450,000 · Members can withdraw the first $5,000, even if they have not met the Minimum Sum requirements. Column No : 3257 NORMAL (TECHNICAL) STUDENTS 5. Ms Braema Mathiaparanam asked the Acting Minister for Education (a) how will the more capable among Normal (Technical) students be helped to make it into the Normal (Academic) stream; and (b) in the last 10 years how many Normal (Technical) students left school with (i) Institute of Technical Education (ITE), (ii) Secondary 4 (Normal) and (iii) Secondary 5 (Normal) qualifications.”
“Members can withdraw the first $5,000, even if they have not met the Minimum Sum requirements. Table 2 ADEQUACY OF CPF AT 30% CPF CONTRIBUTION RATE FOR NEW ENTRANTS TO THE WORKFORCE (for every 10th Percentile) Percentile 10th 20th 30th 40th 50th 60th 70th 80th 90th Starting Pay $572 $1,020 $1,261 $1,450 $1,600 $1,754 $1,950 $2,200 $2,612 Ending Pay $427 $862 $1,242 $1,637 $2,370 $2,958 $3,575 $4,154 $5,178 Total Career Savings $55,800 $176,600 $233,700 $279,700 $354,000 $386,300 $424,800 $408,900 $434,900 OA $33,000 $92,200 $123,000 $145,300 $181,000 $197,200 $216,500 $212,500 $226,100 MA $6,700 $38,200 $48,900 $61,300 $81,000 $89,700 $99,500 $90,100 $96,400 SA $16,100 $46,200 $61,800 $73,100 $92,000 $99,400 $108,800 $106,300 $112,400 Type of Housing Purchasable By Individual - 3-room HDB flat 3-room HDB flat 4-room HDB flat 4-room HDB flat 4-room HDB flat 4-room HDB flat 4-room HDB flat 4-room HDB flat Type of Housing Purchasable With Working Spouse2 - 3-room HDB flat 4-room HDB flat 4-room HDB flat 5-room HDB flat 5-room HDB flat 5-room HDB flat 5-room HDB flat 5-room HDB flat Minimum Sum of $120,000 Withdrawable at 55 From SA $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $13,100 $32,000 $39,400 $48,800 $46,300 $52,400 Property pledge $0 $60,000 $60,000 $60,000 $60,000 $60,000 $60,000 $60,000 $60,000 Medisave $6,700 $38,200 $48,900 $61,300 $81,000 $89,700 $99,500 $90,100 $96,400 Amount set aside in Minimum Sum $44,100 $41,200 $56,800 $60,000 $60,000 $60,000 $60,000 $60,000 $60,000 Notes: · All values are in 2003 dollars. · The OA balance at age 55 includes CPF interest earned and assumes no withdrawals for housing.”
“The 25th percentile CPF member in Table 1 is nearly able to meet the Minimum Sum requirements. If he is conservative about the use of his CPF for housing and medical expenses, or has contributions from a working spouse towards interest payment on the housing loan, then it is likely that he can meet the Minimum Sum requirements. At a macro level, up to 76% of future CPF members should be able to meet their Minimum Sum requirements. For more information on the adequacy projection of CPF members by 10th percentile intervals, please refer to Table 2. Table 1 ADEQUACY OF CPF AT 30% CPF CONTRIBUTION RATE FOR NEW ENTRANTS TO THE WORKFORCE (All values are in 2003 dollars) 10th Percentile Worker 12.5th Percentile Worker 25th Percentile Worker 50th Percentile Worker Starting Pay $572 $722 $1,160 $1,600 Ending Pay $427 $572 $1,050 $2,370 Total Career Savings $55,800 $114,000 $205,000 $354,000 OA1 $33,000 $61,000 $109,000 $181,000 MA $6,700 $22,000 $41,000 $81,000 SA $16,100 $31,000 $55,000 $92,000 Type of Housing Purchasable By Individual2 - 3-room HDB flat 3-room HDB flat 4-room HDB flat Type of Housing Purchasable With Working Spouse2 - 3-room HDB flat 4-room HDB flat 5-room HDB flat Minimum Sum of $120,000 Withdrawable at 55 from SA3 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $32,000 Property pledge $0 $60,000 $60,000 $60,000 Medisave $6,700 $22,000 $41,000 $81,000 Amount set aside in Minimum Sum $44,100 $26,000 $50,000 $60,000 Notes: 1. The OA balance at age 55 includes CPF interest earned and assumes no withdrawals for housing. 2. According to MND, prices of direct purchase flats offered in 2002 are as follows: 3-room HDB flat 4-room HDB flat 5-room HDB flat Price Range $39,000 to $125,000 $85,000 to $297,000 $161,000 to $450,000 3.”
“The Acting Minister for Manpower had said in Parliament previously that even if the CPF contribution rate is lowered to 30%, the majority of future CPF members could still meet basic retirement, healthcare and housing needs. Our projections are based on prevailing interest rates in the OA and SA accounts. It also assumes real annual increases of wages ranging from 1.6% to 5.7% for ages 20-35, -0.1% to 3.7% for ages 35-45 and -1.8% to 1.8% for aged 45-55. It should be noted that Medisave consumption patterns of individual members can impact significantly on the their retirement adequacy - a point elaborated on by the Parliamentary Secretary's reply to Mr Ravindran question in the last sitting. A 10th percentile CPF member with a starting salary of $572 is projected by age 55 to have $33,000 in his OA available for housing, $6,700 in his MA and $16,100 in his SA - please refer to Table 1. The low savings arise because the worker only contributes CPF if his monthly salary exceeds $750. At a starting salary of $572, the worker only needs to pay graduated CPF contribution rate (lower than 30%) and during periods when his monthly salary is below $500, he need not contribute any employee CPF. He will not be able to afford a 3 room flat but can rent a flat at subsidised rates from the HDB. Data on CPF members with low starting pay need to be interpreted with caution, as it is possible that this may be distorted by the low wages of part timers. The 12.5th percentile CPF member with a starting salary of $722, is able to buy a 3-room flat at subsidised prices from the HDB and can set aside $26,000 for the Minimum Sum, after withdrawing $5,000 at age 55. He is not able to meet the Minimum Sum target.”
“Members may also wish to know that the newly-formed Workforce Development Agency (WDA) will be working closely with companies to promote best human resource (HR) and organisational development practices. Such practices could include the promotion of staff counselling to help ease unemployed Singaporeans into new jobs unfamiliar to them before; WDA is also engaging employers and trade unions to look into issues, such as mentorship programmes. All these promotional efforts would contribute towards helping employees to better cope with the rapid changes at the workplace.”
“Sir, it was only recently launched, so it would be some time before I could give the hon. Member more information. Column No : 3142 STRESS MANAGEMENT PROGRAMME AND COUNSELLING SERVICES FOR WORKERS 11. Mdm Halimah Yacob asked the Acting Minister for Manpower (a) whether any study has been done to determine how workers are coping with the rapid changes at the workplace and the increased workload, particularly the impact on their mental and physical health; (b) whether his Ministry will include stress management as one of the topics in the training programmes which it conducts for employers; and (c) what can be done to encourage employers to provide counselling services at the workplace as there are indications that the level of stress and anxiety among Singaporeans has increased due to concerns over their jobs and livelihood. The Parliamentary Secretary to the Acting Minister for Manpower (Mr Hawazi Daipi) (for the Acting Minister for Manpower): Sir, my Ministry's Occupational Health Department, in collaboration with experts in organisational behaviour, psychiatry and organisational psychology, is developing a tool to help assess and monitor the psychosocial health of our workforce. The tool measures job stresses and strains, including aspects of work-life balance, and is intended to provide the basis for intervention, management and monitoring of employees' psychosocial health. The study is part of the national effort under the Workplace Health Promotion Programme coordinated by the Health Ministry's Health Promotion Board, with support from MCDS, my Ministry and SPRING, as well as the tripartite social partners - unions and employers - to promote stress management at work.”
“It also involves assigning workers the opportunities to develop and deploy their skills. WDA has conducted dialogue sessions with employers and HR professionals. It recognises that these members are often a key leverage point in building a great workplace that can engage and challenge workers to develop their potential and enhance their contributions to the company. Managers, however, also need to acquire the skills to do so. For instance, in the hospitality sector, WDA has worked with employers to develop training programmes to enhance the supervisory skills of line managers. Under the SME Upgrading for Performance Scheme (SUPER), enhanced funding for executive training will be provided for those medium-sized companies that have shown commitment to recruit and train local workers. Such executive training can contribute to the ability of companies to better manage, develop and engage their workers.”
“Our labour workforce remains highly regarded, as shown by many reputable international surveys. In April this year, the Business Environment Risk Intelligence (BERI) ranked Singapore's labour force first among 49 countries, and this was the 14th consecutive year that we achieved this ranking. Singapore's manufacturing productivity was ranked top, under the Relative Productivity Sub-index in the Labour Force Evaluation Measure. Singapore's labour market was also ranked top in the World Competitiveness Yearbook 2003 among 29 economies with populations of less than 20 million. Specifically in the area of worker motivation, the Singapore workforce was ranked 6th, ahead of countries such as Hong Kong, Belgium and New Zealand. Despite these positive assessments by external agencies, the Ministry of Manpower agrees with Members that employers and workers must continue to be engaged to develop a competitive workforce. The Ministry of Manpower is currently conducting a study on the attitudes and expectations of both employed workers and job seekers, and this will be completed by early next year. The findings will be useful in the design and implementation of strategies and programmes to strengthen the engagement of employers and workers. One of Workforce Development Agency's (WDA) focus is, therefore, to promote and facilitate efforts by companies to strengthen their human resource systems. The WDA is working with companies in various sectors to adopt best HR practices to maximise the engagement and productivity of the workforce. It will assist companies which wish to strengthen their human resource management capabilities. Enhancing workforce competitiveness is not just about sending workers for training.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, may I have your permission to answer Question Nos. 9 and 10 together?”
“Dr Amy Khor Lean Suan asked the Acting Minister for Manpower with reference to the recent Gallup poll on the low percentage of Singaporean workers who are actively engaged compared to other countries surveyed and, by contrast, the relatively large proportion of workers who are actively disengaged or not engaged, (a) if the Ministry can comment on the findings and if it has or will conduct studies to understand the reasons and factors for such a state of affairs among our workers; and (b) if the Ministry is conducting or will consider funding programmes to help employers, especially those from the small and medium-sized enterprises, acquire skills and knowledge to motivate workers and improve their attitude towards work and hence productivity.”
“As the economy and the job situation turn for the better, we will see a flip side of what I described happened in June this year. The preliminary data for July this year show gains of over 8,000 new jobs. This was a notable gain after three consecutive months of job losses, and was twice that compared to a year ago. But because more jobs are available, more will resume their job search after the poor economic situation caused by SARS. In other words, they are coming out of the economically inactive pool and will expand that pool. In addition, a new batch of graduates from university, polytechnic and ITE also join the workforce annually at this time, adding to the pool of job seekers. So, as a result, I expect the labour force participation rate to rise, as well as the unemployment rate initially. As the economic situation improves, more new jobs will be created and employment and re-employment will increase, and unemployment will go down. Column No : 3139 DISENGAGED WORKERS (Effect on nation's productivity) The following Question stood in the name of Mr Ahmad Mohd Magad - 9. To ask the Acting Minister for Manpower (a) whether the publicity on the cost of disengaged workers in Singapore is affecting the reputation of the nation's workers as being the most productive in the world; (b) what steps will be taken to reduce the cost posted by the disengaged workers to the nation's productivity; and (c) whether his Ministry plans to provide services to companies facing disenchanted and dissatisfied employees. 10.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the economic outlook for the next 12-18 months is brighter. MTI's preliminary estimate for Singapore's GDP growth in 2004 is 3-5%, and economic growth will eventually create more jobs and bring down unemployment. The advance GDP estimates for the third quarter show a positive 1.0% growth. But employment growth is a lagging indicator, and typically lags behind GDP growth by around two quarters. Companies usually do not start hiring until they are more certain that the increased sales are sustainable. So I expect the unemployment rate to worsen this year before improving from the second half of 2004. The unemployment rate was 4.5% in June this year, and my Ministry's earlier forecast, that unemployment could move to 5.5% or higher by end of this year, is still valid and likely. Why will the unemployment rate get worse before improving? This is partly due to the labour force participation rate (LFPR). Earlier this year, we announced that, because of SARS and the weak economic conditions, about 26,000 jobs were lost in the second quarter of this year. This was the eighth consecutive quarterly decline in employment, and the worst contraction since the mid-80s recession. But, paradoxically, the unemployment rate for residents (seasonally adjusted) in June 2003 was actually lower at 4.9%, than the 5.2% in March 2003. Why was this so? The reason is that a higher number of people withdrew from the workforce. The economically-inactive proportion of residents rose from 34% to 37% and, therefore, were not captured in the unemployment data. Because the job market was weak, some perhaps decided to defer their job search to take a break; others went for training or further studies.”
“Yes, we will do that. But structurally, we have restricted the amount that can be used for housing to reflect the appropriate proportion, in terms of what you conscribe to the OA Account and in terms of the withdrawal limits. And we will provide the information on our website, as suggested. I think some of these are already provided. Column No : 3134 CRITICAL YEAR ISSUES WITH INSURANCE COMPANIES 6. Mr Yeo Guat Kwang asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance whether the Government will (i) help policyholders affected by the recent critical year issue with insurance companies; (ii) prevent insurers from using the policyholders' fund to pay compensation in such cases; (iii) reconsider its decision to exclude financial services from the proposed Fair Trading Act; and (iv) facilitate class action suits, so that large groups of aggrieved consumers can band together to sue for their rights in the court.”
“These calculations hold, which means that even at 30%, 85% to 90% of Singaporeans can own at least a 3-room flat. I have just used the 25th and 50th percentile. If I have put the 10th, 20th to 80th percentile, it will confuse us. But if the Member wants the details, we can distribute it from every percentile at 10 points.”
“Sir, I beg to move, In page 27, item (1), to leave out "paragraphs (b) and (c)" in the second column and insert "paragraph (c)". Item (1) of the Second Schedule concerns a consequential amendment to section 6(1) of the Standards, Productivity and Innovation Board Act (SPRING), on the functions of SPRING. The deletion of sub-paragraph (b) to the section was originally proposed, as a new statutory board is intended to be the primary organisation responsible for development and upgrading of skills and expertise of the workforce. However, as under that provision, SPRING has a wider mandate in that it includes the promotion of the growth of small and medium enterprises and other enterprises requiring assistance, we have decided to leave paragraph (b) in the SPRING Board Act. Amendment agreed to. The Second Schedule, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Bill reported with an amendment; read a Third time and passed. ADJOURNMENT Resolved, "That Parliament do now adjourn to Thursday, 28th August, 2003." - [Mr Mah Bow Tan]. Adjourned accordingly at Thirteen minutes to Seven o'clock pm to Thursday, 28th August 2003.”
“Mdm Deputy Speaker, we understand the dynamics that occur at the workplace and our approach is that, yes, there is a preference for certain employers as they do. We do not think legislation is the way to go now. We believe in equipping the workers with the necessary skills, sometimes, we may want to aid them, like our People-for-Jobs Traineeship Scheme where we pay half the salary for six months, and that is to allow the worker to prove himself, because that is sustainable. We will continue with these efforts and with some success, we have placed 12,000 workers in that scheme. I believe that we can do much more in those fields. 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. [Mdm Deputy Speaker in the Chair] Clauses 1 to 50 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. First Schedule ordered to stand part of the Bill. Second Schedule -”
“But we are also mindful that to fulfill that objective, we would need to work with many agencies. Therefore, Mdm Deputy Speaker, I would reiterate my last point that we would require the same unanimous support and cooperation of workers, employers and strategic partners to tackle this problem of workforce competitiveness and unemployment. We must meet our challenges head-on, but together, we can renew heightened hopes to our workforce to help them stay employable and even more competitive.”
“Singaporeans must believe that training makes a difference. I can understand why Mr Chiam See Tong feels that it may not be effective. We would not discriminate against his residents in Potong Pasir and, in fact, I encourage his retrenched workers in Potong Pasir to come to WDA and prove him wrong that if we can find them a job, train them, it would make him believe. At the end of the day, that is what must be delivered. We must stop training for training's sake. As all of you have said, we must be market-responsive, industry-relevant. We have to take this very seriously because, at the end of it all, there may not be enough jobs for new entrants if we do not upgrade. Therefore, we will strengthen this nexus between training and employment and we will place priority on job-seekers and target them to fill specific positions. We will work with the industry. Yes, as Dr Teo Ho Pin said, we will put more place and train programmes and we will find people jobs and give them the relevant skills they need. We will tie training with financial assistance and other measures that he has talked about. I now want to focus on some special groups that Members have mentioned. Yes, we will focus on professionals, executives, managers to cope. We would also help those who want to be self-employed, the entrepreneurs, the older workers. All this needs to be done. They are too numerous and I do not intend to go into details. But they are on our radar screen and we would take all your comments into consideration. I want to end off by saying that the WDA cannot be all things to all men. In fact, that would be a disastrous starting point. We want to be very focused. Yes, the point of focus would be how do we get Singaporeans jobs. We must never lose sight of it.”
“But it does not mean that, as an overall administration, we would not also help other sectors remain here. WDA seeks to be the hub that would bring all these spokes of training, all these various agencies, in alignment, so that training would be better coordinated. As a hub, it seeks to provide an integrated framework for all the training providers to articulate the various parts can fit into a whole. It is Singaporean worker-centric. Therefore, I understand some concerns about what we are taking from SPRING and what we are leaving behind. SPRING would continue to exist as it focuses on companies at national level. But when it comes to worker training, we would put the integrated programmes under one whole. Much has been said about changing mindsets and imparting attitudes. I agree. That is absolutely critical. But as I have realised, that is one of the hardest aspects to do and it is not a point in time when you can say that you have done it and people have understood. It is a continuous process. So while much of that has to go on, as Mr Tan Soo Khoon said, lifelong learning, Mr Ahmad Magad, Mr Ong Kian Min, Dr Jennifer Lee, of trying to change the mindset of employees, employers, changing stereotypes, WDA would continue to focus on certain aspects. As I have said, we will build the skills, resilience and the agility of the workforce. We will have to map skills. Yes, we will also have to teach Singaporeans both the hard and soft skills - literacy skills, critical thinking skills, teamwork, internationalisation skills. As Dr Gan See Khem suggested, we have a Strategic Manpower Conversion Programme for internationalisation efforts. At the end of it, we must make training not only more effective but more believable.”
“Mdm Deputy Speaker, as Members have been asked to be brief, I should try to be equally brief. I am deeply heartened by the overwhelming positive response from the many Members who have supported this Bill. I think we have all agreed that we need a central coordinating body such as the Workforce Development Agency. I have been heartened by Members' comments and positive response. In fact, I was keeping a running commentary of the adjectives on the Workforce Development Agency. Adjectives have been used - timely, necessary, better focus for training, unqualified support, much heartened. We have been called "a breath of fresh air", "a ray of hope", "a rose", except one, when we were called "a spade". To Mr Chiam, the WDA does not mind being a spade if it helps him to dig a hole in Potong Pasir. We would be a spade to help his residents get jobs. There have been many suggestions, too many. In fact, I think my staff downstairs are now scratching their heads and going crazy and saying, "My golly! What have we gotten ourselves into?" We would have to take time to take all these numerous suggestions, look at them seriously, compartmentalise them, priortise them, and decide what we can do. I would like just to spend a few minutes explaining what our main role is. As a Member quite rightly pointed out, we cannot be all things to all men. Employment is not a single agency's objective. It is many agencies. But we are very clear on what WDA's main role is. We would be the champion for Singaporeans' workforce development. Yes, as Ms Olivia Lum said, there would be other agencies that need to champion various sectors and various industries remaining in Singapore. But we are completely pro-Singaporeans because this is the way we can help Singaporeans keep their jobs.”
“In terms of median net balances ie, cash remaining in the CPF accounts, active male members had $42,688 while active female members had $35,031. Please see tables 1-5 for details. Table 1 - Distribution of Active and Inactive CPF Members who are Singaporeans and PRs by Age Group and Gender as at end May 2003 (Cols. 2439-2440) Table 2 - Distribution of Active and Inactive CPF Members who are Singaporeans and PRs by Gender (1999-2003) (Cols. 2441-2442) Table 3 - Distribution of Active CPF Members (aged 15 and above) who are Singaporeans and PRs by Industry, Gender and Age as at end May 2003 (Cols. 2443-2444) Table 4 - Distribution of Median Regrossed Balances of CPF Members who are Singaporeans and PRs by Age Group as at end May 2003 (Cols. 2445-2446) Table 5 - Distribution of Median Net Balances of CPF Members who are Singaporeans and PRs by Age Group as at end May 2003 (Cols. 2447-2448) Table 1 - Employment Change, 1993-1997 and 1999-2002 (Cols. 2449-2450) Table 2 - Employment Change by Sector, 1993-1997 and 1998-2002 (Cols. 2451-2452)”
“By age and gender (i &ii) As at 31st May 2003, there were 1.3 million active members of whom 0.6 million (47%) were females and 0.7 million (53%) were males. There were 1.1 million inactive members of whom 0.6 million (58%) were females and 0.5 million (42%) were males. Over the 5-year period from 1999 to 2003, the number of active and inactive members increased by 5% and 10% respectively. The higher unemployment rates in recent years and the increase in the number of new account holders (especially older Singaporeans above 55 years) who took advantage of the various CPF top-up schemes contributed to the higher percentage of increase in the number of inactive members. By educational status (iii) CPF Board does not capture the educational status of CPF members. However, based on Labour Force Survey figures for June 2002, about 18% of those employed had primary school education or lower, 54% had secondary school education and 28% had acquired tertiary level education. In contrast, about 43% of the economically inactive had primary school education or lower, 52% had secondary school education and 5% had acquired tertiary level education. By industry grouping (iv) As at 31st May 2003, the two industries with the highest number of active members were Manufacturing (19%), and Wholesale and Retail Trade (18 %). In terms of gender comparison across industries among active members, all had more male than female members except for Hotels and Restaurants, Financial Services and Personal, Health and Social Services. By amount held in the CPF (v) As at 31st May 2003, the median regrossed balances (which include cash CPF savings and those withdrawn under the various schemes prior to retirement) of active male and female members were $110,349 and $80,520 respectively.”
“BUILDING CONTROL (AMENDMENT) BILL "to amend the Building Control Act (Chapter 29 of the 1999 Revised Edition) and to make related amendments to the Architects Act (Chapter 12 of the 2000 Revised Edition) and the Professional Engineers Act (Chapter 253 of the 1992 Revised Edition)", presented by the Minister for National Development (Mr Mah Bow Tan); read the First time; to be read a Second time on the next available sitting of Parliament, and to be printed. ENLISTMENT (AMENDMENT) BILL Order for Second Reading read. 4.27 pm”
“And, of course, as DPM reminds me, they have admitted that they were wrong. They have said that they used inappropriate data, that they misjudged the error of sensitivities which brought them to wrong conclusions. So I am not sure why the Member wants to play up or show their mistakes upfront. I have said that it really does not matter from the point of view that they have made a mistake. If people doubt our figures after all this explanation, if they still doubt, there is very little I can do. But I know what I can do. I can try to bring jobs back, and this is what I will do. BILLS INTRODUCED FINANCIAL ADVISERS (AMENDMENT) BILL "to amend the Financial Advisers Act (Chapter 110 of the 2002 Revised Edition)", presented by the Second Minister for Finance (Mr Lim Hng Kiang); read the First time; to be read a Second time on the next available sitting of Parliament, and to be printed. SECURITIES AND FUTURES (AMENDMENT) BILL "to amend the Securities and Futures Act (Chapter 289 of the 2002 Revised Edition)", presented by Mr Lim Hng Kiang; read the First time; to be read a Second time on the next available sitting of Parliament, and to be printed. EVIDENCE (AMENDMENT) BILL "to amend the Evidence Act (Chapter 97 of the 1997 Revised Edition)", presented by the Minister for Law (Prof. S. Jayakumar); read the First time; to be read a Second time on the next available sitting of Parliament, and to be printed.”
“It is a well-known report that started in 1976. The latest publication is the 24th publication. So the limitations are well known. In the second page, in terms of methodology, all the classes that are omitted are based on households and therefore it does not include construction, those who stay on offshore islands, seamen, etc. So there are limitations to the data set and it is clearly stated that the numbers are of a certain level of sensitivity. For the layman to arrive at certain conclusions and say, "Well, this is what your report says. You gave me that information." I take it, but I do not expect the same kind of naivety from academic dons. In other words, if they wanted the overall numbers, they should not have gone to the Labour Force Survey Report. They could have used the employment data, another data set which actually gives the numbers and they can calculate that from those numbers. The second mistake was to try to derive the local and foreign share. What they did was from the Labour Force Survey Report, they calculated the employment change by using decimals. Let us say we have 1 million workers and we print the unemployment change figure as 1.2%, it is 12,000. But we round up the figure because we do not want the sensitivity. So it could have been 1.15% or 1.24%. If we are calculating stock, it does not make a difference. But the NTU dons were calculating flow shifts - small numbers, even for 10,000, if there was a shift of a flow of 30,000, it is a 30% difference. Again, if some Members of this House make that mistake, I think it is forgivable, but less so when you are an academic don. I am not sure whether that satisfies the Member and whether he wants more clarification, but I am quite open to give him more information.”
“Sir, when Mr Low Thia Khiang says that there is not much difference between 187,000 and 102,000, that is a sure sign that we have been inundated with numbers. I have said that they started at the wrong point. I am not sure how giving more figures will solve our unemployment problems. It is as though if I gave him a sectoral breakdown, tomorrow the unemployment rate will go down. But I take his point. So, if Members want me to spend time telling them how we derived these figures, we could do that. I could get my statisticians to explain to Members how these numbers are derived, what our figures are, and we will invite Mr Low and whoever wants to come along and we will tell them what the numbers are. How do Singaporeans know that the figures are true? That is a difficult one. How do I know that there are X number of births? I have not seen them. But the point is that we stand by our veracity. We are trying to solve the problems and we are internally consistent. We can check across information that we give from time to time. Our job is to try and solve the unemployment problem. And when these figures come up, it is unnecessary distraction, but we have to solve the real problem. If it satisfies the Member to know how we derived the numbers, we can easily arrange for sessions where the statisticians can show him our data set and within the confines possible that I have produced today, we will show him how these numbers are derived. Mr Low has asked for clarifications on how the NTU report went wrong. Let me go into the details. The NTU professors started by using the wrong data set. This was a Labour Force Survey Report. If Members have time, please log on to the MOM website and there is a Labour Force Survey Report. This Report is not the first publication.”
“Without the foreign workers, our wages would have gone up, our business would have stifled, our economy would have grown less than what we did. So, in the first place, it is the wrong point to stare at, the wrong point to begin. Having started there and if you want to continue this road, carry on. But for me, the emphasis is very clear - get to the fundamentals, restructure, get back the jobs. That is where the answer lies.”
“I had wanted not to focus on it, but let me elaborate just a little bit. What you can get from public information is the overall number and the shifts in pattern within a sector. Overall numbers are quite easily clear. What you cannot get is the breakdown in foreign and local numbers. And the reason is that if you can get a breakdown in local numbers then you can by deduction get it in foreign numbers, except for the document that I have distributed, in the year 2000, where we give it specifically. So, in other words, we will not give you annual data, we may give every five years, every 10 years. So that is the position. The first mistake was actually the overall numbers. Because they had used a different data set and the data set does not allow you the sensitivity to even arrive at the overall numbers. So that is one of choice, that is not one of our omission. That is really their commission where they chose the wrong data set. The second mistake was to actually try to derive the numbers when someone tells you that you cannot derive the numbers. We had made it so and, in fact, my officers were just following policies. Our statisticians are quite smart at it. But if you are calculating flow, if you are off by 10,000-20,000, it makes a big difference into ratios. But the point is this. If you want to answer the question, why are we having unemployment problems, ratios would not give you the answers. It cannot be. What difference does it make? In 1993 to 1997, more jobs went to foreigners than Singaporeans. But what of it? We created 100,000 jobs a year, 3 jobs to every Singaporeans that entered the workforce. So Singaporeans did not care and in fact were happy.”
“Sir, my reply to Mr Iswaran is that we do provide the information, as I have said. We conform to certain standards, but it would be very difficult to provide information for a specific academic research. In other words, we conform to a benchmark and on an overall standard we are ahead of the benchmark in terms of, as we said, access, periodicity and the comprehensiveness in terms of our information. We have said that the exact foreign worker numbers are sensitive and we continue to maintain that. I think it is to our interest to keep it that way. But, whether we will put out more timely and more figures, I think we will consider it. In terms of jobs in the services industry, let me give you a smattering of jobs that are available now. There are 7,300 jobs available in the following areas and I will give you the numbers so that you will have a sense of where the jobs are. Out of the 7,300 jobs, 1,400 in wholesale and retail; 1,200 in community, social and personal services; 1,100 in business and real estates; 1,600 in financial services; 1,500 in transport, storage and communications; and 700 in hotels and restaurants. And, yes, there are 800 jobs also in construction. Dr Amy Khor Lean Suan: I would like to thank the Minister for his very detailed and patient reply to our questions. But just to clear any doubts that the public and, including myself, may have regarding this recent controversy about ratios, I would like to clarify with the Minister if I am right to say now that what the NTU professors and the Ministry said about data not being available for them to make conclusions about the local and foreign ratio is incorrect because this information, as you have said, is publicly available.”
“Dr Wang is quite right. We have looked at that information. I need to point out to Members that manufacturing also includes the marine industry. And wherever it is, in manufacturing, we have been trying to get Singaporeans back to where there are jobs. In other words, where there are fewer jobs created, let us try to put them where the jobs are. I do not think that we want to put ourselves in the position of apportioning blame. In other words, is it because of employer preference, is it because Singaporeans do not want it, or is it because of our foreign policy. To me, I am trying to get workers into jobs. And when you finally deal with the problem, there is a sense of equanimity. So, in the previous exercise, we find that a particular wafer-fab electronics factory went on a roadshow and, out of a few hundreds, finally they could manage just tens of Singaporeans who entered their workforce. What were the reasons? We will look into them. We will see how we can change mindsets. There are a number of reasons. Sometimes it is transport related, sometimes it is shift related. But, whatever the problems, we will have to solve them if we are going to bring down our unemployment. But this would be a targeted effort and I am glad that Members too now are aware of it. So if you have residents, for example, who live in particular parts of the island where there are factories, encourage them to go into these factories. We will facilitate. They can come to MOM, NTUC or Distributed Careerlink Network where we can train them. If they are willing to go into these industries, for example, either precision engineering, production industries, we will place them, we will sponsor their training and we will get them jobs.”
“Sir, I have taken pains to show what data there is. I am not sure if Members have the time, but I welcome them to log on to our websites where all the data is deposited. The Advance Data Release document, census data, which I circulated for year 2000, if you look at that, it gives very clearly in absolute numbers what the resident population is, what the non-resident population is, from 1990 to 2000. So that is fairly clear. You do not need to do any derivation. The absolute numbers are there. But if you wanted a sectoral breakdown, here I am telling you a few statistical tricks, but if you wanted specific numbers of non-residents in goods and services producing industries, manufacturing, construction, etc, you can derive it. If you are an academic, you should be able to derive it. So in terms of 1990 to year 2000, we do. From time to time we also publish in terms of statements what the general numbers are. But all the overall numbers that you see, both in Table 1 and Table 2, are publicly available. The mistake was choosing the wrong data set. We have gone through that and there is no need to elaborate on that. So my short answer to Mr Inderjit Singh's question is that, at least for the overall numbers, you would be able to derive the same numbers that I am giving here.”
“Sir, I thank Mr Iswaran for his views. He is quite right that a single ratio cannot encapsulate the economic reality of our job market. We would have to have a number of figures before we can do that. In terms of more data, the point is that the information that I have given today may be new to some Members, but for those Members who had sat with me in the Job Task Force and the Economic Review Committee, we have gone through these figures many times. I have actually mentioned many of these figures in the House, maybe packaged differently, but perhaps it was less compelling because there was not a backdrop of controversy. So if there is any good, at least the controversy got us to focus on a few numbers, and we want to know the numbers very much more. The truth is that from day to day we are inundated with numbers. So I suspect that even though if I stood up and said these figures many months ago, many of you would have not even taken notice. But I take his point that we will try to do our public communications better and compel you to look at our figures. And the figures have been there. The resident unemployment rate, we said, has gone up. We have made no bones about the fact that foreign workers form a quarter of our population. Many Ministers have gone in public to say that there are 200,000 jobs excluding foreign workers, construction workers, and Singaporeans need to take back these jobs or take those jobs. These are not new facts. As to breakdown of services, he can get the information publicly in terms of overall numbers. That is also available. But if Mr Iswaran would tell me what he wants, we will try to break it down for him so that it is simpler to understand and easier to encapsulate. But the information is there.”
“"" So even in the United States, globally, jobs are at risk. We are under threat. What is our response? We will have to restructure and retrain. We will face the challenges head on and jobs will come back and the economy flows.”
“Sir, Mr Loh is quite correct in that observation. For the last few years, it has been the first time that professionals, managers, executives and technicians form a larger proportion of those that were retrenched. The figure was about 40% of those retrenched, and that is a sizeable difference compared to previous years. But, in aggregate numbers, the unemployment rate for those who were diploma and degree holders is still around the national average of 4-5%. It is higher than usual, but it is not different from the overall figure. Do they face challenges in terms of re-employment? Definitely. We read articles continuously, in terms of white collar jobs being under threat. For those of you who have time, I would advise you to read the Straits Times' article by Chua Mui Hoong on page 12 where she graphically depicts the problems. Let me also quote to you from the Asian Wall Street Journal of Wednesday, 13th August. This was by Matt Murray. It reads, "Sluggish US Recovery Forces Many Workers To Lower Their Sights". I quote: "In five years at Nortel Networks Corp., Jimmy Richter won a series of promotions and saw his salary more than double, to $94,000 a year. He figured the upward trend would continue. But the opposite happened. He was laid off in March 2002, and expected to find a new job quickly. But Mr Ritcher, 30 years old, got no offers in the telecommunications industry, which was shedding thousands of jobs of workers. After six months, he ended up taking a supervisory job at a cable company even though it paid little more than half as much as his old job. "I used to identify myself pretty heavily through work", says Mr Ritcher. "Now I'm just Jimmy. I have a job, and I am glad, and I'll do the best I can at it, but that's what it is: a job.”
“Sir, the question to ask is whether the suggestion proposed by the Member will result in more Singaporeans getting jobs compared to our current dependency ceiling because there are many instances where Singaporeans have tried to hire locals, and they cannot. So if we implemented that, there may be a net loss of jobs for Singaporeans. She also alluded to the figures on manufacturing and whether our foreign worker policy has actually facilitated the exit of Singaporeans. It would be a fallacy to consider that the number of jobs - it is a finite number - and every number that you push the foreign worker out, a Singaporean gains. It is not so. As I have said, beyond a tipping point, beyond a certain point, with rigidity within the labour market policies, the economic response would be either "I relocate" or "I shut down". So if we make it more difficult for employers to get the type of manpower they need, they would have to do their calculations. But having said that, I am all in favour of Singaporeans moving back to manufacturing. Indeed, we have been working with a number of agencies, including MTI and EDB, to have a manufacturing drive. The Mayors would tell you if you ask them. We have been asking workers why they were afraid of the manufacturing environment and sometimes, you get interesting answers. They thought that when you don these bunny suits, there must be something contaminated about the atmosphere and, therefore, there must be something wrong with the atmosphere. So we have to correct misperceptions like this. We would continue to work and try to increase the numbers because there are jobs available in the manufacturing sector and there is a steady pipeline. We would increase our efforts there as well.”
“Mr Nithiah Nandan has asked for clarification on the ratio of 9 to 1. I have given these statistics. It is correct that from 1998 to 2002, out of the 102,000 jobs, there was a net creation of 93,000 jobs. But if that ratio does not reflect the reality on the ground, it is so. That is not the figure in the first place to look at. What we should be looking at is the net number of jobs created and the resident unemployment rate. If I could replace our fixation with some numbers, then I would say, let us look at the total number of jobs that have been created. And the lesson must surely be this: that we have to create enough jobs at least for additional entrants into our labour force every year. And the way we need to do that is to grow our economy, restructure to be competitive, reduce our costs, and that we must do. In terms of perception, I agree. We are working with various agencies to try to encourage Singaporeans back into these jobs. In terms of retrenchment exercises, we do handle it together with a number of agencies, including NTUC. In terms of redesign, I would ask the Member's indulgence to leave that to be further elaborated under the Workforce Development Agency Bill.”
“Sir, I went to great length trying to explain our labour market policies. But let me address his questions pointedly. What I did say was that foreign workers' wages do reduce our overall cost and that is how we make our businesses competitive. As to national objectives, I have said that in terms of releasing data, from time to time, there are situations with the country of origin from which these foreign workers came, despite the most sensitive and cautious handling. And we want to be mindful of this before we release all our information.”
“Sir, locals refer to residents. Residents refer to Singaporeans and Permanent Residents. Permanent Residents form about 10% of Singapore residents. And of that 10%, aged 15-24, about half of them are economically active. So the proportion in which they occupy for resident unemployment would be less, about 5-6%. And at the top level, 10%, if all of them are economically active. But it is usually about 5-6%. I am not sure which question I have not addressed in terms of what Mr Chia has said.”
“Sir, if I may refer to the Tables which I have circulated. For Table 1, the overall figures, both for employment change and employment level, are publicly available. It is the proportion of local and foreign workers that we have kept it sensitive. With regard to providing information in terms of jobs and employment change and employment trends, these are internationally accepted criteria, so that there is some standardisation when we are comparing country to country. What you do with the information, of course, you are at liberty to do so. And here, I need to make a point. If someone takes the information and says that yes, there are jobs within these sectors but he does not want these jobs in these particular sectors - in construction, domestic, manufacturing - that is his prerogative. But the Government must still give the figures as they are, so that there is some level of comparison. This is what we would continue to do so. But I have said that I am mindful of the problems on the ground, that Singaporeans need some time to adjust to jobs which they did not previously like, and that is where we have placed our efforts in trying to get them into these previous areas so that we can reduce the unemployment.”
“These are the more important indices to gauge unemployment. We have also published detailed information about the foreign workforce. Indeed we do. I refer Members to this circulated addendum which is the 2000 Census Advance Data Release. This release on the economic characteristics of the Singapore resident population is publicly available and comprehensive. Paragraph 7 and Table 2 of the Report provide the breakdown of the labour force by residents and foreign workers, and the growth of each group over the period 1990 and 2002. This is the correct data set for any academic to obtain the change in local and foreign employment during these years in each of the sectors listed, because further down there is a sectoral breakdown. So, you could derive the numbers for foreign workers. There is no guesswork that is required from this open document. Hon. Members of this House and others have called on the Government to publish still more comprehensive and frequent statistics on local and foreign workers. MOM will study these requests. However, Members will recall how from time to time the issue of foreign workers can cause friction between us and their countries of origin, despite the most sensitive and cautious handling. We should be mindful of this regional context and not inadvertently worsen these problems. Sir, at the end of this controversy, if Singaporeans can understand better the challenges of the new job environment, the new market reality and the necessary changes we must make to improve our unemployment, then something good would have resulted from this episode.”