Raj Joshua Thomas
Singapore
“I hope the Minister will consider eventually extending the obligations and penalties under the Bill to buyers of outsourced services. One way, Sir, that we can immediately deal with this would be to issue tripartite guidelines or amend existing guidelines to specifically proscribe such practices by service buyers.”
“I ask this because there are news reports that the deal is already off. But the reason for today’s Bill is precisely because MAS does not have a basis to reject the deal for reasons other than prudential aspects. I would just like to ask the Minister for clarity on the process.”
“Mr Sapari championed and led the implementation of the earlier PWMs and Ms Lim continues to lead the secretariats. It is without exaggeration to say that these two people are probably the two people, in Singapore who have contributed the most to the success of the PWMs, and through the PWMs, the uplifting of the lives and livelihoods of t…”
“Speaker, Sir, I would like to ask the Minister of State how will FWAs interface with the Progressive Wage Model (PWM)? For flexi-load, for example, where a worker in one of these sectors requests to work less days, that may bring his gross wage to below the PWM prescribed wage floor.”
“In this regard, I would like to ask the Minister what efforts MCCY makes and will be making to educate co-op members of their rights under the Act, what they will be doing to educate COM members on their duties, including efforts taken in cooperation with the Singapore National Co-operative Federation.”
“Sir, no, that is not what I was saying. I was, essentially, asking why is it that the Member stopped at a certain point, because in the example that he used, the UK, it was not only Ministers who declared their assets, but all members of parliament had to declare their assets. So, that was the point that I was making.”
The complete record
Every one of 260 lines we hold for Raj Joshua Thomas, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 4 of 6.
“But it will create confusion and misunderstanding of Government policies and it will create unreasonable expectations. This, Sir, of course, is a larger question of how we want our politics to evolve, what is the level of democratic accountability we expect, whether there can be some sharing of the burden of responsibility, to increase accountability and the accessibility to information. Coming back to these Motions, Sir, many of our policies are finely calibrated and work in tandem with each other. As I had mentioned, our housing policies are also a set of social and economic policies. It is often meaningless to look at just one factor, criticise it and make suggestions on how to change it, without looking at the whole. The PSP Motion and its related proposals does precisely this and I therefore find myself unable to support it. I stand in support of the Government’s Motion. [Applause.]”
“But, Sir, arising from these Motions, this debate and the various proposals by Mr Leong, is a larger question of democratic accountability and the nature of politics and political debate in Singapore. Over the Chinese New Year period, while chatting with friends at gatherings, this issue of public housing and land costs came up more than once. I was disappointed when some of my friends and relatives said that, well, paying for state land is simply a matter of left pocket, right pocket; and that Mr Leong’s original proposal of excluding land costs would make sense. This, Sir, is a sad instance of where something incorrect is repeated oft enough, it becomes to believed to be the truth. In fact, in his speech yesterday, Mr Leong continued to conflate the Government's accounts with the past reserves. But coming back to these Chinese New Year gatherings, I took pains to explain to them that this is not a matter of left pocket, right pocket. In fact, it is a matter of two completely pairs of trousers worn by two completely different people. The hon Minister had given his explanation on precisely this last month. For me, it is intuitive, because many years ago, I worked in the Singapore Land Authority, in the land sales department. So, to me, I could understand immediately. But what is the reality of how it will be received by the public? When faced with a correct but more technical and complex explanation as the Minister had made, which may take some time and thought to understand, as compared to an incorrect but simplistic and far more delicious proposition, I expect that the delicious proposition, the nod to a populist position, will have more traction and agreement amongst the public.”
“Related to this is what is the rate that interest should be fixed at – because anything lower than the fair market rate would mean that the Government is being deprived of a certain amount of money that could be used for expenditure in other areas that could benefit a larger number of people. Third, even if a person lives in the flat for his whole life, he is unlikely to live longer than the period of the 99-year lease. What then would happen when he passed away? Is the cost of the land to be borne by the purchaser, the inheritor, or will the land cost merely disappear? None of these options is acceptable. All these questions arise, of course, in a model where the Government pays the state for the land first, then sells the flats once they are built on the basis of the proposed scheme. However, it appears that Mr Leong is actually suggesting that the state not be paid first but only once the buyer sells his flat. Because Mr Leong mentioned that the payment would be made back into the past reserves. Sir, this is an even more difficult proposal because it will again result in a raid on the reserves because the value of the land should be determined, to my understanding, at the point that the transaction occurs – not what the historical cost of the land is, even if interest is applied to it. It is simply wrong and it is not the way that the reserves work. In this regard, although Mr Leong started his speech by saying that he would like to propose a reset of housing policies, in fact, Mr Leong is proposing a reset of much more, including the entire system of how our reserves are maintained and managed. He is proposing to turn the system that has underpinned our financial stability on its head.”
“First, let me say that I imagine that this proposal arises from Mr Leong’s fixation with land cost and his fixation with the payment made by the Government to the state as consideration for state land. If we recall Mr Leong’s earlier proposal in December, it was that, and I quote “Land costs should be take out of the picture”. He had also proposed that HDB flat prices should account only for construction costs and price differences between locations. Mr Leong had also separately suggested that land could be sold at historical rates. The hon Minister had addressed these proposals in Parliament last month and explained how this proposal would amount to a raid on the reserves. Mr Leong now makes a different proposal – that the land cost be paid only when the flat is sold. So, it appears that he has accepted the Minister’s explanation that land cost should, in fact, be “part of the picture”, as it were, but that payment for it should be kicked down the road, albeit with interest. This proposal fails on several fronts. First, if it is a matter of the Government purchasing the land first but not charging it when it sells the flat, it means that the Government will become a de facto creditor to all persons living in HDB flats who have not sold their property. And the question arises whether the Government should be essentially lending money to citizens in this way. Second, it means that when a person sells their flat, they may be left with nothing or even a deficit – because interest continues to run as long as they live in the flat. So, their debt to the Government actually grows larger over time and this could become a disincentive to remain in the flat.”
“With 80% of our population living in public housing, it is a diverse group with a range of income, priorities and aspirations. My next point is to caution about generalising about public housing, based on a few cases or news reports. An example is the increasing number of flats being sold above $1 million in the resale market. If we look at these flats, they have a particular nature. They are larger and they are in choice locations. They also make up a very small proportion of the total number of sales – I understand just between 1% and 2%. Their impact on the price of new flats or resale flats that do not have these characteristics, is minimal. As such, while these make the headlines, they are not indicative of flats, in general, becoming unaffordable. Another example is that of the flat being put up for sale without the buyer having ever occupied it. Based on what the Ministry and HDB has said, these are rare cases of abuse and there are penalties that can be applied to such incidences. One swallow does not make it spring and these outliers do not mean the public housing system has failed. There will always be people who will try their luck at these things. What is important is that they are caught and they are brought to task. Let me now address the hom Member Mr Leong’s proposal that HDB owners pay for the purported land cost of their flats only when they sell their flats – the Affordable Homes Scheme. The idea is that if these buyers occupy the flats for their entire lives, that they would essentially never have to pay for the land cost, and that this would make flats affordable at the outset.”
“But another aspect that public housing policy as a social policy should take into consideration, is how to give effect to the aspirations of Singaporeans for upgrading. As we all know, Singaporeans have an almost innate desire for upgrading our property as we earn more and as our families grow larger. In this regard, it is also important to create opportunities for upgrading within the public housing milieu, including the possibility of upgrading by getting a bigger flat or a flat in a better location. This brings me to my third point – that HDB must continue to show value to buyers. Even as I say that prices of public housing will continue to rise due Singapore’s characteristics, HDB should continually look to building and selling flats of a high quality and also of diverse types to cater for all Singaporeans. The Prime Location Scheme was one such example that I had raised. In Punggol, there are beautiful, new seafront flats, of which I am sure view is absolutely amazing. There is also a need to accommodate the elderly, which includes downgraders – silver Singaporeans who wish to downgrade from their private properties or larger flats, as their children move out or as their mobility is reduced. Singles are another group and many not look not to buying just small two room flats, but larger flats as they may wish to also house their parents or to just have more space for lifestyle. HDB must look into all of these aspirations – from the practical like ageing and retirement to the aspirational like upgrading and lifestyle; and for some, the desire for a fantastic view. This must be so, because our public housing cannot be, like in other countries, basic.”
“My second point is that public housing has to go beyond just affordability and accessibility. The PSP Motion mentions retirement and inclusivity. Indeed, public housing policies are not merely about bricks and mortar and the cost of flats, but it is also a set of social policies that aims to achieve various objectives. If we look at one such policy – the Prime Location Public Housing scheme, which gives higher subsidies for flats in prime locations like the Greater Southern Waterfront, so that they become more accessible to a wider range of Singaporeans. As the hon Minister said when launching the scheme, without Government intention, only the well-to-do would be able to afford housing in attractive locations and that the Government was determined not to let such stratification and segregation happen, as it has successful cities. In this regard, to ensure inclusivity, rental flats would also be built within these prime estates. My first impression reading about the scheme when it was first mooted was that some buyers would strike a lottery if they win the ballot for these flats, as, after having taken advantage of the higher subsidies, they would be able to get a windfall when they sell the flat after the Minimum Occupation Period. This would be hardly ideal. However, when the scheme was eventually rolled out, the Government layered a safeguard against precisely this “lottery effect”, including a higher Minimum Occupation Period and a subsidy recovery mechanism even when the flat is sold after a 10-year period. As such, thought had obviously been put in such that while pursuing the objective of inclusivity, other undesirable consequences do not inadvertently arise.”
“While I agree that certain aspects of Government policies should be reviewed, I simply cannot agree that current policies do not aim to provide accessible and affordable housing or that they do not look at providing for retirees and so on. In fact, even a cursory review of public housing policies would show that all of the points raised in the PSP Motion are actually explicitly stated objectives. These rebuttals have been made by the Government and speak for themselves. I further do not agree with the hon Members Mr Leong’s proposal in his speech, in particular, that buyers be exempted from paying the purported land cost of their flats until they sell their flat. I will elaborate on why I disagree with this. I will therefore support the Government’s Motion but I would also like to make several observations and suggestions on public housing. My first point is that affordable public housing should not be seen as cheap public housing and that accessible public housing does not mean that everyone will be able to get a flat in their choice location at the time that that may want it, devoid of other considerations. As a small country with land scarcity, high level of development and general affluence of our population, we cannot expect that property prices would be anything else than fairly pricey. And this will be so whether it is public housing or private housing. Affordability and accessibility should be created by Government policies like grants, the provision of HDB loans, where possible, waivers of certain requirements and flexibility in imposing eligibility criteria, for example. Accessibility is also created by varying, amongst other things, lease tenure and limiting certain types of flat to only certain categories of buyers, like flats for the elderly.”
“Sir, with 80% of our population living in public housing, today’s Motions are of paramount importance to Singaporeans, as it affects the majority of us on something so fundamental as the roof above our heads. I have considered very carefully the motions put up by the hon Members Mr Leong Mun Wai and Ms Hazel Poa, which I will refer to as the “PSP Motion”; and that put up by the hon Minister for National Development, which I will refer to as the “Government’s Motion”. The points raised in the PSP Motion are, in my view, raising correct objectives for public housing. Affordable and accessible public housing, preserving the owner-occupant nature of it, ensuring that retirees have access to public housing and keeping it inclusive are all ingredients of a successful public housing policy. The PSP Motion calls for a review of policy is also not objectionable – government policies should be reviewed from time to time. And it is precisely the role of Parliament and Parliamentarians to point out areas of public policy that should be revisited and changed if they are not working or not working optimally. However, I find that I am not able to support the PSP’s Motion because the manner it is worded suggests that the Government public housing policies at this point do not deliver on these objectives or do not even have these as objectives. The operative two words in the PSM Motion is “in order”. I quote: “That this House calls upon the Government to review its public housing policies in order to deliver affordable and accessible HDB flats”. The use of the words “in order” suggests that existing policies do not deliver the objectives.”
“And because we know that this is such an emotive topic, even us, Members of this House, politicians and public figures must also be careful not to seek to politicise the issue for political gain or publicity. It does Singapore no good for us to be seen as xenophobic or anti-foreigner. I am optimistic, Sir, for Singapore’s continued success as a global city and an international hub. I look forward to a more cosmopolitan business environment, fuelled by our hardworking and skilled local workforce, tapping on international expertise, building Asia’s capital city and the world’s hub for commerce, business exchanges, ideas and global talent.”
“In fact, if we look at the various policies that govern how we approach global talent, it is quite clear that the criteria for a foreigner to come to work in Singapore is very stringent and that the system is heavily weighted towards Singaporeans. In fact, as much as there has been suggestions that foreigners are taking jobs from Singaporeans, many local businesses have asked instead that the regime be loosened to make it easier for skilled foreigners to come into Singapore. Ultimately, we must strike a balance between bringing in global talent and nurturing and hiring local talent. Sir, attracting global talent is a key plank of Singapore’s continued success. A winning global talent strategy must address both the practical and emotive aspects, because, Sir, Singapore is not a corporation: Singapore is a country, and we are not only workers, but we are also citizens and this is our home. On the practical side, the Government must calibrate policies to take into account shifts in the global talent market and our own local talent pool becoming more skilled and globally exposed and it does appear that MOM is doing this. MNCs must make sure that their hiring practices are fair and do not discriminate against Singaporeans or favour foreigners because there are many skilled Singaporean workers right here, who are eager for good jobs and who can perform. On the emotive side, the Government must be sensitive to and address the fears and concerns of Singaporeans as we see more foreigners coming into Singapore, expatriates must be gracious guests and respect our way of life, and Singaporeans must be welcoming and hospitable hosts.”
“Kabam builds next generation robotic and connectivity solutions for built-environment businesses. Despite being a pandemic baby, has seen rapid growth over its two years of operations, partnering and providing services to, amongst others, Certis, the Singapore Land Authority, Singapore Technologies and Konica Minolta. Michael acts as the CEO of Kabam and his co-founders Kelvin Wee and Benjamin Chia credit him, with his prior experience in bomb disposal, subsea vehicles and logistics robotics, with the company’s rapid growth. Kabam employs 30 Singaporeans and they have shared with me that they had to shore up their technical team with some foreigners because the talent pool in robotics in Singapore is limited, but that they were working, through extensive partnerships with our IHLs to build up the expertise of their Singaporean Core. In this regard, I would like to urge SMEs to also look at how they can leverage on global talents to augment their local workforces to build their businesses, to transfer know-how and to build local expertise; and for MOM to recognise that this is a legitimate reason for SMEs to look to hire foreigners. The criteria they apply to whom they seek to hire must also be very strict, to ensure that they thoroughly consider local applicants before looking at foreign candidates. Again, control mechanisms like the salary stipulations for each type of pass, dependency ratios, the FCF and COMPASS, will operate to as far as possible, make sure that locals are considered first in SMEs before foreign talent may be admitted. Sir, to conclude, my take on the restiveness surrounding our global talent policy is that is it borne not out of Singaporeans’ fear of competition, but out of thinking that we are subject to unfair competition.”
“My suggestion is that we need to do more not only at the universities but even at the Secondary level to encourage a global mindset amongst our local students who are our future workers. This should not only be in our school curricula or in the form of exchanges with other schools, but also through attachments with global companies and their laboratories, factories and facilities overseas or even in Singapore. In particular, we need to build a strong group of future workers who are well-acquainted and well-connected with Southeast Asia and APAC. This is especially important because of the growing number of corporate regional headquarters being set up in Singapore. The Singapore worker must see herself as a global worker – either working overseas for a time or travelling for work if based in Singapore. These are the roles that we must be prepared for. For Singaporeans who gain experience overseas, after some time, we look forward to welcoming them back home to take up senior positions here. And we have exemplars, in fact, even in this House, our very own hon Nominated Member Janet Ang is one such person who has worked overseas for many years and then returned to Singapore to head an MNC. Let us endeavour to produce more Janet Angs. Finally, Sir, it is important to note that when we speak of global talents, we are not only looking at top positions in MNCs but also positions in local SMEs. Our local SMEs and entrepreneurs can benefit from the diverse experience that mid-level executives can bring to their businesses. I recently visited Kabam Robotics, a local company, which has three co-founders: two Singaporeans and a US citizen, Mr Michael Sayre. Michael came to Singapore in 2007 and he worked in various companies before co-founding Kabam in 2020.”
“As Deputy Prime Minister Lawrence Wong said at the Singapore Economic Policy Forum last month, thinking that we can get simply just get rid of foreigners to “reclaim” jobs for Singaporeans is flawed because these jobs may not automatically go to Singaporeans – they may go overseas, to countries with larger pools of talent. This replacement will instead, be dynamic and will be aided precisely by COMPASS, the FCF and dependency ratios. Some global talent, we should not be too quick to replace: entrepreneurs, researchers, inventors and rainmakers because they have a timeless quality and they are enablers. By their very nature, they will not replace Singaporeans, but they will create opportunities for us. This replacement is, however, also dependent on us grooming our local talent to themselves become global talent. It is not being a foreigner that makes one a global talent, it is the fact that these people have worked in other countries, some in many other countries and that they have international experience and networks. Such exposure is invaluable and in order for our local talent to become global talent, we must encourage the acquisition of precisely this quality. Our local Universities are recognised as some of the very best in the world and this has led to some comments that since we have the best universities, why do we need global talent to come into Singapore. It is naïve to believe that one can graduate from our local University, work locally and then be able to take up top spots in MNCs. In Singapore, if one does not have international exposure, it will be increasingly difficult to compete for these top spots. As a global hub, we attract multinational corporations that look at the world as its talent pool because they want to get in the global best.”
“We need to make it a culture to consider locals first, in particular, for expats coming in who are in decision making or influential roles affecting hiring. We expend massive resources to educate, train, retrain our people and we have become one of the most highly skilled workforces in the world. It is also one of our competitive advantages to attract investment. We must not allow our local workers to be overlooked due to preferences other than merit. To help expatriates ease into Singaporean culture and start our relationship on the right footing, I suggest implementing a compulsory initiation programme that could incorporate these three “Respects” for all new expatriates under all types of passes, to be administered by their employer. The curriculum and guidelines for such a programme could be produced by the NIC. Bringing global talent into Singapore must also have a knock off effect on the skills and competencies of our own people and our own companies. As I mentioned earlier, we should look to adopt an initial transactional approach to global talents coming in to fill jobs. In the midst of this, some Singaporeans will lose jobs to foreigners. But what our policies must ensure is that over time, foreigners will lose jobs to Singaporeans, as we become able to fill these roles ourselves, including by know-how and skills being transferred to us from our expat colleagues. Our foreign workforce must shift and it must mould itself around us. And this is what I believe is MOM’s new schemes and adjustments will be able to achieve. However, it is not possible for this replacement to follow the course of an exact science. It is not possible to pick a foreigner and say, "Well I have someone local to replace you. Now, you have to go back".”
“The second "respect" is respect for our culture, sensitivities and ways of doing things. Expatriates in Singapore should seek, as far as possible, to learn how we do things and to adapt. This is one of the aims of the National Integration Council (NIC). I have looked at some of the resources provided by the NIC on its website and there are many suggestions as to how Singaporeans can reach out to expatriates and make them feel comfortable here. But it is a two-way process. Expatriates must also abide by our ways of doing things. These may be small things like respecting personal space or simple courtesies which are the norms here but may not be expected behaviour in their home countries. Over time, if there are expats or expat communities who ignore these norms, certain opinions and biases may be formed against them. These are difficult things to talk about because we do not want to generalise; but these are hard conversations we must have. A National Youth Council survey amongst Singapore youth earlier this year found that only 17% felt that locals and foreigners get along well here despite their differences and only 20% felt that foreigners are able to integrate into local culture comfortably. Clearly, more effort needs to be made on both sides to ease our expatriate friends into Singapore’s culture. The third “respect” is respect for the capabilities of Singaporeans. The hon Minister for Manpower shared last month that more than 1,700 employers have been placed on the Fair Consideration Framework’s watchlist for having a high concentration of a single foreign nationality source and that 300 companies have breached the FCF from 2017 to 2021.”
“ICA could also consider publishing examples of how such criteria could be met, which aside from providing transparency to locals, has the added benefit of allowing potential applicants to know what it takes to become a Singapore Citizen. I now come to my next point, Sir, on respect. Whether on a work pass or a permanent resident, global talent coming to Singapore are our guests and we, as Singaporeans, are their hosts. As much as we are hospitable and welcoming, it is also perfectly reasonable to expect that our global talents here respect their hosts. I suggest three key “respects” that global talent should keep in mind when coming here. The first "respect" is respecting our laws and regulations. Singaporeans get particularly inflamed when we see incidents of foreigners flouting laws. This is because we, as a people, are famously law abiding and we expect others to be the same in our country. A case in point was the public furore that arose over foreigners gathering outside bars and restaurants in May 2020, which was during the circuit breaker when such gatherings were disallowed. Although incidents like this have nothing to do with a global talent policies, commentators are always very quick to ask what they are employed as in Singapore and what are the consequences of them flouting the law. These flashpoints often lead to a backlash against our global talent policies. Tellingly, in relation to this particular incident, MOM had to respond to queries related to work passes, saying in a statement, that "foreigners working in Singapore must abide by our laws and that those convicted, regardless of the type of work pass they hold risk having them revoked and banned from working in Singapore".”
“If this meeting of minds and hearts are amongst the chief considerations and criteria for residency and citizenship, it will ameliorate the concerns of Singaporeans that naturalised citizens and permanent residents are going to be foreign from us, or even worse, that they will all be fabulously rich, beyond our understanding, and more "atas" than us. It will also render irrelevant any distinction sought to be made between Singapore-born Singaporeans and naturalised Singaporeans – a distinction some quarters have sought to make. My view is that emphasising a transactional initial relationship with global talent will not affect Singapore’s attractiveness as a magnet for global talent. In Dubai, for example, it is near impossible to become a citizen and yet, it has not had any trouble attracting a cosmopolitan pool of global talent to set up shop there, with many staying for the long term. Changes were made to their citizenship rules last year, but the criteria remain extremely stringent and even under the new rules, citizenship will only be offered to a very exceptional few. Immigration and our global talent policy, although related, should not be seen as one and the same. I therefore encourage the government to emphasise that citizenship and to a certain extent, permanent residency is not merely a matter of skills and qualifications, but also one of fit and acceptance. This could be done by, for example, elaborating on how ICA assesses the criteria of whether a person would be able integrate into our society or whether they are ready to set roots down in Singapore.”
“Unfortunately, for some reason, there appears to be an impression that our global talent policies are synonymous with immigration. The Government has been quite clear that these policies and our open arms are in our self-interest. As such, my view is that we should make clear that our relationship with global talent coming into Singapore is transactional in the first instance. The initial impetus should not be about immigration bolstering our population numbers or immediately settling in as residents. The first impetus is to fill gaps in our economy. This transactional first instance will be a testing phase, to see if they like us and we like them. If it is a match, then we should certainly invite them to become Permanent Residents and citizens. This is because as much as we say that we are ourselves a nation of immigrants, over our decades of independence, we have formed an identity of our own and become a proud nation and a proud people. Hence, we must ensure that foreigners seeking to settle here respect and accept our national identity, shared values and our way of life. This testing phase could occur both while an expatriate is in Singapore on a work pass or during permanent residency. I note that the Immigration and Checkpoint Authority already considers as criteria for Citizenship or Permanent Residency, an applicant’s “family ties to Singapore”, their “ability to contribute to Singapore and integrate into our society” and their “commitment to sinking roots in Singapore”.”
“These programmes have, in part, led to Singapore being consistently recognised as one of the top countries in the world for global talent to consider moving to. Just last week, INSEAD and the Portulans Institute ranked Singapore second in their Global Talent Attractiveness Index. This Index recognises not only a country’s ability to bring in global talent, but also how well it develops its local talent. So, overall, we are recognised internationally as doing very well and we can take heart that our global talent policies are generally sound. In my Adjournment Motion today I will look at areas ancillary but related to our global talent policies and that must form part of our global talent strategy. Areas that will ultimately affect their success because they tug at the hearts of Singaporeans; they affect our fears, our hopes and aspirations, our dignity and our way of life; and they will largely determine whether we support these policies. I will make some suggestions on how the Government can bolster our global talent policy, ameliorate local concerns and get more of our people behind these policies that are a key plank to ensure Singapore’s continued competitiveness and prosperity. [Deputy Speaker (Mr Christopher de Souza) in the Chair] Most Singaporeans are realistic in recognising that we cannot indigenously produce all the talent required to fuel and grow our economy. As an advanced economy, many of the higher-skilled jobs require not just a first-class education, but often also specific skills and international experience. This is what our global talent policies seek to fill. Singaporeans are, in my view, comfortable if these roles are filled on the basis of a utilitarian impermanence.”
“Sir, the ability to attract global talent is particularly important for an advanced economy like Singapore where we have more jobs than the number of local workers and senior corporate and skilled roles to be filled in our diverse sectors. While many countries have also embarked on a drive to attract global talent, others have turned increasingly inward and there are indications that such sentiments are growing in Singapore. This is natural, because at its basic, global talent policies are about allowing people into our home. It is therefore not only a practical matter but also an emotive one. As such, a winning global talent strategy must rely not only on facts and figures; it must also build comfort and give assurances to our local Singaporeans. Global talent policies look at attracting and retaining global talent in Singapore that is complementary to our local workforce. But a global talent strategy is far more complex because it must take into consideration many other areas that are intrinsically intertwined, including education, upskilling and reskilling, national identity and culture, economic development and competitiveness, entrepreneurship, research, housing, law enforcement amongst others. Over the past few months, the hon Minister for Manpower has, in great detail and quite painstakingly set out how the various global talent schemes work, including new schemes like OnePass and COMPASS. He has also explained the rationale for adjustments that have been made to existing schemes. And I am in agreement with the Minister that these are steps in the right direction. In fact, today, the Minister and I have also agreed on the colour scheme for our outfit, and it is purely incidental, Mr Speaker.”
“Sir, public defence is a critical component of our criminal defence system. It provides access to justice that bolsters the rule of law. Notwithstanding my suggestions and clarifications, I support the Bill.”
“This is relevant where a person had, for example, litigated in person in the first instance and then seeks help for an appeal after the verdict in the lower Court. On clause 12(5), which provides that the PDO may, instead of approving an application, refer it to a body or organisation providing pro bono legal services, I would like to ask the hon Senior Parliamentary Secretary whether the PDO will be able to refer cases to an external body if the applicant does not meet all the criteria. This would help to build complementarity between the PDO and other pro bono schemes. On clause 14(2), which provides that the PDO must not act for more that one accused person, appellant, respondent or party in the same proceedings, the hon Senior Parliamentary Secretary mentioned that the PDO could refer these cases to CLAS. I would like to ask whether the PDO could appoint these accused persons to assigned lawyers from the panels as well so that they can act for other persons in the same proceedings who meet the eligibility criteria. Finally, on the Schedule, on paragraph 1(e), I would like to ask the Senior Parliamentary Secretary why private prosecutions are not covered. In many cases of private prosecution, the prosecuting party appoints lawyers to pursue its or their case. In this regard, if the defending party is unable to afford their own lawyers, they are essentially in the same position as regards the inequality of arms as a person who is charged by the Public Prosecutor and they would face the same sentences if they were convicted. So, would the Ministry consider allowing for the Public Defender to grant aid in private prosecutions prosecuted by lawyers where the defending party meets the eligibility criteria?”
“On a related note, we must ensure that the Public Defenders are also adequately compensated and have career progression prospects. While they should, of course, have passion in what they do, the PDO should not be a passion project, as it is in many other jurisdictions. I would expect that because the Public Defenders would come under the Legal Service Officer scheme, their compensation would be competitive and that good lawyers will be attracted to join and stay in the office to build seniority and institutional knowledge. This will help ensure a high standard of defence provided. I am also gratified that the Bill provides for the involvement of lawyers in private practice via panels of lawyers who can be assigned to cases. The private sector has carried the pro bono defence for many years and this spirit of public service to assist impecunious persons remains strong in the legal fraternity. I would suggest that the panel of lawyers can be utilised in two ways: one, to assign cases to lawyers whose particular expertise would be useful in those cases; and two, as a release valve when the PDO's caseload gets too voluminous. I hope that there will also be avenues for Public Defenders and private lawyers to be able to work together on appropriate cases to leverage each other's knowledge and experience in defending the aid recipient. In addition to what I have covered, I have the following clarifications on specific clauses. On clause 8(1)(b), which sets out the scope of criminal defence aid, I would like to ask the hon Senior Parliamentary Secretary whether the PDO can take up appeals or criminal applications where the PDO had not represented the accused person in the originating proceedings, which are provided for in clause 8(1)(a).”
“An accused person would naturally have anxiety as to how they are going to deal with their case and many would be relying on legal aid to help them get through the criminal process. A timely response would ease their minds if they get the grant of aid. If they did not, it would allow them sufficient time to quickly pursue other options, including preparing to self-litigate. By way of comparison, CLAS currently takes about two weeks to consider an application. I note also that for urgent cases – and this is something that the hon Senior Parliamentary Secretary mentioned – clause 12(4) does provide for an expedited process. When a case is taken up, it is important to manage the expectations of persons receiving aid, in particular as to what are the prospects for their case as regards both verdict and sentence. I am a little concerned that there may be backlash against the office by the accused person and their family members where a desired outcome in a particular case is not achieved. So, managing expectations will be extremely important. As regards the performance of the Public Defenders, I note that in many jurisdictions that have such institutions, the common feedback is that Public Defenders have huge caseloads and are overworked to the point that they are not able to spend the necessary time and effort on each case. This leads to less than optimal performance and quality of defence. As a rough measure, CLAS undertook 864 cases in 2020 and 775 cases in 2021, figures of which I had obtained from CLAS. So, it is not a small number of cases. In this regard, we need to ensure that the PDO is adequately staffed, of course, with a prudent budget and that there is careful monitoring of each Public Defender's case load so that they take up a manageable number of cases.”
“First, as there may not be sufficient understanding of the structure of the state as regards its legal components, it would be important to step up public education on how the public prosecutor is an independent organ of state and not part of MinLaw, which the PDO would be. Often, laymen tend to lump all official bodies under the broad heading of the Government. In fact, the Public Prosecutor and MinLaw and the PDO as part of the Ministry are distinct and the public prosecutor is not part of the Government. It may be otherwise confusing to the layman that the Government is funding both prosecution and defence and this was mentioned by earlier speakers. I note that clause 12(3) does provide that the Public Defender must not determine the benefit or detriment of a case based on the interests of the prosecution or of any other law enforcement agency. Second, as the Public Defender will be providing a service to impecunious persons who may be elderly or who may not be highly educated, it is important that the process of making an application should be easy and accessible. This would include having various modes of application, including online and in different languages, and assistance to make an application. Furthermore, to improve access, would the Senior Parliamentary Secretary consider providing a standard allocution for Police officers to recite to accused persons as regards having an option to avail of public defence when that person is being charged? Further to this, I would also suggest that the period for considering an application should not be too lengthy while, of course, giving enough time for the PDO to carefully consider whether the application meets the criteria.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, a fundamental principle of the rule of law is access to justice, which includes access to legal advice and representation. Accused persons who are unable to afford lawyers to represent them face an indomitable inequality of arms against the Public Prosecution. Helping impecunious persons gain access to good quality legal representation evens the field and ensures that robust criminal defence is the not the preserve of only the well-to-do and instead is available to everyone. The Law Society Pro Bono Services' Criminal Legal Aid Scheme (CLAS) had, amongst other organisations and programmes, served this function. The Public Defenders Bill seeks to enact and enshrine in legislation criminal legal aid, funded by the Government, for persons who meet the means testing and other criteria. I thank the Minister for tabling this Bill. It will fill a lacuna in our rule of law institutions and create a more fair and equitable society. But public defending is a new concept to Singaporeans and given our reputation for robustly enforcing our laws and regulations and given the Government's previous position that the hon Member Murali Pillai had spoken on, it is novel and perhaps even discombobulating for the public that the Government will now be required by law to provide or to arrange for the defence of persons accused of certain offences. In time, it will become an accepted part of our criminal legal system but how it is perceived and how it is approached will depend on the information and education provided to the public on this new setup and how the office carries out its statutory functions when it is set up. In this regard, I have several points for the hon Senior Parliamentary Secretary's consideration.”
“Sir, Singapore's tourism sector has been hit hard by the disruption of travel into Singapore. On the home side, Singaporeans have become a little stir-crazy from restricted travel overseas for leisure, and business persons are also looking for easier travel procedures to places they need to be at. In this regard, I would like to ask the Minister about MOT's plans to recover air passenger travel and revive the aviation sector. On a related note, I would also like to ask if there are plans to ultimately drop the VTL system and to introduce quarantine-free travel for vaccinated travellers from all destinations, perhaps starting with vaccinated Singaporeans.”
“Food security is an existential issue for Singapore. The global food system faces many challenges, from short-term disruptions, such as disease outbreaks in a source country and the pandemic, to long-term issues such as climate change, global population growth and dwindling resources. One of the Government’s efforts is the 30 by 30 goal, to transform our agri-food sector, and build capabilities and capacity to sustainably grow in a highly productive, climate-resilient and resource-efficient way. It is important for the Government to work towards the 30 by 30 goal in a sustainable manner. I would like to ask how does the Government plan to help the local food production industry to build up capabilities and capacity to achieve the 30 by 30 goal, to enhance the resilience of Singapore’s food supply. Further to this, unlocking sea space for sustainable fish farming can help boost our local production in the long term. However, as with land, there will be diverse and competing needs for the use of our sea space. I would like to ask what are the Government’s plans to provide the local food production industry with greater certainty on the use of land or sea space to optimise the supply of local produce. Lim Chu Kang Masterplan”
“Sir, in Malay, please. (In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Singaporeans enjoy hawker food. Our hawker trade is a key part of Singapore's history and identity. We have strong public support for hawker culture, and many of us celebrated when our Hawker Culture was inscribed on the UNESCO Representative List of the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity in December 2020. Therefore, we must ensure that our hawker culture and food continue to thrive for future generations. I am heartened to know that NEA has announced last year it will be rolling out the Hawkers Succession Scheme. This scheme aims to facilitate retiring veteran hawkers pass down their stalls, culinary skills, practices and recipes to aspiring successors through an apprenticeship and mentorship programme. I would like to ask what is the progress of the scheme, and are there more details available on how the scheme will be implemented? Food for Sustainable Future”
“For example, instead of regulating the facilities management sector, the Building and Construction Authority has worked closely with the Singapore International Facilities Management Association to establish accreditation schemes for firms and facility management professionals. Similarly, as debated in Parliament last year, my own association administers the Security Consultants Accreditation Programme. Finally, I would like to thank MTI for the TAC Growth Model Toolkit that was launched recently. This, Sir, is a very excellent resource and reference document for TACs that can help them chart their development. On a related note, while TACs may get some funding from the Government pursuant to the LEAD grant, it should be the aim of all TACs to not only grow their operations and the services they offer to their members, but also to make sure they have the financial wherewithal to stand on their own two feet. In this regard, I would like to ask MTI if it will consider extending grants to TACs that are traditionally offered to SMEs to help them build revenue making activities.”
“Sir, I declare my interest as President of the Security Association Singapore (SAS). Sir, the Finance Minister had, in his Budget statement, as well as his reply speech, mentioned the important role that trade associations and chambers (TACs) can play. In addition to the roles the Minister had mentioned, I would like to make the following suggestions as to what more they can do and how MTI could support them. First, TACs can coordinate shared services for their members that would help them get favourable rates and enjoy economies of scale. This includes legal, accounting and human resource services, but also consultancy in core capabilities and internationalisation. In this regard, Enterprise Singapore could consider adapting the Enterprise Development Grant in a way that would allow TACs to coordinate mass funding for their members in the eligible areas. Second, TACs could be harnessed to administer appropriate Government schemes. A good recent example is how the SG United Training scheme is administered by the Singapore Business Federation. The sectoral TACs can similarly take charge of sector-specific schemes, within parameters worked out jointly with the relevant Government body and with funding to support the costs incurred in administering the said programmes. The TACs' closeness with their industry’s companies will be useful in that it is easier for them to explain how each scheme works and increase these companies’ participation in beneficial programmes and grants. Third, regulatory authorities can consider devolving some regulatory functions to TACs, where appropriate. Such devolution is most easily achieved with professional certifications and if we push the envelope a bit more, even licensing.”
“Gone also are the formal dinners that trainee lawyers were invited to attend, where they would be seated with and would get to know senior practitioners. These unique and iconic traditions of the profession helped to build camaraderie and fraternity and gave life to the idea of being part of an ancient and noble profession. Even in the UK, from which we inherit our legal traditions, the importance of these "dining-in sessions" was recently affirmed. Perhaps we could consider bringing these back. Third, while stress from the job is inevitable, stress from bosses and from the working environment is not. I note that modules on leadership and management have recently been added to the compulsory training for lawyers becoming partners. There is merit in considering including these types of courses as compulsory modules in the Continuing Professional Development programme for middle and senior category lawyers. Retaining Young Legal Talent”
“Sir, I start with a quote: "Every solicitor who has got a serious practice is under stress". The hon Chief Justice was quoted in a Yahoo! News article on Monday as saying this at a recent Court of Three Judges hearing. Lawyering, Sir, is invariably stressful. Why so? It is because the stakes are so high. It takes a certain dedication to be in a profession that, amongst other things, defends life and liberty, that acts for commercial interests that may have wide-ranging consequences, that challenges in Court the constitutionality of laws made in this House. If we accept stress as an immutable part of the profession, we have to then look at other things that can be changed to address the exodus of junior and middle category lawyers from the profession. Many suggestions have been made by various people and I would like to add three. First, MinLaw could consider upping the proportion of law students in our Universities who are graduate students. As a graduate law student myself – my first degree was in political science and I took up a law degree only after working a few years in the Civil Service – I can attest that once someone makes that sacrifice of three years with no salary or advancement to obtain a law degree, they will likely remain in the profession, as most of my batch have. The MOE Tuition Grant should also be extended to all graduate law students, regardless of whether they had utilised the grant for their earlier degree. Second, it was recently suggested to me by a Senior Counsel that the current training contract scheme has lost the emotional elements of the previous pupillage system, which created a bond between new lawyers and their pupil master, and to the profession.”
“Equally, MHA and the Police must continue to be transparent about disciplinary cases and make these public. This gives confidence that the system of internal checks works and that errant officers are taken to task. Importantly, Madam, we must also speak up in support of our officers when they do well. I will end, Madam, with a quote from a LinkedIn post by Ms Sadhana Rai, a criminal defence lawyer at the Law Society's Criminal Legal Aid Scheme. She wrote, "In my experience as a defence counsel..." – and we should know that defence counsel are opposite the AGC and opposite the investigation officers (IOs) in the Court setting – "...I have come across some hardworking, sensitive and professional investigation officers who go out of their way to ensure that complainants are safe, comfortable and emotionally supported. These officers accompany complainants to Court, sit through proceedings, speak to the complainants on breaks to make sure they are doing alright and more. We are all important parts in a system that aims to uphold and deliver justice." Upskilling of Inmates in Prison”
“As Senior Minister of State Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim has said about this collaboration, it was a step showing how the rest of the sports community could join in the anti-drug effort. In this regard, could the Minister update on MHA's efforts in spreading the anti-drug message to various communities and the impact it had made thus far? My second question is with regard to the death penalty for drug offences. A study commissioned by MHA in 2019 on the views of Singapore residents found that the majority felt that the death penalty was more effective than life imprisonment for serious crimes, including drug trafficking. Another study in 2018, this time on a sample of non-Singaporeans who were likely to visit Singapore came to similar conclusions. Minister Shanmugam had also mentioned in the House in October 2020 that there was evidence that knowledge of the death penalty led to a reduction in the amount of drugs trafficked. As the Minister said then, these and other surveys quite clearly show that there is majority public support for the death penalty. On this, would the Minister be able to give a comparative view, that is, how Singapore compares with other countries that do not impose the death penalty for drug trafficking offences? On my final point, Madam, part of the community effort in bolstering our criminal justice system is ensuring that the public support for law enforcement that I mentioned at the start of my speech is not eroded. In this regard, all of us have a part to play. First, we must make sure that we do not make any allegations about law enforcement without being absolutely sure of the factual basis of these allegations. It is incumbent on the authorities as well to swiftly crush even rumours of any impropriety if they are untrue.”
“In this regard, in order for us to keep the likelihood of reoffending low, we need to make sure that the community plays its part in conjunction with Government programmes and importantly, after Government programmes have completed. Some community initiatives include the Singapore After-Care Association's befriending programme and the HCSA Highpoint Halfway House. I would like to urge MHA to continue to provide support to these and other ground-up programmes, including with grants and funding, so as to empower the community to play its role in rehabilitation and to help to prevent re-offending. On a related note, I would like to ask the Minister what other efforts has MHA made to look at the criminal justice system, from a holistic perspective, to prevent individuals from offending or re-offending. Separately, and based on my experience as a volunteer probono lawyer, I have noticed that there are many drug offence-related re-offenders. This appears to be corroborated by a 2018 paper by Stephanie Chok at the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy on drug offenders in Singapore that the recidivism rates for drug offenders has been consistently higher than overall recidivism rates. Furthermore, the figures quoted by Parliamentary Secretary Eric Chua yesterday with regard to the noticeable rise in the number of youth drug abusers from 2016 to 2019 are troubling. I have two questions as regards preventing drug offences in the first place and reducing the likelihood of re-offending. My first question is with regard to MHA and CNB's collaboration with the community in the fight against drugs. An example is a partnership between PERSES, the Sepaktakraw Federation of Singapore, and the Dadah Itu Haram campaign.”
“Madam, it has been mentioned very often in this House and it is true that our justice system and law enforcement agencies enjoy a high level of public confidence. In fact, the Institute of Policy Studies' 2020 instalment of the World Values Survey found that our Courts and the Singapore Police Force enjoyed admirably higher levels of confidence, compared to our Government and Parliament. On a related note, the low level of crime in Singapore is a key indicator of the success that law enforcement has achieved. I will be speaking on the role of the community in building a holistic criminal justice system. Madam, our recidivism rates, as mentioned by Mr Murali before this, are amongst the lowest in the world. The two-year rate for the 2019 release cohort is 20%. However, as has been pointed out in this House before, the five-year recidivism rate is double that. This warrants some pondering as to why the rate of reoffending goes up steeply after the first two years of being released. I know that, as had been debated in Parliament last year when the Singapore Prisons Act was amended, there are significant Government programmes for ex-offenders immediately before and immediately after release. These include the Employment Preparation Scheme and a community-based programme. Most of these appear to taper off at around the two-year point, including the Mandatory Aftercare Scheme. I will, therefore, venture to deduce that the reason or at least one of the reasons, why the recidivism rate goes up after the two-year mark is precisely because Government programmes are tapering off.”
“I am happy to support what he has said and also to inform him that for the Security Association Singapore, we have received funding from Enterprise Singapore to go beyond just creating guidelines but to create an outcome-based tender generator and repository that will help buyers create outcome-based tenders. This will first be implemented for the security industry but we will very soon then make it available for other industries as well. To conclude, Sir, I support this Budget and all it will do to help our businesses and workers. But despite our best efforts, some may still fall through the cracks. I have sought to identify some of these areas and have made suggestions as to what we could do. Together with the cooperation of the tripartite partners, I have no doubt that we will not only chart a new way forward together but that we will also leave no one behind. Thank you, Mr Speaker, Sir.”
“[Mr Speaker in the Chair] As regards the extension of the PWM to in-house cleaners, security officers, landscape workers, administrators and drivers, I would like to urge the tripartite partners to adopt a unitary PWM for the same professions, regardless of whether these workers are employed in-house or if they are outsourced workers. This is because the PWM prescribes not only wage increases but also a skills and progression path. In-house and outsourced workers in these sectors do identical work and differentiated wage ladders based on who their employers are, in my view, does not make sense. On a related note, the current PWM sectors tend to have a fairly large number of ad hoc or part-time workers who choose to be ad hoc workers. In fact, many of them work every day, often with the same employer but do not take up full employment. This would appear to be antithetical to the PWM, which provides a career progression path with concomitant skills upgrading. In this regard, efforts should be made to encourage workers in these sectors to be employed full-time, instead of doing jobs on an ad hoc basis. Finally, I would like to propose that SSG consider putting in place a system to recognise apprenticeships alongside Workforce Skills Qualifications (WSQ) framework, because not all skills can be imparted through a classroom setting. Some skills and professions, like that of gaffers, artists, technical crew, woodworkers and hawkers are best acquired through a period of apprenticeship. Sir, before I end, I would just like to respond to a point that Member Mr Fahmi Aliman brought up, where he suggested that TACs be funded to employ consultants to develop outcome-based contracting guidelines.”
“Madam, the current Progressive Wage Models (PWMs) have been very successful in raising wages and I thank the Tripartite Committee on Low-Wage Workers for their recommendations, as well as MOM and the tripartite partners for their hard work and commitment. However, prices in the PWM outsourced sectors continue to lag wages, as Minister Wong noted in his Budget speech and the Progressive Wage Credit Scheme (PWCS) has been introduced to support businesses in the short term. But the PWCS may operate ultimately as a crutch, in which service providers use it as leverage to bid lower in upcoming tenders. The net effect is that these companies will find themselves in a similar position when the PWCS tapers off: that is, providing services at a rate that is unsustainable vis-à-vis the PWM wage increases. Furthermore, in order for companies in these sectors to meaningfully transform, including implementing work-life harmony schemes and adopting technology, they will need to earn enough to afford these measures. If prices continue to lag wages, SMEs will invariably forego transformation initiatives for day-to-day operational needs. In this connection, I would like to ask how the Competition Act applies to the PWM outsourced sectors, given that in the outsourced services sectors, fixing wages is essentially fixing the cost of supply. On a related note, will the Government consider working with the tripartite partners to set out reasonable prices that service buyers can expect to pay for each of the PWM outsourced sectors, derived from objective costs, for example, insurance and costs of replacements, so that prices can keep in tandem with wage increases.”
“Another group that may be left out in this drive to improve working conditions and work-life harmony are workers in outsourced services. These are sectors where workers do not work at their employer's premises, but at third party sites that their employers are contracted to supply manpower. As such, these employers do not have much control over their employees' physical working conditions. Working conditions and how these outsourced workers are treated are dictated by the service contracts between their employers and the service buyers, not the employment contracts. Outsourced workers are not even parties to these contracts and have no say in how they will be treated at their workplaces. Pursuant to the service agreements, they often face the threat of summary immediate removal from their workplaces or discrimination. And they have no recourse nor protections under the law. This issue must be addressed urgently as it affects a large proportion of our outsourced lower-wage workers. To address this, I call on the MOM to ensure that the upcoming legislation enshrining the TAFEP guidelines includes obligations on buyers of outsourced services, in that, service agreements must not contain clauses that result in unfair or discriminatory working conditions for outsourced workers. This is similar to the Workplace Safety and Health Act, which imposes obligations on building owners and managing agents. If we fail to do this, Madam, we are leaving the employment conditions of almost 100,000 outsourced workers to be subject to the whims and fancies of service buyers and managing agents without recourse.”
“If we cater one and a half hours for her to wash up, have her breakfast and commute to work, it means she has to wake up at 6.30 am. She ends her shift at 8.00 pm. By the time she gets home, it is 9.00 pm. If she has young children, she has barely an hour or less of time with them before they go to sleep. After she has her dinner, spent time with her family and done some chores, she goes to bed at 12.00 am. If she needs more time for these things, she sleeps later. This routine then continues, Madam, for the next six days before she has one day off and this day off may well be a weekday. So, Madam, amidst all this hullaballoo about work-life harmony, where is the work-life harmony for this security officer? Where is the work-life harmony for the 50,000 security officers who live this life right now? In fact, more than 50,000 if we consider ad hoc workers and many of them, Madam, older workers. So, the private sector will take some convincing to move away from 12-hour shifts because it involves costs. In this regard, I would like to ask the Government, as one of the largest buyers of security services, to take the lead by changing the working hours for security officer in all Government tenders to eight to 10-hour shifts. This will have a knock-on effect on the shift durations for security officers in the private sector. Achieving work-life harmony for our lower-wage workers means challenging and changing their working conditions. The chief issue in working conditions for security officers is that of unreasonable working hours. I plead, Madam, that as we take steps towards achieving better work-life harmony generally, that our security officers, low-wage workers and older workers are not left behind.”
“Separately, I call on the Action for Alliance for Work-Life Harmony and TAFEP to consider how to make sure that even as we adopt work-life harmony principles as norms at our workplaces, we do not at the same time unwittingly discourage elite performers and dedicated workers from putting in hard work and effort, and rising above the rest nor should we allow a culture of complacency and adversity to work to foster, because Singapore cannot afford it. I will now move on, Madam, to my next points on lower-wage workers, before which I declare my interest as President of the Security Association Singapore. The narrative on work-life harmony is weighted towards flexible work arrangements. This is more suited to office workers and those whose work can be done remotely. We need to consider the work-life harmony of employees who are in jobs that require them to be at their workplace, many of whom are essential workers like nurses, or in lower paying jobs like bus captains, cleaners and security officers. In particular, Madam, I would like to raise the issue of the unearthly working hours of security officers, who generally work 12 hours a day, six days a week. I raised this last year, but I feel compelled to raise it again this year. Security agencies, who are the employers of security officer, can only do so much to change the norm of 12-hour work shifts, because as an outsourced service, supply follows demand. Hence, if a buyer stipulates 12-hour work shifts, that is all that an agency can bid for. Most security contracts in both the private and public sector are based on 12-hour shifts. We need to seriously think about whether this pattern of work is reasonable. Put ourselves in an officer's shoes. Her shift starts at 8.00 am.”
“As regards to elite performers, we must make special effort to identify, nurture and promote them. They pull their organisations forward; in the private sector, they drive profit and growth, attract and keep clients, and they help to create more jobs. They include business leaders, entrepreneurs, admin service officers in the Government, senior counsels. They include Razer CEO Tan Min-Liang, Singapore's youngest self-made billionaire, who recounted at a Singapore Management University commencement ceremony that he was spurred on by his parents who told him that he needed to just go get what he wanted out of life through hard work, attention to detail and responsibility. They include Carousell CEO Quek Siu Rui who has said that he had not taken a holiday in years due to his obsession with his work and with doing things well and good. For a country that has nothing but people as our resources, we need these captains of performance to continue to be motivated, to continue to push the boundaries and ultimately to expect, see and feel the rewards of their hard work. And while we raise awareness about the importance of balance and mental health, an extremely critical endeavour, we should not forget to concomitantly celebrate our elite performers, to fortify them and to recognise them. This is because their successes are the successes of their organisations and ultimately, of Singapore. While striving for work-life harmony, we should not lose our culture of meritocracy and our system of meritorious rewards. In this regard, I am happy to hear Minister Wong’s announcement of the new Singapore Global Executive Programme and I trust that our elite performers will be identified to be involved in it.”
“But there were some who questioned why he had taken only a few weeks and not the full 20 weeks he was entitled to; and others yet who criticised him when he said he would still be taking meetings while he was on leave and keeping up with the company's business. It is almost as if the responsibility and dedication to his work was being vilified. Now to be clear, I am not saying that everyone should strive to be an elite performer. A recent article on Rice Media titled "Everyone's Progressing, but I Lack Ambition. Is That So Wrong?", carried a quote as follows: "Just because I'm not ambitious doesn't mean I'm lazy or lagging behind. I don't need a big house, for example. I don't need to travel the world too. If I'm earning enough and happy, it's my choice". Madam, I agree with this and indeed, it is everyone's right to make choices about how they want to live their lives and how they want to structure their relationship with their jobs. And this is equally so for elite performers and dedicated workers. But the difference may be felt ultimately in promotions and increments, and employees who decide to enjoy the fullness of their benefits should temper their expectations. This is not because they are being punished – it is because it is fair, just and equitable to reward dedicated workers and to reward elite performers. The hard truth is that those who do more, especially if it exceeds expectations or contractual obligations, will get more. And yes, this will inevitably spark others who also want to get ahead to go the extra mile. What is important is for employers to put in place mechanisms to prevent their elite employers and dedicated workers from burning out or suffering from mental health issues arising from work. But employers and peers should never hold them back.”
“There are also workers who upend and buck the trend of work-life harmony, who are willing to forgo their benefits and their rights. They are ambitious, driven and committed to achieve and surpass their organisation’s goals. They want to do more because they want more. They are hungry and their professional goals have become their personal goals. I refer to these people, borrowing a phrase from professional sports, as “elite performers”. Both these types of workers go beyond their contractual obligations and they do so not because they are asked to or because they are pressured to. They do it out of a sense of responsibility and commitment to their job roles. They still feel that they have work-life harmony, just perhaps a different form, because work-life harmony means different things to different people. As we move towards balanced workplaces, we need to make sure that, inadvertently, these dedicated workers and elite performers are not discouraged from wanting to be the best and, if they wish to forgo their rights and benefits, we should not judge them, dissuade them or, even worse, ridicule them. Importantly, we must not allow a culture to develop that is against hard work and hard workers. A case in point is the varied reception that Twitter's new CEO Parag Agrawal received when he announced that he would be taking "a few weeks of paternal leave" after the birth of his second child. Twitter offers its employees up to 20 weeks of paternal leave. Many applauded him, seeing his move as helping to normalise the taking of paternal leave.”
“Madam, I fully support these initiatives that help employers adopt good and progressive employment practices. It is, however, easier for larger corporations and those with deeper pockets to put in place work-life harmony initiatives. SMEs may need to be more creative since – and this is something that Minister Tan See Leng mentioned earlier – they have less resources and could do with experts assisting them to design and implement such measures. In this regard, I would like to suggest that Enterprise Singapore’s Enterprise Development Grant include work life harmony as a specific fundable area, so that SMEs can avail of the grant to help them formulate work-life harmony programmes for their employees. Notwithstanding my support of these initiatives, I have some reservations on how we are approaching work-life harmony and this has to do with, first, how we can continue to encourage high performance and, second, how it applies to lower-wage workers. I read a recent survey by recruitment agency Randstad Singapore that showed that an equal number of respondents ranked “work-life balance” and “attractive salary and benefits” as the most important employee value proposition they looked for in an employer. In other words, employees’ expectations are to find a workplace that offers both work-life balance and an attractive salary and benefits. This is, of course, aspirational and, on the face of it, it is a good aspiration. However, there will always be workers who wish to do more, to go the extra mile, who take additional pride in their work and desire to do a good job. Sometimes, this may take them beyond their working hours. I refer to these people, Madam, as “dedicated workers”.”
“Mdm Deputy Speaker, I thank the hon Finance Minister for a very well-thought through Budget 2022, which balances dealing with immediate needs and preparing for future challenges and opportunities. Several parts of the Budget deal with developing our manpower resources to ensure we remain competitive, as well as how we can uplift our lower-wage workers. My speech will centre on two key themes: first, ensuring that our workforce remains motivated and enterprising, and making sure we level up the working conditions of and opportunities for our lower-wage workers. There has been an inexorable global drive by employees to seek work-life harmony. This has dominated the headlines recently. Employees, especially new job entrants and younger workers, are drawn to workplaces that offer flexible work arrangements, like work-from-home and compressed work weeks, and that can guarantee freedom from work considerations outside of contracted working hours. It has even been suggested in this House that we consider implementing a four-day work week and the right to disconnect. This move to find workplaces that are more accommodative of workers’ personal pursuits and aspirations has been called the “Great Resignation” or the “Great Re-alignment”. A 2021 talent trends report by Michael Page indicated that 56% of Singapore workers see themselves searching for new jobs post-pandemic. Although the statistics bear out that this may not have happened yet, it appears that the trends underlying the Great Re-alignment are likely to become the new norm. To give effect to such aspirations, the Government has, amongst other things, introduced the Tripartite Advisory for Work-Life Harmony and instituted an Alliance for Action for Work-Life Harmony.”
“In this regard, I trust that all parties will allow the legal process to run its course, from the PP’s consideration of whether an offence is disclosed, to, if it turns out as such, the deliberation and ultimate decision by the Court. Parties, whether represented in this House or otherwise, should not cast aspersions on the Office of the Public Prosecutor and on the Courts, especially if the ultimate outcome is not one they expected or had hoped for. While this matter involves members of political parties, Sir, I do not see the recommendations as political machinations. As is evident, the COP or the Government could not possibly have been aware of the facts underlying the Second Motion until they were disclosed in the COP proceedings. I see these Motions and any Court proceedings that may follow as an exercise to protect the public interest and the integrity and the standing of this House, and as a reminder that Parliament and Parliamentarians must deal in the currency of truth and that a failure to do so must have consequences. But equally, where there is no wrongdoing, an accused person must have a fair chance to vindicate himself. Not only must it be a fair chance, but it must also be seen to be a fair chance. Politics is politics, Sir, but the facts are the facts, and the law is the law. In the circumstances, my view is that the best forum to determine the facts in these matters and to apply it to the law, is the Courts.”