Thomas Thomas
Singapore
“Can I ask the Minister whether he can consider it a competition when commuters do not have a choice, whether they are being served by SBS or TIBS? They have to live with whichever public transport company runs the route along where they live or want to use?”
“Would the Minister consider that Singapore being very small and if there is one company sharing resources, just like the banks are being encouraged to merge and share resources and skills, we will have an even better public transport system?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I just want the Minister to clarify, because I do not understand. If it is managed competition with two, why can it not be managed competition with one? Since we always say that we are short of players, we have a concentration of players to give even better services.”
“One is whether Government will recruit; two is how do we prevent wages for lower income dropping too low such that they cannot maintain their living standards? And the third question is this.”
“The bulk of TIF is invested with established VCs. Several were able to raise more than their targeted fund sizes, though some of the first time early-stage funds (which are meant to help develop local VC expertise) are seeing a slow-down in fund raising and deal flows.”
“Sir, I am pleased to say that most of the points that I had wanted to bring up have already been addressed by the Minister. However, I would just like to ask what are the acceptable international standards for noise levels, in decibels, from expressways, and what is the general noise level from our expressways? 1.45 pm”
The complete record
Every one of 136 lines we hold for Thomas Thomas, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 3 of 3.
“Sir, we have a significant number of foreign workers and they make a significant contribution to our economy. Moreover, being a nation of migrants, our forefathers, at one time or other, were foreign workers. Because of this, I completely agree with the sentiments that the Minister expressed on Saturday regarding treatment and welfare provisions for foreign workers. Because of that, I just have got two points that I want to bring up today. One is that the way many foreign workers come to Singapore is through employment agents and many of these employment agents profit from workers who are desperately trying to get out of the poverty trap in their home countries. We say that labour should not be treated as a commodity but the way the whole system works where these people pay the agents for a chance to work here, it is more than a commodity. These agents collect the money, many on false promises, and sometimes, they are brought in here illegally. To maximise profits, some of these agents work with employers to change them more frequently. In all these cases, workers end up the losers. I would like to ask the Ministry of Manpower to review the way that they bring these workers in. I know we have modified some schemes but can we also look into the possibility of a Government agency being the sole authority to bring in these foreign workers and cut off many of these unscrupulous employment agents. The other point is that while we are bringing in foreign workers cheaply, we also have problems, which many of my fellow Members have raised, on older workers finding it very difficult to get jobs. Most of the time, the older workers are the first to be retrenched. Foreign workers are mostly cheaper.”
“So we should promote the flexible wage system and now, base-up wage system, so that we do not have to have the painful CPF cut, which actually affects people at the lower level of income more painfully than people at the top. These are people who need CPF savings most. 2.30 pm Thirdly, I suggest that we lift the income ceiling of $6,000 for CPF contribution. Fourthly, increase their income through education and training. If we can use CPF for investments in the stock market, we should also allow people to use CPF for investments in increasing human capital. Therefore, they can use it for training and educational purposes. We heard from the Ministry of Trade and Industry that they want consumers to have choice. Give workers choice. Give workers some money into their CPF accounts and let them decide which training courses they want to take which are useful for them. Fifthly, allow the employers to have some tax incentive benefits to contribute to the SRS which the Minister for Finance has announced. The SRS could be a supplementary income for old age, and let employers contribute. Finally, tax allowance for savings in excess of CPF. The most they get is for CPF allowance and people who save in insurance do not get any advantage. Can the Minister look for supplementary provision retirement which could be through employers and companies like insurance companies, banks and cooperative societies? Therefore, in that way, they will have CPF plus private means to give them income for old age.”
“Sir, the main social security safety net for Singaporeans is the Central Provident Fund. It provides for our old age, medical, education of children, home ownership, investments. And the question asked, is CPF really adequate to meet all these needs? Apparently, going by newspaper reports, it may not be adequate because a large amount of CPF contributions has been used by workers for home ownership. While it is right, I support the use of CPF for home ownership but, unfortunately, the prices of houses are going up faster than the wage rises, and more of the CPF is being used up. The second thing is that there is an income ceiling of $6,000 on CPF contributions and this has not been raised since 1985. Moreover, the liberalisation in investments of CPF holdings has meant quite a number of people have lost money on the stock market. I want to suggest some points to ensure that we have enough money needs to carry through in CPF and other means to our old age. First, I agree completely with Mr Charles Chong that we should restore the CPF cut as soon as possible. We do not have to wait for five years. The Government did a good example by not waiting till next year but restoring it this year. Keep up the good work and do even much faster. The second thing is that we should never ever use CPF as a tool for cost reduction. In the 1985 recession, CPF was used and the Government said that it was very painful. The reason the CPF was used was because the wage system was inflexible. So a flexible wage system was promoted. In 1998, CPF was again cut because many firms had not introduced a flexible wage system, especially in the private sector. In the private sector, for categories of executives and managerial people, practically no flexible wage system exists.”
“It will help our image and increase the social consciousness of our business. We do not have blatant and unfair work practices in this country, but without ratifying it, it creates a kind of impression in the international community. Next, I hope that the Trade Unions Act will be amended to allow trade unions to represent more categories of workers. I mentioned this in the debate on the amendments to the Trade Unions Act. I also hope the Act will allow unions to buy shares of companies where they have members. Some of these companies may not be trustee stock companies. Some of them may be listed in foreign stock markets. This will mean allowing unions to buy shares of foreign companies and I think this will also help to bring about a link between employers and workers. Finally, I think we cannot succeed without the wholehearted support of the business leaders at the top of our business community. And I hope the political leadership will do more to sell the benefits of tripartism.”
“Retrenchment exercises are done without regard to the human factors and its impact on workers and their families. Union leaders are being picked on, just to name a few. It is unnecessary to have these problems. While unions put people first, yet union leaders know that without commercial success we cannot promote the well-being of people. Businesses also must realise that they can do better if they can motivate the people who work for them. Fear of losing one's job is not an effective long-term motivational tool. The best tool to motivate people is to show genuine care and concern. Then business decisions will have to be more than just economic decisions. It has to take into account people factors and be adjusted accordingly. I have a few suggestions. The Manpower 21 has made some very good points on strengthening relations and promoting good human resource practices. I would like to ask the Minister to give top priority to its implementation. The key players in industrial relations are union leaders and HR practitioners. We need to upgrade their level of professionalism. They have to conduct industrial relations with openness, honesty and, of course, integrity. While unions spend a lot of resources in training and developing union leaders, the quality of our HR professionals varies very widely. I suggest the Ministry work closely with the Singapore Human Resource Institute to train and maybe even certify HR practitioners to ensure a higher level of professionalism. Next, the Government, as the biggest employer, can set the example. It will have to involve, consult and recognise union leaders. I also hope that the Government will ratify the core ILO conventions as in the Declaration of Fundamental Principles and Rights of Workers as soon as possible.”
“Sir, during the last recession, our unions and workers were praised for taking a cooperative posture in contributing to cost cutting measures to revive the economy. Looking ahead, the challenges ahead are going to be even more difficult. The twin forces of globalisation and technological changes are creating changes and uncertainties at an incredible speed. We need to strengthen tripartism to better manage the uncertainties of the future and to make all the stakeholders in Singapore winners. Tripartism can only work well if there is strong bipartite relations at the lowest working level in our factories, offices and workshops between managers, supervisors, workers and trade union leaders. Industrial relations is like friendship between people. Going through a crisis can result in two possible outcomes. Firstly, the shared experience could result in better bonding and better relations. This in turn can make it easier to work together and overcome future difficulties. The other possibility is that friendship suffers when one party feels taken advantage of by the other. We all know of individuals who are nice to us when they need us, and ignore us or even be unkind to us when they do not need us. If good relations suffer, we know it is very difficult to rebuild them. Singapore cannot afford to have confrontational industrial relations. Relations at the top level between the Singapore National Employers' Federation, the Ministry of Manpower and NTUC are generally good, but bipartite relations at the workplace generally need more improvement. There is a gap. I hear of cases where employers are being unreasonable or taking the union for granted. For example, they are asking workers to take pay cuts even when the company is doing well.”
“Therefore, in this context, Sir, I like to ask the Minister that while encouraging investments overseas, his Ministry should also advise Singapore companies and Singaporeans to be aware of social issues and sensitivities like labour rights, human rights and environmental issues. This is especially needed when operating in countries with repressive regimes in power. It is better that we be proactive in this area before someone does something that damages Singapore's good name.”
“Sir, I support efforts to promote our external economic wing by encouraging companies and Singaporeans to invest overseas. All Singaporeans are representatives of our country when we are abroad. We are all ambassadors of Singapore. Therefore, how Singapore companies manage and how Singapore managers and workers conduct themselves will affect the impression ordinary people of the host country will have of Singapore. It is therefore in our national interest for people in countries receiving our investments to have a positive impression of Singapore. To cultivate this positive impression, we need to look beyond sheer profits for our companies. Local people who work in Singapore companies and with Singapore managers are in the best position to act as a conduit for us. There are many examples of countries with poor record. The United States has a terrible record of human rights in Latin America which is still being repaired. There are also records of some East Asian countries with poor record of human and labour relations in some of the South East Asian countries. Therefore, Singapore companies and Singapore managers will have to realise that it is not just profits that make for successful business. Beyond maximising shareholder value and pursuing economic efficiency, companies will need the human face and human values, ie, the need to sustain families, treat men and women equally, look after the environment, to respect natural justice, to give workers dignity at the workplace, respect the rights of workers to form trade unions and to conduct collective bargaining and to comply with the laws of the land of the host country, and the list can go on.”
“We should also set in place the basis of those changes, what is it linked to, and how it will go up. In that way, nobody will feel disadvantaged in moving to a co-payment scheme which is supposed to benefit everyone.”
“Sir, I want to thank the Member for Cheng San GRC for explaining the background, as it makes my presentation more easier. I want to say that the civil service medical benefit is one of the prime selling points for civil servants all the while. In 1994, the civil service actually introduced changes, and these changes were what Mr Yeo had touched upon. One of the key components of the civil service change was the aspect of co-payment in medical benefits. We also know that the private sector is looking to the civil service and the public sector to set the tone, and sees the Government as a role model for staff and welfare benefits. At the same time, we are encouraging the private sector to get on to this co-payment scheme and yet it is not picking up. One of the reasons why it is not picking up is because the civil service had introduced this scheme in 1994 and up to now had made no revision. People see it as a stagnation of benefits when pay and wages go up, cost of medical benefit goes up. But when the two aspects of it had not changed, it looks as if the scheme has gone down. I would like to ask the Government to review these quantums regularly, and now is the time for change. Changes can be in two aspects. One is the 1% which goes into the Medisave account under the MSO scheme, and the cap of $7,000 salary a month, which is equivalent to $350 a year. The other one is a subsidy for outpatient medical treatment for an employee's family which is placed at a maximum of $350. While I ask the civil service and the Prime Minister to look at the review, I also want to say that we should do revisions periodically. It is very difficult to get the private sector to accept change when there are no changes. We should not only have changes periodically.”
“Developing human capital had given us the competitive edge. I fully support what has been done in the schools and tertiary institutions. I recognise that a lot is being done for those in employment and out of a job. Many workers are anxious and very concerned with the new employment relationship and uncertainties it carries with it. We have to help them. Even more can be done for the people who have contributed to Singapore's success - the workers and their families. 4.32 pm”
“As more and more jobs are being outsourced, more workers are being employed on a contract for service, they are employed as part-timers on fixed term contracts and other atypical work arrangements. Workers without CPF accounts do not benefit from CPF top-ups. And most of the time, they are the ones who need them most. The Government should help workers to look after themselves better and give support to the unions to help these workers. On a previous occasion, I had asked the Minister for Manpower to include workers in atypical employment relationship under the definition of "workman" in the Trade Unions Act. And in this way, trade unions can also represent this group of workers. Mr Speaker, Sir, there is a Chinese saying about giving a man a fish or teaching him to catch fish. Similarly, the advantages of having skills are overwhelming. It is better than charity. Our workers do not want charity. They want dignity and self pride that comes from having a stable, good paying job. The State will have to step in where employers will not do enough. The arguments for giving all citizens part of the budget surplus to educate and train are many. My union colleagues had suggested a "Skillsave" account to be part of CPF to be used for training as the worker finds it in his or her best interest. It would have been an appropriate gesture of recognition if the Government accepted this suggestion and transferred some of these budget surpluses into this account. I strongly urge the Government to consider this proposal seriously. It will not cost very much. Giving every worker $500 for training will only cost the Government less than $800 million, compared to the billions in our surplus. Sir, Singapore's greatest asset is our people.”
“I know of the $25 million that would be spent to make our workers more IT savvy. I know there are incentives given to employers for the training of the workforce. Even when employers train, they are for firm specific functional training. It is most useful if workers could continue with the same employer, or another employer, in the same industry. For workers to move on to better jobs, they also need developmental training. One of the lessons of the last recession is that workers cannot just depend on employers to provide job security. The whole employment relationship has changed. To illustrate my point, I would like to quote the Business Environment Risk Intelligence (BERI) who said in their 1996 Report: "The general expectation before the 1990s was that hard work and respect for the company would result in job security and progress within the organisation. Ratings are being affected by a radical change in this viewpoint. Top executives seem to be communicating the principle that 'the company is offering no loyalty to employees, and employees are foolish to offer it to the company'." No one can look after the Singapore worker better than the worker himself or herself. The core workforce of our companies is being reduced through out-sourcing and restructuring. And of the non-core workforce, there are two types. One is highly skilled, mobile and is able to look after himself. At the other end, the worker is not skilled enough or he is at risk of losing his or her present job, and if he loses it, he has difficulty in getting another job and even if he gets it, the pay may not be as high as his present job. By the Minister's own estimate, they number some 834,000, or 42%, of our workforce. A good many of them do not have CPF accounts.”
“Last year, when CPF was cut by 10 percentage points and unions agreed to wage cuts to maintain the competitiveness of the economy, the Government also gave a package of reliefs to help citizens cope with the reduction in income. When the economy suffers, it is the working people that feel the pain first. Any reduction in demand for goods and services means a reduction in overtime pay and reduction less take-home pay at the very least, and loss of jobs at the other extreme. The restoration of wage cuts has not fully happened in the private sector, although the public sector had made full restoration. CPF restoration is expected to take some years. The National Wages Council has not come out with a recommendation this year. Workers are patient to wait for the better performance of the economy, as well as for Singapore's competitive position to improve before going for substantive pay rises. The Minister should have also exercised the same patience in maintaining the personal income tax rebate at 10%, and also the rebates on HDB service and conservancy and rental charges. The $250 into the CPF accounts of every active account holder is a good gesture and has my full support. However, workers would have welcomed more assistance in helping the workforce overcome the sense of job insecurity. Business Times of 21st January this year, carried a report of a survey conducted by a firm of head-hunters that, although wages are expected to go up, workers are generally unhappy and are working longer hours. Mr Speaker, Sir, labour flexibility has to be balanced with job security through increasing employability. I thank the Government for the commitment to make manpower training a key priority. I know about the many schemes about worker training, such as SRP.”
“Then there were other new measures for strengthening family cohesion and for meeting retirement needs. The $250 into each worker's CPF account is a good gesture and is much appreciated. When I attend international trade union conferences and meetings, many of my union friends from overseas tell me that they actually envy we Singaporeans in the sense that we can get some money back from our Government surpluses by crediting into our CPF accounts and to the Edusave accounts of our children. In many countries, these are not possible. The taxes that their workers pay from their hard work is squandered into mega projects which boost egos of politicians but are not economically feasible, or to enrich some people, or it just disappears. In Singapore, we also have to remember that our workers are also unique. I cannot think of any other place in the world where workers will agree to a pay cut without social unrest. In November 1998, when the NTUC passed a resolution supporting wage cut at its Delegates' conference, it was done without much debate. Union leaders had taken the effort to explain the problem to the rank and file. The ground understood the situation and there was some trust. Our workers must probably be the only workforce in the world that talks about employers' problems and try to help them in real ways. It is reflected in the economic performance. In 1999, our unit labour cost went down by 10%, unit business cost of manufacturing went down by 12% and productivity rose by 5.8%. The action of workers and their unions must have contributed to the confidence for investors to invest in this country and for the economic turnaround.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I understand I am the last speaker on the row and during the break, quite a number of Members have expressed to me what their expectations of the last speaker are. I am not able to fulfill all their expectations, but I can fulfill their feelings and I will try to be brief. I would also be speaking on the feelings of a class of our population. Mr Speaker, Sir, I will start off by first expressing the feeling of relief this budget has given to most Singaporeans in the sense that it has moved away from the sombre tone of last year's budget, and this year's budget is more optimistic. We all like optimistic tones. This relief is even greater because the economy had performed better than expected. Instead of a budget deficit for the last financial year, we saw a surplus of $3.2 billion. Instead of a negative growth of 1.4%, we saw a positive growth of 5.4%. Our neighbours are also doing well. All these are good news. There were external and internal factors for this turnaround and the year ahead looks good. The Government deserves some credit for it, and I give it to them for the better than expected performance of the economy and for managing to get a surplus. Mr Speaker, Sir, one of the other factors for this turnaround had been the contributions and sacrifices of our workers. The Minister had acknowledged this group in his Budget speech. I thank him for doing that. The workers rallied behind the Government's call for austerity. I am glad that the Government has, in some way, recognised the contribution of the people sector by returning some of the surpluses to the people through $100 million into Medifund, $200 million into ElderCare Fund, $385 million into the CPF accounts of workers.”
“While I support step-down care and institutional care for the elderly, I ask that we do not neglect home care. Home care is also the desire of most of the elderly. They like to be near their children and grandchildren, and we should say that it is part of the value for the family to take care of them. Towards this end, I would like to ask the Minister what steps are going to be taken to promote home care so that more and more people will look after their elderly at home.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I support the Bill. How we treat the sick and old is a strong signal on how we recognise their contributions to the success of this nation. It is part of strengthening the software to look after the old and the sick. Today's old was yesterday's young who contributed to the success of Singapore. And today's young who is presently contributing to our success will be tomorrow's old. I do not wish to go through all the many things in the Bill because it has been covered by previous speakers. However, I have two concerns regarding elderly care. First, in promoting step-down care, the private sector would be playing a role. The private sector is primarily profit-motivated, and there is nothing wrong with that. But, Sir, the question we ask is: should the question of elderly care be subjected to too much of market forces? And as a follow up, is it not better to serve the needs of the elderly through the VWOs and cooperatives? The setting up of cooperatives would have social objectives and they could give the elderly care and those who need it better value for money. Moreover, the surpluses of cooperatives, which are run on commercial line, belong to members and will go back to the people who need it. The other point I want to make is about home care. While we promote institutional care, I think we should not neglect home care. The report of the Inter-Ministerial Committee on the Ageing Population had a whole chapter on enabling families to care for the elderly. It primarily says that the care of the elderly by the family is the best avenue as they also need to talk about physical need as well as the emotional and social needs. And it is also in keeping with our value of filial piety.”
“Sir, can I just clarify as well as seek clarification? When I talked about expanding the definition of workman, in the present Trade Unions Act, "workman" is somebody who enters or works under a service of contract or apprenticeship. That is all. But before the 1982 amendment, the definition was slightly wider. It talked about any workman who had entered or worked under a contract with an employer, whether the contract was a contract of service or a contract personally to execute any work. In other words, during those times, around 1982, most of the regular sort of employment relationship existed but before that, there were many people who were self-employed but actually worked for just one employer. I am trying to say that in downsizing and outsourcing, there are also many people who actually just work for one employer, and who are not in a position of bargaining and they sometimes need the collective power of the trade unions to ensure a bit of equity in the labour market. There are such categories of people. It could be the couriers and taxi drivers, and we also need to reach out to those groups of people. I ask the Minister to understand this position as well as to look at the law to bring these people in.”
“Another was that the New York State Attorney-General is trying to force Manhattan food stalls to pay minimum wage to delivery people employed from another company. There is even debate on whether health and safety standards for offices should apply to home offices. These cases, as illustrated, show that United States laws have not kept up with changes in the workplace. In Singapore too, there are many workers with a contract for service instead of a contract of service working for one employer. The work they do can be considered an integral part of the business and the employer is able to discipline, dismiss and give them incentives. In the United States, non-governmental organisations, with the support of trade unions, are emerging as champions for the cause of workers in atypical employment. The question I ask is: who in Singapore should represent this growing group of workers? Should they bring their problems to Court and let Judges decide? In that case, do we want to see an increase in litigation, or do we want to see NGOs agitating on their behalf? In view of all these, I would therefore like to ask the Minister to take some proactive steps to enable the trade union movement to cover this type of workers. By bringing them within our existing industrial relations system, it will reduce social tensions and enhance social cohesion. This would also ensure that our tripartite system, which has served us very well in the past, will stand the test of time and continue to serve in the best interests of workers, the employers and their unions.”
“I therefore support these moves that would strengthen the trade union movement and therefore also support the amendments in the Bill. However, my only complaint is that I wish there were more amendments, which reflect the changing employment patterns. In the past, a "normal" employment relationship involved a full-time job with a specific employer and usually had some long-term stability. We saw attempts in the past to promote company loyalty, a closer nexus between workers and employers, and even a shared common destiny. Therefore, this "normal" worker was also a normal union member or a normal potential union member, and he was a full-time employee whose employment relationship was not casual. Today, things have changed so much. It is recognised that atypical employment situations are increasingly becoming typical. Part-time work, short-term and casual employment, agency work, self-employment, work from home, contract work and, of course, unemployment, are all now more common. Down-sizing and structural shifts in sectoral and occupational distribution, changing technologies and increased use of IT have added to these changes. The net result is increased uncertainty and ambiguity for the worker. The contract of service, which is used in the Trade Unions Act, to define a worker is more and more being substituted in the workplace with contract for service, as employers seek to lower cost with less manpower, to save on CPF contributions, fringe benefits and other benefits. Allow me to illustrate this point. The New York Times of 16th February carried an article entitled "Who is the boss? Who is a worker?", reported some interesting cases. One was of temporary workers successfully suing and getting benefits of full-time workers.”
“Sir, this Bill updates the regulation of trade unions. I agree with the Minister that this Bill will make it easier for unions to operate. Unionists must therefore welcome the amendments as they reflect changing times and ensure the quality of the movement. Examples of changing times are the use of IT to maintain records and union register; reflecting the new investment climate of opportunities in the greater flexibility in the application of union funds, more leeway in the purchase of land and building; and also to make it easier for unions to change names or amalgamate, just as corporations do. This Bill will enable unions to respond more quickly to changes in their operating environment. I would also support the increase in fines, because it also reflects changing times, and it is just like keeping up with times. The quality of the movement would also improve the imposition of additional disqualifications on those who want to hold union office or become trustees. I do not intend specifically to go through the details of the Bill, because it was adequately covered by the previous two Members. Globalisation has increased the power of management relative to labour on a world scale. Management seems to have more options whilst labour has a smaller voice globally. Unless trade unions can remain an effective voice for the small man, frustration in the workplace can threaten social cohesion in the long run. Strong trade unions are therefore good for the country. In this context, I wish to thank the Minister for acknowledging the contribution of unions in the economic and social progress of Singapore, as well as saying that in the long run, he supports the growth of a responsible and strong trade union movement in Singapore.”
“Sir, I thank you for allowing me to seek clarifications from the Minister. Firstly, I support the Bill and since there is globalisation, crime has also globalised, I think this Bill is very useful. However, I just want to ask whether this Bill will be used in the case of trafficking in people, especially women and children. There is an increase in these crimes worldwide and will this Bill address that problem. And secondly, will this Bill be used even in cases where there are unscrupulous employment agents who, we know that happens in Singapore, also bring in foreign workers illegally on promises of employment here? Will these be classified as serious crimes and will this Bill be applicable?”
“This is what the Government was able to do because we have this monthly non-pensionable variable component, which we could bring down, and now we can bring up again. The NWC has endorsed it. How to do it is something which we have to study. There is an issue because if you do not do it properly, then although you call it a monthly variable component, it will be monthly but it may not be variable. So you need to have a clear understanding of how it will operate, what the formula will be, either based on the economy as a whole or based on the company and its performance, so that when it is necessary to revise it up or down, it is easy to do.”
“Rather than looking forward to future downturns in the economy, are we going to use CPF as a tool to reduce cost or will there be other tools as far as wages and salaries of workers are concerned? BG Lee Hsien Loong: CPF should only be an absolute last resort. If you are in a very desperate spot and the situation looks very grave, then it is a card which we can play, which nobody else can play. No other country has this possibility. We can do it but only if it is really a very serious situation and only if we make an exceptional effort to explain and justify and get people to understand why it is necessary. But it is not something which you want to use as a standard macro economic policy tool. What we really want to do is to build in flexibility into the wage system so that if there are ups and downs, it can be buffered by the wage system. After the 1985 recession, we built in the variable bonus and the flexible wages over the next 12 years. So this time when we had the recession, we were able to use that to absorb part of the reduction in cost and could make a smaller reduction in the employer's CPF contribution. The conclusion we have drawn from this experience operating the flexi-wage system is that it is very good to have the variable component. But there is a draw-back because the variable component works on an annual basis and most of it are annual bonuses. So by the time you adjust and cut, it may be eight or ten months later, and by that time either you may have hoped for the situation to have changed or the company may already have run into cash flow difficulties and gone under. So we really would like to develop a monthly variable component of the salary which will be adjustable more quickly and flexibly.”
“Contractors involved in the construction of the North-East MRT lines are reminded that because of their proximity to public thoroughfare, they need to take extra precautions when conducting lifting operations. This is also generally true for those contractors with projects nearby public places. Sir, my Ministry officials have worked with LTA on the measures that could be taken to prevent recurrence. These include the tightening of the system of checks to ensure that all lifting operations are conducted safely. A standardised permit-to-lift system is currently being studied and, if found feasible, will be introduced to these contractors. Under the system, all lifting operations can only be carried out after a written permit for the lift has been endorsed by the lifting supervisor. Before endorsing such permit, the supervisor is expected to check thoroughly the suitability of the crane for the lift, the ground and environmental conditions, the qualification of the operator, the rigging of the load and so on. These checks are to be done with the help of suitably qualified persons on site, such as the site engineer. Only after these checks have been made can the lifting operation commence. Sir, to ensure compliance with the safety requirements in lifting operations, the Ministry will continue to conduct special enforcement exercises targeted at premises which use cranes. Occupiers found flouting these safety requirements would face the issue of stop work orders and be charged in court.”
“Sinnakaruppan asked the Minister for Manpower what additional safety measures will be in place in construction sites to ensure that accidents such as the toppling of a crane at a North East Line MRT station worksite, do not recur. The Minister of State for Manpower (Encik Othman Bin Haron Eusofe) (for the Minister for Manpower): Mr Speaker, Sir, in September 1998, my Ministry introduced new regulations to enhance the safety of crane operations in Singapore. Under the new regulations, only operators registered with the Ministry are allowed to operate mobile cranes and tower cranes. The Factories (Operation of Cranes) Regulations prescribe safety rules that these operators must follow. Their registration would be suspended or cancelled if they are found not to have complied with these rules. The Regulations also require that all lifting operations using mobile or tower cranes be supervised by competent lifting supervisors who must have completed a course of training on lifting supervision. Other than these, the Regulations also specify that installation and dismantling of a mobile or a tower crane, or any repair affecting the structural integrity of such crane be carried out only by approved contractors. Crane operators who conscientiously follow the regulations will be able to avoid accidents involving their operations. As for the case mentioned by the Member for Kreta Ayer-Tanglin GRC, where a crane had toppled and fell onto a moving vehicle, investigation is still underway. My Ministry viewed this case seriously as such an accident could take disastrous proportions.”
“Sir, can I ask the Minister whether the Government has a view on Mr Akbar Khan's irrevocable request and authority scheme (IRAS)? BG Lee Hsien Loong: Mr Speaker, Sir, Mr Akbar Khan, in his press statement on 18th November, proposed an irrevocable request and authority scheme. This is in addition to his closed-end fund offer for which he has submitted proposed offer documents to the Registrar of Companies and Businesses (RCB). The RCB is reviewing the documents and has stated that it will take into account all information including SIAS' views in determining if it is in the public interest to register the documents. SIAS has been in contact with Mr Khan and has said that it is waiting for relevant information from him that will enable it to come to a responsible view. Mr Khan's IRAS offer does not require RCB's approval. However, the SES will require clear and legally binding understanding with KLSE on any migration schedule. The KLSE has yet to indicate its position on either the SES' proposal for a 12-month migration of CLOB shares or Mr Khan's proposal for a 15-month migration of shares after a further 12-month lock-up period. The lock-up period is 7 months for warrants and derived instruments, but 12 months for shares. The CDP will not be able to put the migration proposal to investors without an unequivocal and binding commitment from the KLSE. As and when the offers have been given official approval and accompanied by clear commitments from the KLSE, the CDP will be able to put them to CLOB investors. CLOB investors will have to study them carefully and calmly before deciding for themselves whether to take them up. They should consider all relevant factors, including their legal rights as owners of the CLOB shares. SAFETY MEASURES AT CONSTRUCTION SITES 3. Mr R.”
“Sir, can I ask the Deputy Prime Minister whether the Singapore Government has considered taking action at the World Trade Organisation? BG Lee Hsien Loong: Mr Speaker, Sir, the Singapore Government has taken advice on possible proceedings at the World Trade Organisation forum from leading legal counsel that specialises in WTO issues. The counsel has advised that the CLOB issue is within WTO's jurisdiction and Singapore has valid grounds for seeking redress at WTO on the matter. Malaysia's actions are inconsistent with its obligations under the WTO's General Agreement on Trade and Services (GATS). Under the GATS agreement, of which Malaysia is a signatory, countries are entitled to accept most favoured nation obligations that are mutually binding. The obligation is to accord all financial services and service suppliers of other WTO members treatment that is no less favourable than that given to similar service and service suppliers of other countries. There must not be discrimination between countries. Today, scrip-based trading of Malaysian securities continues freely on two foreign exchanges within the European Community - the London Stock Exchange and the Copenhagen Stock Exchange. The Malaysian Securities Commission has issued a statement specifically recognising both of these as exempt markets, and yet Malaysian legislation has forced the discontinuance of CLOB International and caused the securities traded on it to be frozen. And this is a denial of most favoured nation (MFN) status that Singapore is entitled to.”
“Sir, can I ask the Deputy Prime Minister to clarify what would be the status of the CDP's authorised nominee status after 31st December 1999? BG Lee Hsien Loong: Mr Speaker, Sir, the lawyers have also advised on what would happen if the CDP's authorised nominee status is not extended beyond the end of the year. Some CLOB investors are concerned that MCD will transfer the CLOB securities to the Malaysian Minister of Finance after 31st December for subsequent disposal by him. QC has advised that there is no basis in law for such a transfer to the Malaysian Minister of Finance. Indeed, the MCD has a statutory duty to transfer the CLOB securities into the beneficial owners' individual securities accounts under Malaysian laws. The SES wrote to MCD on 26th October to ask if it is their intention to maintain the status quo after 31st December by extending CDP's authorised nominee status. The SES is still waiting for MCD's response.”
“Sir, can I ask the Deputy Prime Minister to clarify the legal position of the CDP as well as the 172,000 CLOB investors? BG Lee Hsien Loong: Mr Speaker, Sir, the CDP has now obtained comprehensive legal advice, including that of Malaysian lawyers and a few Queen's Counsels. The legal advisers are unanimous in their view that CDP and CLOB investors have a strong position in law and their rights over CLOB shares are indisputable. The CDP had complied with Malaysian law. Specifically, the CDP-SCANS agreement which contains precise arrangements for CLOB securities to be transferred into individual accounts with the Malaysian Central Depository for trading on the KLSE is legally binding and is specifically enforceable in Malaysian courts.”
“In conclusion, I must emphasise that the role of the Government must be that of an enabler, for citizens to take more responsibilities for themselves and the State. Government must help institutions that can bring about active citizenship, and come out to be more tolerant of differing ideas and views. With this in place, the people of Singapore can thus be active citizens that can build upon our achievements. We must not deflect from the mission of giving our citizens a better life.”
“It is therefore not only important to restore to workers the CPF cut as quickly as possible according to the ability of the economy to afford it, but also to take steps to strengthen unions and reward workers. The best reward the Government can give to workers is to ensure that there is not only full employment but there are good paying jobs for which workers are able and willing to take on. Unions can be supported by making it easier for them to organise workers and form unions. Employers should not go against unions' organising efforts. If they are not prepared to support unions openly, they should at least remain neutral without working against unions. Our current laws need to be reviewed for unions to organise workers based on the new evolving employment relationships of the knowledge economy which sometimes are different from the old industrial age definitions. Tripartism has been a positive factor in getting us out of the recession. It is one of our most competitive advantage. It should not be devalued. It should be built on. Employers should be actively encouraged to promote bipartism at the enterprise level to reinforce tripartism at the national level. Cooperatives are commercial organisations formed by citizens to address both commercial and social needs. During the last economic crisis, they played an important role in stabilising prices and helping the lower income. As we promote local enterprises, cooperatives should also benefit from the many schemes in place for small and medium sized enterprises. They have added value to the life of Singaporeans and they must therefore be supported to do more.”
“People will have a sense of fulfilment in so far that they can contribute ideas, suggestions and even criticisms to make a difference. It is empowerment. It is taking greater responsibility for matters affecting them. Active citizenship has to be taught and understood by all to yield maximum benefit. If not applied and understood well, it could affect our social cohesion. It would be spending more time and energy talking and quarrelling rather than moving forward. We must realise that active citizenship goes beyond politics and we will therefore have to build up institutions that can contribute towards active citizenship. These institutions should be membership based, people focused organisations, trade unions, cooperatives, voluntary welfare organisations and self-help groups. They will build up strong institutions for civil society and strengthen democractic institutions. Trade unions and cooperatives can contribute immensely towards achieving this vision of active citizenship and building up heartware. Trade unions promote workplace democracy. The ordinary worker can influence outcomes through his union. The President in his Address has acknowledged the contribution of unions. I am also glad that the Ministry of Manpower lists strengthening partnership as one of its important strategies for Manpower 21. Partnership can only be strengthened if partners are effective to play their part. Both employers and Government have acknowledged the role workers and their unions have played in helping Singapore get out of the economic crisis. An important aspect of heartware is keeping faith and building trust.”
“I acknowledge that there is some form of consultation and involvement in Singapore through the Feedback Unit, grassroots organisations and the various committees formed like the Singapore 21, Manpower 21, IT 21 and so on. However, we must do more as there are many benefits from active citizenship. There is an educational value in active citizenship. Our citizens, by asking questions and getting answers from these questions as well as reacting to feedback, will learn more of the issues that affect them as citizens. By participating, the consent of citizens is gained together with their commitment for policies and actions that affect the country. We have to recognise that the abilities and outlooks of our citizens will differ. Some of us may not be academically bright. Some may be physically impaired. Others may not be interested in participating in political debate. Yet others may only want to work at grassroots level. Yet, they are all our citizens with rights and responsibilities. Leaders can also learn more about the feelings, concerns, aspirations and thinking of the people. By listening to citizens and taking their views seriously, the leadership will be harnessing the creativity and knowledge of all sectors of our population. Knowledge cannot be the monopoly of a few individuals. The collective contribution of many will result in better decisions. Another reason why I support active citizenship is that it allows for changes to take place in an orderly fashion. Drastic change is painful and can be avoided if change can be made gradually with the support of the people. Another important aspect of this participation is that it will result in improving the quality of lives.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I support the motion to thank the President for his Address to this House. Many of the points made in the President's Address are points which I, as a trade unionist, can identify with. Some of these points could even sound like issues which unionists raise with our employers. Examples of these are treating people as a valuable asset, developing and motivating them to reach their full potential, enabling them to contribute to their full potential, putting people first and take into account people issues when making decisions. As a unionist, I can only feel happy with the focus given to people in the President's Address. Two things that struck me most was a call for active citizenship and heartware. In the industrial relations language, active citizenship is participation and involvement. Heartware is emotional bonding by increasing commitment. For companies to be high performing enterprises, the involvement of all workers is necessary. The old divide between thinkers and doers is no longer relevant in the knowledge economy. All workers have to be thinkers. For Singapore as a nation to be a high performing economy, it is necessary to get the commitment and involvement of all citizens. Allow me to share some thoughts on this active citizenship and heartware. Active citizenship is more than a reaction to demands for a greater say in the matters of the State from some quarters of our society. A knowledge economy in the face of globalisation and increased commitment, coupled with technological and social changes, requires the active contribution of all players.”