Wan Soon Bee
Singapore
“I would like to thank the Minister of State for the answer, although I am not satisfied with what he has said because these are standard answers which have been given to us year after year. However, I still beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.”
“Sir, since 1992, selected old HDB flats have been undergoing upgrading through the Main Upgrading and the Interim Upgrading programmes. These programmes are highly popular with the residents since they have brought about new facilities and amenities in the precinct as well as an enhancement in the value of the flat in this resale market.”
“Hence, I would like to ask the Minister whether the foods introduced into the Singapore market are safe and for large-scale consumption, and whether tests have been carried out to ensure that these GM foods would not bring ill health or allergy or even trigger long-term side effects as a result of prolonged continuous consumption.”
“Sir, with the Government actively pursuing its policy to attract more foreign talents and workers, I would like to ask the Minister if there are any plans in place to accommodate this influx of foreigners. Will there be a surge in demand for housing that will distort the housing market?”
“Features which may have high aesthetic value but are hardly used when completed are really unnecessary. Such duplication and under usage is not cost effective. Besides they have a serious impact on the long term maintenance cost.”
“This has significant advantage over the options of downgrading to a smaller flat or queuing for a rental flat after selling off the existing flat or buying a studio apartment as all these three options require a re-location. Currently, reverse mortgages exist only for private properties but not for HDB flats.”
The complete record
Every one of 175 lines we hold for Wan Soon Bee, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 3 of 4.
“Sir, I would like to join the Member for Kebun Baru in urging the Minister to review the rates for public assistance. I think the rate was actually reviewed in 1985 based on the minimum household expenditure survey of 1984. But I hope that in reviewing the rates the Minister will not just base on the rate of inflation to review the rates, otherwise it will defeat the purpose because the rate currently is at $90 for a one-person household and $220 for a four-person household. I am sure you would agree with me that this amount of money is hardly enough for the recipients to keep their body and soul together. So I hope the Minister when reviewing the rates would take into consideration of progress over the last few years and the real need of the people in keeping their body and soul together.”
“It may take a little time but with some patience and if they are prepared to start working at the modest level, they should be able to find employment and apply the knowledge they have gained at the university. In some countries, standards of university admission may have been lowered to take in more students and in order to let them get through the university, standards may have been compromised. As a result, there is little confidence or no confidence and indeed no recognition of the degrees obtained by the students. I think we do not need to go to that state. We should maintain our high standards but allow as many students as possible to enter the university. Let me just conclude by stating that we should not compromise our standards. We must maintain our high standard of quality and excellence and at the same time we should endeavour to help our students who qualify a chance to enter the University. If necessary, alternative arrangements should be made or at least to give them a chance to get part-time degrees.”
“However, we should not let them enter our university at the expense of our students who are also able to qualify, although their educational performance may not be as good compared to them. However, there must a proper balance. And as we want to get our students to achieve their maximum potential, I think we should try and achieve a proper balance where these two objectives could be met. I hope the Minister can elaborate on this point. The other point that I would like to deal with is on the need to plan university graduates in accordance with manpower requirements. Here, I think what has been said is that there is a fear of unemployed graduates, the fear that we may produce too many graduates. I am not quite sure whether this is a real fear. In fact, the number of graduates which our economy can absorb will depend on our economic growth and also the attitude of our graduates. The point is: do we really need to be too conservative in our manpower projections? I think in the final analysis, the market place is the best judge of this. Moreover, if our graduates are prepared to start modestly, eg, one rung lower down the ladder and be prepared to make progress through the companies, I am sure with economic growth, the market will be able to absorb most of them. And this will indeed add quality to our workforce and help us in our drive to be more competitive. I think we should not compare ourselves with the experience elsewhere where there are cases of large numbers of unemployed graduates. If we maintain our high standards and keep our quality high, I am sure the graduates that the NUS produces will have a premium and this will be able to help them to adjust and to find jobs.”
“The capabilities of Singaporeans, nurtured by a high standard of education from the earliest stages, is evidenced by the success of Singaporeans both here and abroad. It would be a pity and a great waste to lose even a single one of them. Encik Othman bin Haron Eusofe (Geylang Serai): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, the various speakers, my PAP colleagues, who spoke earlier on, have already touched on the question of the minimum entry qualifications and the need for the criteria for admission to the NUS to be clearly stated. I do not want to belabour on the points which have been raised by them. However, I would just like to say, like them, I am concerned that many applicants who are able to meet the minimum entry qualifications have not been able to get admission. Let me also state here that I agree that we should maintain the high standards of the NUS which must be equivalent to the standards of reputable and well-established universities of quality in this world. So I am not asking for any relaxation or compromise in our admission criteria. Yet, I believe we should try to assist more of our students who either meet the minimum entry qualifications or even exceed them to gain admission. Let me just deal with two points. Firstly, the admission of foreign students. Let me say also that I agree that there is a need to get students from other learning environments and social, cultural and economic backgrounds who have performed well, who have high standards of education, to enter our university. Their presence will indeed raise the quality of learning in our univeristy. It will make for a richer learning environment, an interaction of ideas among students from various cultural, social, background.”
“This does not appear to be the case since the standard changes yearly according to the performance of students in the 'A' level examinations. The second question is whether the standard which we have purported to set is so unrealistically high that a large number of capable people are denied access to a tertiary education. An expansion of the intake of students at tertiary level does not necessarily imply a sacrifice in the standard of education that is at present available. There is no question of lowering entry requirements. Any expansion would involve admission of the many who meet the entry requirements by present standards and yet are rejected. This big group of students represent capable people with the potential to contribute to Singapore's economy. Testimony to this is the large number of students who go abroad each year and obtain recognized degrees from foreign universities. These people return to Singapore and are able to make valuable economic contributions. This clearly indicates that each year a large number of able people who can and will obtain a university degree are denied the opportunity to do so in Singapore. The seriousness of this is not so acute for those who have the funds to pursue a higher education abroad. But what about the large number who do not have the financial means to do so? These people are denied the chance to maximize their potential and this is not only a loss to them but, more importantly, a loss to the nation. Lastly, there is a real danger of a brain drain. Many who go abroad ultimately choose to remain there. This is a trend which should be avoided as far as possible and can easily be avoided by reducing the number of people who are forced to seek tertiary education abroad.”
“To increase our productivity, we must have a better educated workforce. With the rapid changes in technology nowadays, the labour force must be educated so that it is flexible enough to cope with technological advances. Higher education will provide our workforce with the basic mathematical, scientific and language skills that will enable them to continually adapt to new concepts and new technology. An uneducated workforce, on the other hand, will lead to inflexibility, inability to cope with change and ultimately economic stagnation. Finally, it has often been lamented that there is a lack of entrepreneurship in Singapore. This is not surprising when all our qualified people are having highly paid and secure jobs. Why should they take the risk of being entrepreneurs? An expansion in the number of tertiary educated people is a factor that will encourage entrepreneurial growth. In fact, if there is an excess of tertiary educated people, many of them would be forced to become entrepreneurs. Having said why opportunities for education must be available, the next issue is to what extent such opportunities should be available. There have been countless complaints in the past about the difficulty of entering NUS. This has culminated in the Report of the Parliamentary Estimates Committee which recommended a change in the admission policy of the NUS. At this juncture, there are two pertinent questions to ask. Of course, I am in full agreement with the Minister and the Ministry of Education and other Members of this House that a high standard must be maintained in our institutions of higher learning. But what is the standard set by NUS? And is there a fixed standard which the university has imposed and which it considers the proper one to maintain?”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, as a city striving for economic and cultural excellence, there are many reasons why it is important that our people are given as many opportunities as possible for maximizing their potential through education. Firstly, there is the need to satisfy our people's aspirations to obtain the highest education that they are capable of. The vision of Singapore as a City of Excellence by 1999 cannot be achieved unless our people are highly educated. Secondly, Singapore's continued economic development and growth will be greatly influenced by the education of its people. There is at present not only a shortage of skilled workers but also of qualified personnel and professionals. This had led to the high cost of employing professionals and qualified people. Clearly, it will be in our economic interest to lower the cost of professional and skilled labour and to decrease our dependence on foreign expertise. This can be done by increasing our pool of local professionals. In fact, currently we are putting a lot of emphasis in encouraging hi-tech companies to come and invest in Singapore. Such companies require more and more qualified people. And if our costs of these people are to be high and, in fact, in the last few years, wages of such people are even higher than those in UK, Japan and some of the European countries. If that is the case, there is no reason why investors from Japan, the US and European countries would want to come to Singapore. All of us know that the rate of growth of our indigenous labour force will also decrease as the population growth decreases. This implies that in order to maintain or increase our GDP, productivity must increase at a faster rate in order to compensate for the smaller increase of our labour force.”
“Sir, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.”
“But surely $90 a month for a single person household and a maximum of $220 a month for a four-person household is not enough to afford a subsistence standard of living by even the most conservative yardstick. Was it not only in August last year that the Ministry of Labour announced that $230 a month was the estimated minimum income a person needs to live at a subsistence level? I am not advocating that we should increase the public assistance relief to that level but any relief must enable its recipients to meet at least the basic living needs. We must not deprive the destitute, aged, disabled and chronic sick of whatever sense of human dignity they have left when we give them financial relief. True, we cannot be too generous but at least we can be charitable. Families on public assistance are really needy cases. Most public assistance recipients are no longer able to work due to old age, illness or disability, or other family members have to suffer much hardship. But they have in their own ways, big or small, contributed to Singapore's development and growth. Yes, they are poor but not by choice rather because of circumstances. They are our responsibility now and we have a moral obligation to see that they live out their lives in as dignified a manner as possible.”
“Mr Chairman, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head J be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead JE-03 of the Main Estimates. Sir, the public assistance scheme was introduced to provide financial relief to those who are destitute and without any means of support. It is financial aid given to those who are in financial distress due to illness, old age, physical or mental disability. Over the years, stringent qualifying criteria based on the means test have ensured that only the really deserving cases qualify for public assistance. This is to discourage those who are still able and capable to seek public assistance rather than other alternative means of financial support, like employment. The aged, disabled and chronic sick are the main recipients of public assistance. Public assistance, therefore, aims only to afford the recipients and their dependants a subsistence standard of living. The amount of relief under the public assistance scheme has been reviewed on five occasions since 1970. It was increased from $21 a month for a single person household up to $60 a month for a four-person household in 1970 to $90 a month and a maximum of $220 respectively in 1984. The Ministry must be commended for this periodic review of the rates. However, since 1984, there has been no revision. This is rather unfortunate as the cost of living has increased since 1984. If the Ministry is not already contemplating to review the current rates, I hope and I think it should do so now. We appreciate the fact that public assistance must remain only to provide its recipients with a subsistence standard of living.”
“Sir, in view of the reply of the Minister which in a way he realizes the seriousness of the aged population, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.”
“We should get them involved and be active in organizing their own activities and in fact they can even contribute to the community by taking a lead in the various activities that are being organized for the residents in the various constituencies. This is a problem which will surface in the future and I think it is time that we really looked into it very seriously to see how we can prepare ourselves to face these challenges of the future.”
“Such short respite care gives the family a chance to recharge themselves and give attention to other family members. Moreover, the provision of respite care, if in nursing homes, can free hospital beds and prevent frequent re- admissions to hospital. The Government could therefore consider either expanding this specialized area of care of the elderly or providing financial assistance to voluntary welfare organizations for establishing them. However, as I mentioned earlier, the problem of care of the elderly is not confined solely to the aged sick. In fact, the more serious problem is how to look after our able-bodied senior citizens. I believe there could be a few solutions to it. At the moment, most of the activities are concentrated in providing social and recreational activities for the able-bodied senior citizens. This is only a very small part of the problems that we are solving. I would suggest that, first of all, we should create an environment favourable for these older citizens to continue to work and that is important because if the senior citizens are active they are able to remain more healthy mentally and physically. The senior citizens should be encouraged to remain in their jobs for as long as they can. I am sad to say that in many instances, as soon as they reach the customary retirement age of 50 or 55 years, most of them have been asked to leave their jobs and this is also true with the statutory boards and civil service. I would urge the Minister to look into this problem and help to find a solution for the senior citizens to be able to continue to work longer in their jobs. Secondly, I think we should not just organize acitivities for social and recreational activities for them.”
“Currently, the care of the elderly is mainly undertaken by our voluntary welfare organizations. Since the first commu- nity home was established in an HDB estate in 1974, more have been established to shelter and care for the able-bodied aged citizens. While the community homes allow our elderly to remain within the community instead of being isolated in large institutions, we should nevertheless, and I think this is very important, continue to cultivate in our young the responsibility of caring for the aged parents within their families. However, the realities cannot be avoided. With the anticipated increase in the number of aged in our population and the probability that they will be more vulnerable to various disabilities, the need for supportive assistance and institutional care for the aged sick is also a very real one. This need is made more acute by the increasing number of nuclear family households and the shrinking size of family units. These families may lack the necessary skill and physical capacity to provide continuous nursing care. Others may face the financial and emotional strain with having to balance between the demands of care-giving and other responsibilities relating to other family members and work. The Ministry of Community Development has already initiated several worthy programmes in the area of care of the elderly, including the establishment of day-care centres, Befriender scheme and various public education programmes. But I believe more should be done to further help the aged sick and his family to help them continue to live in their own homes with their families. Where illness is long-term and the family begins to experience the physical strain, short stays away from the home for the patients should be made available.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head J be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead JE-01 of the Main Estimates. Sir, the aging population of Singapore in the longer-term is a very serious problem for a small country like ours. In 1985, the total number was 7.8% but this is going to rise to about 25% in the year 2030 and this demographic configuration will certainly have very serious implications on the care of our elderly in the future. I would like to classify the aged population into three categories: (1) the aged sick; (2) the destitutes; and (3) the able-bodied senior citizens. Of course, here when I mention "senior citizen", my definition is different from that of the People's Association which classifies everybody above 50 years old to be senior citizens. I thought the age of 50 is a little bit too young to be considered senior citizens. I think we have a tendency to concentrate our problems on the aged sick and the destitutes. But I personally feel that the problems of these two categories of people are more easily resolved than those of the able-bodied senior citizens and if this large group of able-bodied senior citizens is not properly handled, I am afraid, many of them will eventually end up to become aged sick and destitutes. If this were to happen it will certainly affect our economy, the quality of life and social cohesion of our country. The question of the aged population was studied by a Committee for the Aged just two or three years ago and there were a lot of excellent recommendations in this Report. I hope that the Minister will be able to give us a report on what has been done so far for the aged population or at least what are we doing to prepare ourselves to handle these problems in the future.”
“Like others, they are also making their contribution to the country and to the people. They are working hard to provide the necessary services to the commuters. But they are subject to certain occupational risks. Recently crimes have been committed against taxi drivers on public highways. This has alarmed us very much.”
“Likewise, when implementing the MRT services, I hope the authorities can also pay attention to taxi operators' interests and how taxi services can cooperate with or complement MRT services. Has the Government taken into consideration the complementation of taxi services with the MRT? This is what the taxi drivers are very concerned about. It is also a vital link with the whole communication system that the Government should not overlook in its planning. I am glad to learn that the PWD is considering certain basic facilities around MRT stations to enable taxi operators to have some taxi stands at various MRT stations. This is good news to both taxi drivers and the commuters. I would urge the Ministry, before implementing any policy that would affect the livelihood of taxi operators, it should liaise with the taxi organizations concerned, relating to such matters as diesel tax, fare structure and number of taxis, etc. In support of the Member for Bukit Timah's suggestion, I would also urge the Government not to increase the diesel tax before the MRT's effect on taxis is clear. Here, I would like to make a few suggestions to the Minister: (1) There should be half-hour parking coupons to allow taxis to park for durations of less than an hour so as to reduce their cost. (2) To set up taxi stands at all the hotels to facilitate freer movement and provide a better taxi service. (3) To review the car pool scheme, because the present car pooling is not in consonance with the original purpose of allowing four car owners to go into the CBD in order to reduce traffic congestion. Instead, three non-car owners are being carried into the CBD. Therefore, we should review the scheme of car pooling. Mr Chairman, let me emphasize that taxis are providing a public service.”
“Mr Chairman, Sir, may I have your permission to join in the debate? I am the Chairman of NTUC Comfort and I would like to declare that I have no personal pecuniary interest. (In Mandarin) Sir, the construction of MRT, besides improving the transport system, will also enhance our image and increase national productivity. To taxi drivers, although they are concerned about the ffect of the implementation of the MRT on their livelihood for the long-term interest of the country, they understand that it is necessary for the future transportation needs of the people and the nation. Furthermore, the setting up of the MRT will enhance the confidence investors have in Singapore that will make our economy more prosperous to the benefit of all our people. We can understand their psychological mood in spite of the fact that in their rational mind they understand the need for MRT. They are worried about the effect of the MRT service on their income and livelihood. We can understand their concern and worries. At the moment, the income of taxi drivers has stabilized. However, they will have to meet with the increasing operational expenditure, due to the rising Yen, price increases of the spare parts, repair costs and others. The income of taxi drivers has been eroded relatively by all these costs since the fare adjustment in 1985 which benefitted them. The other day the Minister announced in the House that the MRT and bus services will be complementing each other. And the MRT will have a joint ticketing system with the bus services for the convenience of mutual commuters. When planning for the MRT, the authorities have considered the complementary role of bus services.”
“Sir, West Coast Park is being developed and many amenities are being provided. The residents in the western part of Singapore welcome the development of this park. They are hoping that eventually West Coast Park will have as many amenities as the East Coast Park. But unfortunately,without a beach, West Coast Park will never be the same as East Coast Park. Besides, the beach is a danger to the people who use the park. To date, nothing has been done and I believe that no plans have been made to create a beach at the West Coast Park. I hope that the Minister will consider providing a beautiful beach for West Coast Park.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, may I be allowed to join the debate?”
“Sir, on a point of clarification. I would like to ask the Member for Potong Pasir how he proposes to reduce the CPF by 10%. Take it off the employer's contribution or the employee's contribution?”
“(11) That the sum to be allocated for Head R be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead RF-01 of the Main Estimates.”
“Point of order, Sir. Can the Member continue to speak on this topic? After all, the subject is Labour Inspection and Safety. I think he can make some clarification but he is making a whole speech.”
“(3) That the sum to be allocated for Head R be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead RC-01 of the Main Estimates.”
“Sir, may I speak on a point of clarification? I do agree that there may be people who job-hop because of a higher salary. But I think the job security out-weighs the retrenchment benefits. I just want to suggest this. The Minister has said that it is difficult to draw the line. I think it is not that difficult. I would suggest that all confirmed employees be paid retrenchment benefits. People do not go to a company because of the retrenchment benefits. They think the company is going to offer them better prospects and better security. Unfortunately, the company appears to be stable but they are not, and these people have to suffer for that.”
“The extension of retrenchment benefit entitlement in the Employment Act to workers with less than three years' service, therefore, would not only help to alleviate their hardship but would also serve as a deterrent to employers who hastily retrench workers instead of deploying or retraining them.”
“Sir, let me take this opportunity to make two more suggestions, and I think these two issues are important for our workers, especially for the lower income group. (1) CPF contribution by the employee Sir, CPF is an extremely good scheme. It has served us well. It caters for old age and it has enabled the majority of our working class to own flats which workers in even the most developed countries cannot dream of. But, Sir, the income ceiling of $200 for which the employees need not contribute to CPF was fixed in 1968. And if you were to take inflation between 1968 and 1982 into consideration, the $200 in 1968 would be compounded to $432.44 in 1982. Therefore, I am suggesting that the Hon. Minister consider seriously raising this $200 income ceiling to $400. I am fully aware of the possible consequences of this change. Sir, I am making this suggestion because I believe some people are finding it difficult to cope with the cost of living if he is the sole bread-winner and if he earns below $400. (2) Retrenchment Benefit In accordance with section 44 of the Employment Act, an employee will only be entitled to retrenchment benefit after he has served his company for three years or more. This provision should be reviewed in the light of our current efforts to encourage companies to upgrade their operations. Very often, employers prefer to retrench surplus workers as a result of mechanization, automation or reorganization. When a retrenchment exercise is carried out, those who have served their companies for less than three years will be denied retrenchment benefits through no fault of theirs, and this would affect their livelihood adversely.”
“There is continuous confrontation between the union, the government and the employers. And what happens? The standard of living of the working class is declining and millions of people are out of jobs in those countries. Just a few days ago the new Prime Minister of Australia, Mr Hawke, who was a prominent union leader for many years, has called for cooperation between union, government and employers. Why is he not calling for confrontation? Why? This is food for thought for the Member for Anson and other like-minded people. If the Member for Anson continues to advocate confrontation between union,government and employers, is he not also irresponsible? Sir, now let me turn to the requests I made last year. They are (1) sick leave benefit should be provided to any employee as soon as he is confirmed in his job; (2) annual leave entitlement should be reviewed to make it more equitable and in line with our current efforts to promote loyalty, company welfarism and good employer-employee relations. Sir, the Hon. Minister in his reply said, and I quote: 'The Member for West Coast touched on a similar vein within the Employment Act, about annual leave benefits. I think his proposal merits consideration.' With regard to the sick leave benefit, he said and I quote: 'On the point raised by the Member for West Coast on sick leave, perhaps it is also opportune at this time to ask the officials to look into this as well while we are reviewing the whole series of provisions in the Employment Act to bring it up to-date.' Sir, I am anxious to know what has been done so far. I hope the Hon. Minister can give me a definite answer this year.”
“The majority of those who will be benefiting is the working class. Is this also in the interest of the workers? (3) He wants the Government to pay the landowners the full market value for the land acquired for public interest. If this is done, Government projects such as HDB flats will be more costly and the working class will have to pay more. Is this also done in the interest of the workers? The Member for Anson would like to portray himself to be the champion of the workers. But basing on what he has done, I have no doubt that he does not care a hoot about our workers. I reckon his real motives are his own interests, his party's interests and the interests of the foreigners. I think it is obvious that he is not interested in the well-being of Singaporeans and, least of all, for the Singapore workers. Mr Chairman, Sir, many Ministers have been kind enough to advise him not to speak on topics which he is not familiar with. But he is stubborn and he continues to get involved in topics which he knows absolutely nothing about. He continues to criticize NTUC and the Singapore Labour movement. What does he know about the Labour movement? He does not even know that the main objective of the Labour movement is to help the working class to improve their standard of living and thus enabling them to enjoy a better quality of life. For him, the union is an end in itself and the main objective is to fight the Government and the employers. Does he encourage his own employees, if he has any, to fight him? Is what he is advocating in the best interest of the companies and the employees? As a lawyer and having contacts with the outside world, he should know what is happening in many of the Western countries and the Third world countries.”
“No, Sir, I would not be carried away. (2) He wants the Government to give back the payroll tax to the employers instead of letting the Government use it for the benefits of our people. Mr Jeyaretnam: I said "for the workers."”
“It is all related to the workers and I have to explain to the Minister so that he is not influenced.”
“The Minister for Trade and Industry, in his summing up of the Budget debate, said that the Member for Anson has said nothing new or relevant but a lot that is confusing. He described his speech as a hotch-potch of unrelated ideas. The Minister for Foreign Affairs and Minister for Culture, after listening to the various remarks made by the Member for Anson during the debate on the Ministry of Culture commented that the Member for Anson displayed abysmal ignorance about many issues facing Singapore. Lastly, let me quote what the Prime Minister said about him last week: 'I think he ought to listen to me. I am telling him the history so that he will know how totally false his allegations are'. Sir, now let us see some of the major issues that the Member for Anson has been fighting for in this House: (1) He has been fighting for the non-citizens or foreigners. He has forgotten that our first duty as a Member of Parliament is to look after the interests of our citizens and workers. He wants the Government to liberalize the immigration policies to allow indiscriminately tens of thousands of foreigners to come to Singapore to compete with our workers for jobs and other amenities provided for our citizens. Does he want us to be in the same situation as that in Assam where thousands of people are killed? Is this in the interest of the working class and of Singaporeans as a whole? Mr Jeyaretnam rose -”
“Sir, last year I mentioned that many of the provisions in our labour legislation were out-of-date and there was a need for us to review them. Sir, labour legislation must be progressive. They must keep up with time. The latest amendments have certainly helped us a lot in our relentless efforts to promote harmonious industrial relations and further help Singaporeans, and in particular the working class to improve their lots. Sir, I am pleased to note that during the last 12 months many amendments have been made. Of particular importance were the amendments to the Trade Unions Act and the Trade Disputes Act. Sir, there had been a fair amount of apprehension and resistance to all these amendments from some unionists. This is because they do not fully understand the rationale behind the changes. We need to give more and better explanations. So I hope the Hon. Minister is not discouraged and will not be deterred from continuing to update and streamline the provisions just because of the apprehension of some of the unionists, the constructive criticisms of other unionists and the destructive criticisms of the Member for Anson. For the first group of people, we need to have more patience and take the trouble to explain to them the rationale in greater detail. For the second group of people, we must listen to their criticisms and suggestions carefully and give them due consideration. For the Member for Anson you may want to ignore him. He does not know what he is talking about and he is only interested in trying to get whatever political mileage out of his acts. On top of that, the Member for Anson is a confused man and he cannot understand logic. This has been said many times in this House by the Minister of State for National Development.”
“Sir, would the Minister inform the House how to ensure that the guidelines recommended are being followed by the employers? And would the Minister also inform the House whether he will introduce legislation so that the level of radiation can be monitored by the Ministry to ensure that the radiation level of all VDUs is always maintained below the international standard set? Would the Minister also inform the House whether the cumulative effects of low level radiation will pose certain health hazards?”
“It is because the locals are put to work under those expatriates who are not qualified, less experienced and less capable than them. In view of this, would the Minister assure the House that, where such cases are uncovered, he will take prompt actions against them?”
“Sir, is the Minister aware of the complaint that Singapore is becoming a training ground for redundant expatriates in their home countries and that such expatriates have deprived some Singaporeans of their jobs and promotions and this has created morale problems among the local managers? The unhappiness is not because the locals do not welcome the expatriates. In fact, all of us welcome all those expatriates who bring skills and expertise to our country. But it is because the locals are put to work -”
“It is accepted that trained manpower is our only significant natural resource. On that count alone, we should explore and exploit every avenue to enable every worker, even those who are less endowed by nature, to participate in and benefit from the restructuring of our economy. We should particularly ensure that those workers who work well and hard to raise their productivity benefit and not suffer from their contributions to productivity gains. Workers must be made to see that the gains of their companies are also their own gains. If we do not do so, future calls for greater efforts in productivity improvement will be futile and consequently the workers, their dependants, the enterprises as well as Singapore will suffer. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I support the motion by the Minister for Trade and Industry. 6.40 p.m.”
“Trade unions and workers similarly co-operate with employers to raise productivity in their places of work. But do all employers appreciate the efforts of their workers in raising productivity? I am afraid not. Some employers think it is good business practice to use the productivity gains from the efforts of their workers to retrench workers, since less workers are needed to do the same amount of work. Some other employers even think it is good business practice to take advantage of the productivity campaign for reorganization and get rid of the older workers at the top of their wage-scales. I wonder whether these employers are good businessmen, if you consider that such business practice would save one cent today and lose one dollar tomorrow. If workers see that whatever contributions they make towards raising their productivity will be used to terminate their employment, it is unlikely that they will cooperate with their employers in any future productivity campaign. Yet, the same employers can do a lot to make their workers productivity fans. If productivity gains result in less workers being needed to do a given piece of work, the excess workers can be re-deployed to do other work, work which the management always wanted to do but were unable to do so because of manpower shortages. The employers can also arrange for the workers who can be spared to go for skill-upgrading courses so as to be able to increase their productivity further. What is required of employers in this kind of situation is that they use their management skills and ingenuity to derive the maximum benefit from productivity gains instead of jeopardising their own productivity campaign by their own short-sighted action of cooking the goose as well as the egg.”
“I would urge VITB to also conduct short practical courses in skill training for workers who do not possess the prescribed minimum educational qualifications. There are workers who do not have an aptitude for any form of formal schooling but who are able to benefit from practical experience. A very good example are the car mechanics and some other technical workers who may not have gone through a formal education at all and know nothing about the theories. Yet they are excellent in their jobs. What I have in mind is that the VITB and other training bodies should conduct training courses not only at different levels but also in different modes. In place of or in addition to training courses which consist of lectures or lecture-cum-practical demonstrations, the VITB should design training programmes that wholly consist of repetitive sessions of practical demonstrations to enable workers with very low educational levels to acquire new skills or improve their existing skills. The practiceoriented courses should be of short duration, that is, one to three months at the most, and should be precise and to the point, that is, without needless theorizing. The Skills Development Fund Board should give its fullest support to such projects. At the same time we should also ensure that all the resources, energy and time we spend on the training of our workers are not wasted. Proper guidance and advice should be given to the workers as to the requirements of future skills. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, another concern is the productivity movement which we are embarking on. Trade unions and workers have responded wholeheartedly and enthusiastically to the call by the Government to increase productivity.”
“As it is, employers who have established training programmes for the upgrading of the skills of their workers usually select the good workers in their service. Similarly, some workers who do not have any training programme in their place of work and who are keen to better themselves can enrol themselves in the BEST programme or other programmes presently conducted by the VITB. In short, workers who are able or are eager to benefit from any programme to upgrade their skills are adequately catered for by the various programmes conducted or sponsored by the VITB or the Skills Development Fund in association with the employers, PAP educational centres and trade unions. But the group of workers, who either have cause for thinking or have convinced themselves into believing that they are unable to take part in any programme or upgrading of skills, would find themselves in a worsening situation as time goes on. Without new skills or upgraded skills, these workers would find themselves among the first to be retrenched in any establishment and among the last to obtain new employment after retrenchment. If these workers are unable to obtain gainful employment to support themselves and their families, they may have to require public assistance in one form or other. It is not a healthy or desirable state of affairs for the workers, their dependants and Singapore. We must not spare any effort to persuade them and to design special courses to enable them to upgrade their skills or gain new skills. At present, to attend any training programme of VITB, a worker must possess minimum educational qualifications. The BEST programme thus enables workers to obtain the requisite qualifications.”
“The VITB and the Skills Development Fund Board are doing a good job in helping workers to gain new skills or upgrade existing skills. But do all categories of workers benefit from the various schemes of education and skills training? Who do the employers choose to send for skill upgrading? Are all workers qualified to attend or capable of following even the BEST programme? Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, what I am not happy about is that the plight of a small but significant group of workers has been apparently overlooked and completely ignored. The workers I refer to are those who are either less endowed by nature, or who have never been to school for one reason or another or who might be too old to start education all over again. There are others who are good with their hands but who might find formal schooling inappropriate. All VITB skill training courses require certain minimum academic qualifications. To expect this group of workers to go through BEST programme and then the skill training courses would take them years. With a family to take care of and after eight hours of hard work, this is hardly practical. Whatever the explanation, they represent a forgotten group of workers who are not able to participate in, and benefit from, the BEST programme or other skill training programme financed by the Skills Development Fund. We have limited manpower resources and everyone counts. More importantly, let us not forget that these workers have contributed a lot in the past and they can continue to make their contributions in the restructured economy. Everyone has a role to play. And everyone must play his role if Singapore is to continue to thrive. If we do nothing for them, we are being very unjust. In addition our small country cannot afford to carry passengers.”
“While I am generally happy with the Budget, I wish the Budget proposals would have devoted some attention or reference to the plight of those Singaporeans who are not able to cope with life as well as others, even in a normal economic situation. In an economic down-turn it is conceivable that the plight of these unfortunate Singaporeans would worsen. Moreover, it is not peculiar to Singapore alone that some of its citizens are in such unenviable position. Even in highly developed countries there are segments of the population needing more public help and assistance than others. As it is, there are some Singaporeans who are not able to avail themselves of Singapore's comprehensive and enlightened programme of public housing without some form of public assistance, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, my concern today, however, is directed particularly to that small but significant group of workers who are in the greatest danger of being left out, high and dry, by our programme for the restructuring of the economy. As Members of the House know, the restructuring of our economy necessarily entails the adaptation of our workforce to more advanced and sophisticated industries incorporating the latest technology. What this means in plain words is that the workers have to learn new skills or upgrade their existing skills in order to be able to continue working in the restructured economy of Singapore. It is for this reason that NTUC initiated the "Basic Education for Skills Training" or commonly known as BEST, which is now administered by the VITB on a nation-wide basis because they have the material and manpower resources to manage such a huge project. Similarly, the Government established the Skills Development Fund to promote and finance the development of the skills of our workers.”
“This was clearly manifested in last year's NWC negotiations, They have demonstrated that they realized and understood the seriousness of the worsening world economic situation and its impact on our own economy. With the sterling performance of 9.9% GDP growth in 1981, most workers and unionists in other countries would have been tempted to ask for a high wage increase. But instead they have responded positively to the call for wage restraint. They knew that it was in the long-term interest of our workers and our nation. Unfortunately, this year is still very uncertain and unpromising. And I am convinced that once again our unions, workers as well as the managers will continue to act responsibly. While there should not be unnecessarily high expectations this year, the efforts of the workers to help increase productivity must be rewarded. Sir, I do not think any reasonable Member in this House will object to the granting of tax incentives which should ultimately strengthen the economy of Singapore. I personally find it gratifying that the proposed Budget does not contain any tax increases except where it is consistent with the policies of the Government to increase taxes in areas where the consumption is either luxurious or undesirable. For example, the increase in taxes on tobacco and alcohol products is consistent with the Government's policy to discourage the consumption of these two products. And I fully agree with several other hon. Members who have spoken that the increases have been too mild to have any effect on the habitual consumers of these two products.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, the year 1982 was indeed a grim year not only for the industrialized West and other developing countries but also for Singapore. Though we still managed to achieve a GDP growth of 6.3% which is more than respectable by any standard, the fact that our GDP growth has declined from 9.9% in 1981 to 6.3% in 1982 augurs badly for the future. This rapid decline in our growth rate has indicated to us just how vulnerable our eco- nomy is. We are not immune to the state of health of the world economy. For quite some time, the economic experts around the world do not seem to be able to forecast correctly the arrival of the elusive economic recovery. While we must hope for the best, we must be prepared for the worst. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, under the circumstances, I must say that the Budget Statement placed before the House by the Hon. Minister for Trade and Industry is fair, positive and realistic. The proposed Budget does not shirk or avoid facing up to the grim economic situation that is being experienced by Singapore and the rest of the world. That Singapore seems to weather the present unfavourable economic situation better than many a highly industrialized country is in itself an eloquent testimony to the far-sighted and rational policies of the Government in fiscal and economic matters up to now. The proposed Budget is, likewise, laying the foundation for Singapore to take advantage of any economic recovery in the world economic situation. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I think we are also fortunate that over the years our workers and especially our unions have been very enlightened. They have been reasonable and realistic. They have always responded positively to the calls to tighten their belts as and when necessary.”
“Although the prevailing industrial climate is good, and the question of strike and the like has never surfaced or occurred for many years now - and hopefully strikes will not occur forever - yet I feel that paragraph (d), as contained in the Trade Unions Act, should be retained. In my opinion, paragraph (d) will act as a "shield" or "weapon" that can be used by trade unions if a need really arises. This can also provide as a bulwark to employers or individuals who deliberately obstruct trade unions from attaining their lofty ideals. I wish also to seek the assurance of the Minister for Labour that, with these amendments, managements will adopt a positive attitude and truly comprehend the objectives of trade unions and give due encouragement so that the lofty objectives under clause 2 of the Amendment Bill can be achieved, as this will benefit not only workers, trade unions but also employers, companies and the country as well. 4.12 p.m.”
“This would, in time, result in the upgrading of their own performance and provide the atmosphere for better wages and will benefit all parties concerned. As I said just now, these amendments open new vistas for mutual benefit and cooperation. Workers will possess this new attitude and spirit because the working environments are conducive to the acquisition of such characteristics. Under the new working climate goodwill, trust and loyalty of the workers are thus strengthened. They possess that feeling of having the same role to play in the progress achieved by their companies. Changes in the thinking of the workers would certainly bring about tangible changes in industrial relations. Such a situation will pave the way for a good industrial climate. The spirit of cooperation at the highest level will permeate through the entire infrastructure of the company. Examples of the prosperity of successful companies can be seen in Singapore now where all the employees, supervisors and management have good and cordial relations and who, in turn, furnish good feedback. In the light of my remarks, it is obvious that the introduction of the amendments is a genuine attempt to harmonize the Trade Unions Act with the real situation prevailing in our country. Nevertheless, I seek elucidation from the Minister for Labour concerning the new sections of the Amendment Bill. The amendments proposed under the new definition of a trade union in clause 2 reflect a change in the objectives of a trade union, I wish to seek clarification from the Minister for Labour as to why paragraph (d) of the definition contained in the Trade Unions Act has been deleted entirely from the Amendment Bill.”
“My fear is that such workers are generally indistinguishable from employees working on a piece-rate basis. There is always a danger that unscrupulous persons may exploit the new definition of "workman" in the Trade Unions (Amendment) Bill as a loophole for anti-union activities against their workers simply by converting their employer-employee relationship into that of principals and contractors. Undoubtedly, the Minister for Labour is aware of such a danger. I trust that the Ministry of Labour will study the problem of these workers who cannot be trade union members because they are technically non-employees under the new definition of "workman" and devise effective solutions to the problem. A good number of these workers require the kind of help and protection that a trade union can give them. Other than this consideration, I am in support of the Bill before the House. Encik Abbas Abu Amin (Pasir Panjang)( In Malay): Mr Speaker, Sir, I wish to discuss the objects of the Trade Unions (Amendment) Bill. The proposed amendments are consonant with the principles and objectives of a new and modern trade union. These amendments should, therefore, receive the necessary attention and support. These amendments will enhance the already existing cooperation and mutual understanding between the workers and employers. The emphasis of this Amendment Bill is shifted from one of confrontation to one of cooperation and overall well-being. Union members will certainly agree with this change of principles for the promotion of good industrial relations, betterment of their well-being and status and the raising of productivity. These amendments also signify a positive approach for workers to improve themselves through training and for the acquisition of better skills.”
“A trade union is an organization of either employers or employees. If a person is neither an employer nor an employee, he has no reason to be in a trade union. There are other forms of organizations, such as societies, which a person may join other than as an employer or as an employee. Unfortunately, if the Bill is passed, there will be groups of people who are neither employers nor employees as a result of the new definition of "workman". The people I have in mind are workers in the charcoal trade, musicians, and other similar groups of workers. They are not considered employees because the persons for whom they work choose not to view their relationship as that between employer and employee. There are many reasons for such a situation arising. One may be because of tradition. Another may be that the employer-employee relationship entails onerous obligations such as payment of contributions under the Central Provident Fund Act, While technically, these groups of people are not considered as employees, in practice, they are and they will be treated as such. Whatever may be the real reason for certain workers not to be considered as employees by those whom they work for, the new definition of "workman" in the Trade Unions (Amendment) Bill will adversely affect these workers. Under the prevailing Trade Unions Act, such groups of workers may still be formed into trade unions but under the Bill such workers would not be able to form trade unions because they are not employees. While I agree that the Trade Unions Act should draw a line between employees and other workers, I am also at the same time very much concerned that the effect of the Bill is to penalize those workers who are not employees, through circumstances beyond their control.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of the Bill which is to amend the Trade Unions Act. 1, as a trade unionist, consider the Bill as deserving of my support. To those who are not actively engaged in trade union affairs, the Bill may seem to be making significant changes to our system of industrial relations. During the 36 years that the Trade Unions Act has been in operation, the trade union movement has undergone so many changes that the Act is, in fact, out-dated. It does not accurately reflect the prevailing trade union practices. For example, trade unions in Singapore for the last decade have been responsive and co-operated with employers and the Government so as to serve the interest of members better. This responsive and cooperative spirit of the trade unions has, in no small way, contributed to the economic development of Singapore. Similarly, trade unions in Singapore have always accepted that the funds of trade unions belong to the members and must be used carefully and appropriately. For that reason, trade unions have long anticipated the provision of the Bill by prohibiting certain key officials of the unions from being trustees of the unions at the same time. In this way, the funds and assets of trade unions are protected. The Bill therefore merely makes the Act concur, though somewhat belatedly, with existing practices. My trade union colleagues and I have decided to give our support to the Bill because the changes proposed by the Bill are reasonable, necessary, and in the interest of workers who are members of trade unions. My only misgiving is that certain provisions of the Bill may, in their implementation, give rise to problems. I refer particularly to the new definition of "workman" in the Bill. In itself, the new definition is logical and reasonable.”
“I am not moving, Sir. The sum of $321,725,430 for Head P ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. The sum of $46,453,100 for Head P ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. Head O -”