Zaqy Mohamad
Singapore
“Deputy Speaker, may I seek your consent and the general assent of Members present to move that the Question Time at this day's Sitting be exempted from Standing Order No 22(1) so as to enable questions for oral answer to continue until the completion of Question Nos 7 to 29, including relevant supplementary questions, until 12.45 pm?”
“Mr Speaker, may I seek your consent and the general assent of Members present to move that the proceedings on the item under discussion be exempted from the provisions of Standing Order No 48(8) to remove the time limit in respect of the Minister Tan See Leng's speech, please?”
“I think on the hawker front, we keep our rentals as low as possible to sustain our hawkers. But for food prices, we continue to monitor. My colleague, Minister of State Gan mentioned about how we are monitoring food supply of food prices, and I think that we will continue to do so.”
“I thank the Member for his question. On seafood specifically, we do not see immediate risk. We have diversified our food imports. We have also got local production of seafood readily available. At this point, as both the Deputy Prime Minister and Coordinating Minister have shared, our main risk for agriculture lies in fertiliser.”
“Mr Speaker, as I shared, we are monitoring the situation. The Government is monitoring at this point. There is no need at this juncture, because we have not seen the price hikes hit the hawkers in the same way as yet. There will be downstream impact. I think that is quite sure.”
“For us to also look into buying local produce, that helps our farms to increase capacity at this point, helps them build resilience over time and should there be disruptions or should there be a need for us to divert supplies or look to ramp up local production, I think they would be in a better position if we do what we can today to supp…”
The complete record
Every one of 1,752 lines we hold for Zaqy Mohamad, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 25 of 36.
“I thank the Minister of State for his reply. As we know, the AEC is progressing at different paces across different ASEAN countries as well as across different sectors. Can the Minister of State share with us what are MTI's plans in terms of whether there are priority sectors that it plans to push our SMEs towards or to promote for SMEs and also specific countries which are further upstream or further developed on the AEC path?”
“I have a clarification in addition to my supplementary questions earlier. I have asked not just for those who are identified, who are travelling there, but in some countries, they have instituted a travel ban to some of these countries where you have a risk of them joining ISIS, for example. Is Singapore considering such a measure, whether for those who have been identified or the public in general?”
“I thank the Minister for his wonderful reply. I am glad with the Government’s approach in engaging many of our religious leaders, behind closed doors. I, myself, also had public dialogues. At a recent event with Berita Harian and the Office of the Mufti, even members of the public are generally quite supportive and understand the clear and present danger these terrorists present to Singaporeans and Singapore. I have three supplementary questions. In considering whether Singapore will join this coalition, did we consider whether this would further endanger Singaporeans who may travel to the Middle East, for example, as had happened to some of the western counterparts as well? In terms of security of Singaporeans overseas, what is MINDEF's position and how can we alleviate or mitigate the situation? The second question – back home, as we combat this threat of ISIS, what is the position of our neighbours, especially those who are Page: 25 predominantly Muslim? Are they with us on this and are we collaborating and cooperating with them? The third question – will the Ministry or ICA consider, as some countries have done, banning certain individuals from going to some of the countries to volunteer or embark on some of these activities?”
“However, in the spirit of co-regulation, there is also a need for the community to differentiate between term licensing, which is largely an administrative process, and classification. Nonetheless, the classification ratings are an ongoing dialogue that will evolve with time and our accepted value systems in Singapore. I encourage MDA to continue this dialogue to represent the different segments of society. Madam, I applaud MDA for taking into account the feedback from the arts community and deciding not to proceed with the term licensing scheme until we are more aligned on what needs to be done for co-regulation to exist. While this was a much awaited feature of PEMA, there was a realisation that it would be a win-win for both the regulator and the arts community to first come to a consensus on what would work best for Singapore. Madam, in closing, I support the objectives of the Bill in providing greater clarity in the roles of the various agencies and in regulating licensing, and updating the regulations in cognisance of media convergence, as well as enabling MDA to perform its regulatory functions more effectively. Madam, I rise in support of the Bill.”
“In the context of PEMA, certainly, the reach for arts performances is not as wide compared to films. Between 2007 and 2013, there were only three arts and entertainment events or performances which were disallowed. While the NAR classification is in place as safeguards, the robustness and transparency of its use have to be in place to reassure the public of its continued need to ensure national security and racial and religious harmony here in Singapore, and that the NAR classification is not used unless there is a clear threat to our security and value system. MDA, as the regulator, however, also has the role of gatekeeper for the wider public, many of whom expect MDA to continue to set the standards. Today, parents want to have a greater say over what their children watch or do not watch. While some are open for their children to be more exposed, the reality is that many other parents also expect the regulator to provide the guidance so that they can be guided on what their children can watch or should watch. A recent poll by Reaching Everyone for Active Citizenry @ Home (REACH) stated that quite a majority, at 60%, were satisfied with current standards. However, 7% felt that they were somewhat relaxed, 2% felt they were too relaxed. Only 4% of respondents felt that today's content regulations were too restrictive, with about 19% feeling that the regulations were somewhat restrictive. So, you have about 23% feeling that the regulations were Page: 68 restrictive or too restrictive. As a society, we have to be aware that there is a spectrum of views on how we calibrate our classifications and MDA needs to continually adjust the "norms" if this shifts over time.”
“Madam, the Not Allowed for All Ratings (NAR) classification seems to be a point of contention with many arts groups seeking that NAR be lifted but that arts content should only be classified and not banned. However, given that we have just done a Parliamentary Question (PQ) on NAR yesterday, I understand MDA and the Censorship Review Committee's (CRC's) recommendations to retain NAR, given the various circumstances that we have to protect, such as the racial and religious harmony of Singapore, national security and so forth. Page: 67 With the recent NAR rating to Tan Pin Pin's film, "To Singapore, with Love", I understand if the State is concerned with such movies that depict an alternative history to Singapore, and as the Minister had responded to a PQ yesterday, allowing the exiles to feature their own version of the story disrespects the many Singaporeans who fought the armed struggle against the Communists in our early years of pre- and post-Independence. While this example relates to a film, and not an arts performance, the application of NAR has the same objectives. I have only managed to watch parts of the film, whatever is available online. While the accounts seem one-sided from the perspectives of the exiles, one may also argue that the communist ideology that they expound is no longer relevant and current in the modern-day Singapore context. We should make the NAR classification of any works more transparent and the framework more robust. The product today can be viewed just across the border and this has been done in Johor Bahru, and alternative means of accessibility today, for example, the Internet, as I have done, is much easier. Moreover, making works classified NAR may also bring more attention to them.”
“Arts Engage also highlighted the subjective and arbitrary nature of classifying arts content, citing instances when the same content was potentially viewed and rated differently between the arts group and MDA. Hence, doubts were raised over any basis for holding individuals accountable for misclassifications. Though many understand that penalties are in place to prevent abuse, however, as the arts are subjective, arts groups find it hard to accept penalties for misclassification, especially for an area open to interpretation. This, they felt could lead to self-censorship and not fulfil the full objectives of co-classification even though the intent of the penalties, as MDA has mentioned, are due to intentional misclassification and not unintentional ones. In addition, arts groups also raised concerns that the creation of the role of Content Assessor would place them at odds with others in the same arts group or even with the wider artistic community, or perhaps even with oneself if he is an artist. Based on MDA's closing note, Arts Engage further explained that they had found no willing candidates whom they could appoint as a Content Assessor. More fundamentally, they viewed that the arts group should be more accountable for creative decisions as a collective, rather than for the accountability to be rested on one person identified as the Content Assessor. Given that this concept is new to both the arts community and MDA, I would recommend that MDA pilot this in the meantime with some key groups to see how it works and if the role can be accepted by the arts groups over time, as we explore how to make this role more meaningful, and whether accountability could be shared as a group.”
“Following the Censorship Review Committee (CRC) recommendations in 2003 – and this was further re-affirmed in 2010 – there was some push for MDA and the arts community to embark on a co-regulation effort for the arts scene, in the hope of creating greater vibrancy. The recommendation was to move the arts groups from an event-based licensing scheme to one that would be period-based, thereby allowing the staging of multiple events within the valid period of the licence. As PEMA defines arts entertainment more broadly to cover events beyond those by the arts groups, the proposal for term licensing was, likewise, extended to the entire pool of arts events organisers. My parliamentary colleague Mr Baey Yam Keng and I met former Nominated Member of Parliament Janice Koh and Arts Engage, both of whom had submitted papers to the public consultation exercise, to listen to and understand the concerns of the arts community. The following are some areas that the arts community was concerned with; (a) disagreement over the intent of the Term Licensing Scheme; (b) Arts Engage was of the view Page: 66 that the proposed Term Licensing Scheme would see artists functioning as extensions of MDA, resulting in self-censorship; (c) concerns over misclassification, the penalty system and appeal processes; and (d) concerns over content classification guidelines for the arts. The same points were also outlined in MDA's closing notes for the public consultation paper. Arts Engage, which represents the arts community, expressed concerns over the fines and penalties which could result from wrongly implementing the arts classification guidelines.”
“This is important because technology today allows for media convergence, which means that an arts entertainment Page: 65 event staged overseas can now be transmitted "live" or in real-time to an audience in Singapore. Recognising this "virtual" arts entertainment event, the amendments were proposed to cater to its public exhibition and to apply the same regulatory principle vis a vis an arts event physically staged here in Singapore. The Bill also brings about administrative enhancements to PEMA, which is timely because the last amendment to it was 14 years ago. Some of these amendments that this Bill proposes will enable MDA to perform its regulatory functions, as the Minister had explained earlier, more effectively today, such as in the areas of investigation powers, disposal powers and composition of offences. However, what is also interesting about this Bill is what it intended to cover but did not. I believe it is important to cover the aspects of what did not happen, for the consideration of future amendments. I am also heartened that MDA took discussions with the arts community beyond the public consultation paper with two meetings and one town hall session. Following these sessions, MDA decided that the time was not right to implement term licensing and made the call to withdraw term licensing in view that there needs to be greater alignment between the regulator and the arts community for co-regulation to be effective. Perhaps, more time was needed for the arts and other communities to understand the proposed scheme, and even pilot term licensing, before it becomes part of PEMA.”
“Mdm Speaker, thank you so much for allowing me to speak on this pertinent Bill that has received a lot of attention by the arts and entertainment sectors as well as by the media, with the amendments that it had included as well as those that it had intended to include but left out following public consultation. This is the first time I am actually speaking on a Bill where the bulk of the topics or things that were not inside, but because these were included, if I may call it, in during consultation, but excluded after it. The key amendments in this Bill will improve the administration of the arts and public entertainment scene in Singapore. These amendments also make the regulatory powers clearer between the agencies, updating the context of the Act to today's media convergence. This will undoubtedly provide better clarity to the arts and entertainment industry. The Bill allows for a provision of clearer delineation of the public entertainment licensed by the SPF and the arts entertainment licensed by MDA, and the classification of the arts entertainment, independent of the licence being issued. Through a clearer delineation of definitions and licensing regimes between the two agencies, the public will get greater clarity on these regimes. Moreover, since there is a possibility that an arts entertainment event can be held under a Public Entertainment licence, the proposed delineation will also help MDA to better define and classify the type of performance that should be an arts entertainment event. The Bill allows for an update of the definition of arts entertainment to include virtual forms transmitted in real-time to a venue for public exhibition.”
“I thank the Minister for his update on the developments. Certainly, today, we have got the Lease Buyback Scheme (LBS) already in place. What is MND's strategy in terms of pursuing both the LBS as well as reverse mortgage? To ordinary citizens, I do not think they would be able to differentiate between the two. And is there a concerted strategy that we are embarking on both paths?”
“I thank the Parliamentary Secretary for his reply. I am not going to ask for just Choa Chu Kang station. I am going to ask in terms of roll-out plans. How does the Ministry plan to deploy from the town centres, all the way up to Khatib and the rest? Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim: Madam, Mr Zaqy asked a very reasonable question. I must say that it is a trial period, lasting two years. And we are focusing our efforts, starting with the interchange stations, including Choa Chu Kang and also stations where there are high volumes of commuters. If we find it well-received and Singaporeans like it and Page: 32 use it, ultimately, we will roll it out to the rest of the MRT stations. Beyond that, we are looking at how we can enhance the travel experience of Singaporeans. LTA is assessing how we can also provide wi-fi services on buses, in the interchanges, as well as, as I said earlier, at more MRT stations.”
“I thank the Minister for his response. I am glad that these programmes are in place. I know many of my residents in Chua Chu Kang are certainly very happy and excited by this development. On the question of timeline, I understand the Minister said that this would depend on the Town Councils and the level of Page: 11 engagement on the ground. At the same time, for each Town Council, we are given a quota in terms of the number of projects we can set aside each year. With the new number of blocks that are qualifying now, would that mean that the number of projects we can do per year also increases, if we can show that we can engage more on the ground at the same time? The second question is in relation to the announcement that the Minister made yesterday in terms of some of the new developments in technologies for the Lift Upgrading Programme (LUP). Given that we are doing SLRP on some of these estates that previously could not benefit from LUP, will there be any possibility of dovetailing the two? Once you have upgraded the blocks, you may actually discount them from undergoing LUP in future.”
“I thank the Minister for his reply and I am glad to say that for the blocks that have implemented these cameras, we have seen very positive feedback from residents. I would like to ask the Minister if MHA would be prepared to look at expanding the role of security for these CCTV cameras, for example, at bicycle bays. We did a trial with the Neighbourhood Police Post to extend one of the CCTVs to cover a bicycle bay. Residents had always complained that their bicycles got stolen from this bicycle bay. We found that Page: 46 the number of bicycles that got stolen was reduced significantly. However, there is no existing budget to cover for some of these extended security roles. Since the CCTVs are in place, will the Ministry consider expanding the role of securing our HDB flats?”
“I thank the Deputy Prime Minister for his reply earlier. I am also glad to note that the Deputy Prime Minister is already working with the IRG and various Muslim groups. Based on MHA's assessment today, does MHA see any threat or risk to our social fabric today, based on what has happened in that people may associate the radical behaviours with the Muslim community, for example, and certain tensions may have occurred in other countries. Has MHA assessed such threats so far in what we see today?”
“Status has always been an important part of any society and more so in the Asian culture where we want to have it all, the "kiasu" mentality – cannot lose – has been with us, and I see our culture and mindsets becoming the biggest hurdle we need to overcome for ASPIRE to succeed. For the recommendations to work, our value system must transform and be aligned to what ASPIRE sets out to do. Indeed, there is a lot of work yet to be done for these proposals to be fully implemented and accepted, so I recognise the work that the Senior Minister of State has cut out in the years ahead. The ASPIRE committee has done well to recommend some innovative and bold suggestions but now the rest of the nation must do its part to carry these plans out. The benefits the ASPIRE recommendations bring to the society and economy potentially outweigh the costs and the pains that would be involved, and because of that, Mr Deputy Speaker, I support the adoption of these proposals. Page: 98 6.06 pm”
“The Government and also employers must display the encouragement that attaining university degrees is not the Page: 97 only way for Singaporeans who want to succeed in their careers. On this matter, the Education Ministry and the Manpower Ministry must pave the way to provide an environment that can encourage this culture, in addition to providing the guidance, pathway and enough opportunities. This is an important effort because apart from fulfilling the needs of each student and those seeking suitable employment, non-degree holders must not feel left behind. This will remove the worry and concern that, without a university degree, their opportunities are limited. Malay organisations like MENDAKI, can also play a part by reaching out to students, through programmes like educational and career counselling so that parents and their children can make the right decision that fits their abilities and requirements. The investment in education is important, but any wrong move will be very costly. Obtaining a university degree that is later found to be irrelevant, will break the student’s spirit and wastes their time and money. On this matter, we should be knowledgeable to make sound decisions. Continue the effort to achieve good aspirations. ASPIRE is another golden opportunity towards that goal. (In English): Sir, so how do we value success? Is it material wealth, is it a degree, or is it job status? How do we value job each of us has and the roles we play in society? Is every job a respectable job – from the cleaners to the construction workers to the delivery workers to the managers and CEOs? Does society treat every worker, no matter what rank or pay, with equal respect?”
“But for some, they work first after polytechnic or ITE and obtain a university education later. We welcome such efforts as it is consistent with our wish to encourage a culture of lifelong learning. The door to achieve success in life is always open and Singapore provides many pathways to its citizens to succeed. Many young Malays with ITE and polytechnic education manage to get good jobs. They can contribute to Singapore’s economy and many of them also go on to obtain university degrees. We welcome the Government's policy to provide many opportunities and pathways for the benefit of its citizens. The recommendations of the Applied Study in Polytechnic and Institute of Technical Education Review (ASPIRE) Committee displays a major commitment on the part of the Government towards that policy. It provides more opportunities for ITE and polytechnic students to enhance their skills, as well as many pathways to progress. This is an important effort because we must always make adjustments for the future and fulfil our students' aspirations. One of the main recommendations of ASPIRE, that is the work and training programme, must be utilised by ITE and polytechnic students because it aims to enhance and widen the prospects of their career choices. This choice should be studied closely, because it is a pathway that promises a structured training to obtain working knowledge. This is because, in a challenging and uncertain economic environment, one cannot simply depend too much on qualifications. We should instil in ourselves the concept of pursuing lifelong knowledge and upgrading work skills and continuous education. This requires a mindset change not only for each parent and child.”
“At present, many Government scholars are on fast-track career schemes, which provide them more opportunities and quicker upward mobility. I think this should be reviewed to create a more level playing field between graduates and non-graduates with job performance and achievements being the key indicators of who should advance in the organisation and at what pace. The signalling is important and this scheme has created a culture of divide and perception of inequality between diploma holders, graduates, local scholars and overseas scholars. If we want to move to a value of skills and experience, then, we should remove these perceptions of fast-tracking as well as glass ceilings in the Administrative Service. Enable all civil servants to compete and perform based on ability and experience and provide promotions, salary increments based fully on performance. I also hope that our Government-linked companies will perform similar reviews and showcase models to benchmark against and the transformational models in the respective industries. Sir, may I continue my speech in Malay? Page: 96 (In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] What is the benchmark of one's success? Is it solely based on a degree scroll? Or ultimately, on one's career? These are all important and are things that everyone aspire to have. On this matter, we are proud that there is an increasing awareness among the Malay community on the importance of investing in education. Attaining a university degree has become an aspiration for many of our young Malays. This is shown when we see that, year after year, more of our young Malays are attaining university degrees. However, not everyone manages to achieve that due to various reasons.”
“The model example of how Singapore needs to effect this change in culture, mindset, employment pathways and Page: 95 graduate recruitment, will have to come from none other than the Public Service. Thus, I propose that one of the first steps by the Government in accepting this recommendation is to initiate a Public Service-wide review by the Public Service Division (PSD) into the impact of the recommendations made by the ASPIRE team on the Civil Service and Public Service, and what are the areas that transformations and changes would be required. The model and pace of transformation in Government will have an impact and likely set the benchmarks for the private sector to adopt. There are some principles which I would like to highlight for consideration for a review. Public sector roles should be based on how well a person can do on the job and not whether he is a degree holder or not. Areas such as salary structures may have to change. Some questions like, should differences in salary scales of degree holders and those without degrees continue, or should remuneration, promotions and bonuses not be moved towards job responsibility and be productivity-focused, should be asked. Today, Civil Service pay structures for fresh graduates still distinguish if they have a degree or not, and to the extent of which class of honours the graduate they have. I think we should remove this and settle on a range, taking into consideration one's overall value-add in experience – internships, external exposures such as co-curricular activities (CCA) or industry associations for experienced hires, soft-skills, potential responsibilities and so forth. Questions will also be raised as to whether fast-track schemes for scholars should still exist.”
“While more technical sectors will welcome such a shift in the HR landscape here as they have more access to more skilled labour, other industries may have to alter their business models just to adjust to a changing labour market. But, at the same time, we should not also under-estimate the value that generalist graduates bring to some industries as these carry their own skills sets, which some employers may find useful. Sir, since the announcement, many questions have been raised which have created confusion among some employers and members of the community. The teaching profession, for example, has committed for sometime to new teachers being degree holders. In recent years, an early childhood diploma for preschool teachers is now the norm. Online, questions have also been raised on whether Ministers, Members of Parliament, or even the Administrative Service should be open to polytechnic graduates too. Most have been answered in the respective forums. This is a new concept – a work in progress. We are in transition but we do need to close the loop on these contradictions or perceptions of contradictions. There are more examples I am sure, but we must persevere to get the communications and messaging right on what we mean by alternative pathways, differences in what is presently practised and how we address some of these practical concerns. Otherwise, it is also not fair to prospective students, employers and parents if they get the wrong interpretation. Some have also began to question, whether the Government is also saying that the degrees are overrated and are no longer required? But, I think this is where the Public Service has to take the lead and employers in the private sector will nonetheless be looking this way to take the cue.”
“Also, following vocational training and a degree or a diploma, there are also more opportunities for the staff to look around for better paying jobs – which is only natural. This means employers have to find more senior positions or more responsibilities for such staff in order to retain them in order to justify for the higher salaries, the higher responsibilities and expectations of higher productivity. This may be a challenge for the small and medium enterprises (SMEs), which also hire the bulk of our workforce. For this scheme to be effective, employers must come on board and participate effectively. In asking this commitment from our employers, I would like to suggest that the Government consider giving them some additional subsidies or incentives. Our companies, Page: 94 which have been firm partners in the country’s restructuring efforts even as they bear with the higher costs of doing so, will undoubtedly appreciate this assistance. Beyond incentives, one way companies may find the vocational training approach more attractive and value-added is to have more industry standards certifications provided as part of the curriculum or programme. Using the IT sector as an example, for computer science, engineering or related courses, we should enable the students in ITEs and polytechnics to undertake their CCNA, CCIE, MCSE or related IT certifications during their vocational training. This will incentivise employers to hire them as they already come in ready with industry-related certification. Today, many of these industry certifications are taken on a part-time basis while underemployment.”
“Some polytechnic students I spoke to said that while they do not mind exploring a greater vocational or work experience component with their diploma curriculum, they, however, voiced some concerns that while Singapore may value the diploma and added work exposure more, this may not be the case when they are seeking work opportunities with overseas firms – where the traditional value of a degree would still outweigh the polytechnic diploma and the ITE certificate. Thus, the ASPIRE programme must work towards both national and international recognition among foreign employers and governments. Sir, this is a practical concern as they will also be competing for job opportunities and at work with foreign employees coming to Singapore with degree or higher qualifications. How do we ensure that our diploma and ITE certificate holders who are pursing master craftsmanship will not be disadvantaged or will be able to compete against foreign degree holders, some of whom may be more experienced and with lower salary expectations? We must also address this practical concern on how we help level this playing field over time. Sir, moving on to the impact of the ASPIRE recommendations on employers. For starters, employers will need to make room to hire more ITE and polytechnic students under the place-and-train programme. This does not just include the cost of hiring additional headcount, but to make the experience more meaningful, companies will have to dedicate extra resources, including existing staff to oversee, train and guide the students. Many employers are concerned with staff retention after investing in vocational training and upgrading of qualifications. Often, once a staff has attained his or her degree, there will be expectations of a higher salary.”
“But the practical concerns of many parents would be whether the ASPIRE programme will ensure that my kids or kids from ITEs and polytechnics will enjoy the same quality of life that graduates today enjoy? We have to address the issue that salaries and quality of life will play an important role in signalling and how we get employers to play along, I think that is the key thing. Recently, I also attended a Singapore Civil Defence Force (SCDF) commissioning parade and noted that SCDF was recently accredited by the Singapore Workforce Development Agency as an in-house Workforce Skills Qualifications (WSQ) Approved Training Organisation. This means SCDF and WDA can provide SCDF NS personnel with industry-recognised certifications, thus better preparing our servicemen when they make the transition from National Service (NS) to the workforce. I understand that SCDF is among the first units from the Home Team that is undertaking this. I would like to suggest that if we can expand this Page: 93 concept, relevant NS units can look into expanding certifiable vocation training while our men from ITEs and polytechnics are also serving NS. This ensures that the two years in NS can help build their vocational training with relevant skill credits, so that momentum is not lost on our polytechnic and ITE graduates, after they graduate and go to work.”
“But mostly, it was because they believed it was their pathway to success. For the one student who did put his hand up to go straight to work after ITE. He said he had heard of the ASPIRE programme and he thinks it is a "win-win"; those were his own words. Earn some money while he works, and if he does well, he could gain his diploma through the potential employer. He thinks it will work for him. Given that this is a new, unproven concept in Singapore, the first practical concern is our value system, of how we define success. This is important because it will also determine how students view their pathways of success and the mindsets of parents. I see this culture shift to be the biggest hurdle. Over time, with better communication and career guidance provided, I believe it is possible that more students and more parents can be convinced. There are other practical concerns that students may face with some of these recommendations and let me share some of them. Just by embarking on a vocational training model alone, a polytechnic student for example, who has to blend his academic time with practical experience, may take longer to graduate. So, not only is he going to enter the workforce later, he will also be doing so at lesser qualifications in current view and thus lower pay, because previously, he could have spent that extra time on a degree and enter the workforce at a higher pay. We have to ensure that they do not lose out on salary differentials because they take longer to graduate. I understand the Senior Minister of State also spoke earlier in terms of deepening skills and mastery of crafts. I understand the ideals.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, thank you for allowing me to speak on this important Motion. To quote a recent editorial in The Business Times last week: the ASPIRE" proposals are not just another tweak to the educational system but possibly the missing piece in the restructuring jigsaw puzzle that the Government has set out to complete". The premise the article made for this statement is that a dual vocational training model for ITE and polytechnic students, as recommended by the ASPIRE Committee, will help to better train and match a skilled workforce here with industry demand, thus keeping the economy competitive. Through this one example, we can agree that ASPIRE does have its benefits and this vocational training model has worked in countries such as Germany and Switzerland, to show desirable results. There are several considerations for these proposals to be effective within Singapore’s economic and social context, given the way our pathways and definitions of success have been ingrained and set for many years since our Independence. A few days after the ASPIRE recommendations were announced, I visited ITE College East with its Board of Governors and management team, and had the opportunity to meet some of the students. In one of the classes, we did a quick straw poll using a show of hands. We asked, "How many would like to take a diploma once they have completed their ITE course?" Almost everyone had their hands up. "How many were open to work to continue their vocation right after ITE?" Only about one in 20. "How many had heard of the ASPIRE Page: 92 recommendations?" About half. I spoke to some of them who had put their hands up on pursuing their diploma after ITE, and asked if they were doing it because of parental pressure. They said, partly.”
“Mdm Speaker, I thank the Minister for sharing with us Singapore's position on the conflict. First and foremost, our hearts and sympathies go out to the families on both sides who have been affected by the conflict, and the innocent lives lost. My three supplementary questions are: first, whether Singapore would play a more proactive role in the UN to take a stronger position against Israel for using asymmetric force on civilians. In some quarters, they have classified this as a war crime. Second, what is our relationship with the Palestinian National Authority? How have we connected with them before, because there is a perception that we are taking sides in this case? Third, is the Singapore Government, in addition to what we have done so far – I mean, it is good to see us come up with some money to help the Singapore Red Cross and other initiatives around it – but do we have the intent to do more to provide humanitarian aid and medical help to Gaza, as we did for Afghanistan?”
“I thank the Minister for his comprehensive reply. I also thank him for considering the heavier penalty fines. I have a number of residents who are also asking whether NEA would look into channels in which they can facilitate claims of Page: 39 medical fees and costs should there be construction sites and construction companies that have been found to be guilty of breeding mosquitoes and spreading dengue to the nearby housing estates. But more along the lines of public awareness, as I went around Chua Chu Kang – which had one of the record number of dengue outbreaks – I found that most of my residents were actually very aware of NEA campaigns and the five-step Mozzie Wipe-out, and if you go around, it is probably hard to find trace in flower pots, for example. They have removed these and have done all they can, but yet, 80% of the breeding sites are found in the homes. Is there a gap somewhere? Or are there some new developments that we have been missing and should be looking into? What more can we do, basically, to help this situation?”
“I would like to thank the Minister of State for her reply. I just have two supplementary questions. First and foremost, I just want to say as well that the videos that were produced, both the dialect and the Mandarin versions, were quite well received by my residents. I thought it was good work done. My question is this: the Minister of State did mention that the Malay and Tamil versions will be coming out later. Why were these not produced earlier because these are all official languages and are we prioritising dialects before our two other official languages? I thought, in terms of capacity, given that there are production houses out there which could also help, we could have prioritised the Malay and Tamil language videos earlier.”
“I want to thank Deputy Prime Minister for the statement as well as consciously making the distinction between practising Islam in a peaceful and moderate way, compared to one that is radicalised and supporting armed conflict. May I ask two supplementary questions? How is MHA tracking these potential radicalised volunteers right now? Is there a systematic programme, especially for those who may be influencing those in Singapore? And because the Deputy Prime Minister did mention that the Internet sites are also a key factor today, have there been sites that have been identified and banned at this point? Lastly, the Deputy Prime Minister also spoke about being proactive in creating awareness as well as rehabilitating those who have been radicalised. Will there be more resources given by the Government to help groups and those who are interested in creating greater awareness, as well as helping out in this effort?”
“I thank the Minister for the clarification. I have a few supplementary questions. Is the Ministry quite confident that the accounts breached are the only ones that are breached? Secondly, I hear the Minister saying that SingPass itself is not breached but, basically, the likelihood is that it comes from other sources. The bigger question would then be this: how do we instil confidence in our citizens that the e-services are secure? Of course, the two-factor authentication is not a new technology. The banks have implemented this before. Why has the Government not considered this earlier? Assoc Prof Dr Yaacob Ibrahim: I thank the Member for the questions. I agree with him that it is important for us to continue to build trust in the system. As I mentioned earlier, the investigation revealed that there were no vulnerabilities that were uncovered within the system. Having said that, we also agree that the system can be strengthened. As I had mentioned in my reply, all of us have to work in partnership and, therefore, we hope that ordinary Singaporeans who are using the SingPass accounts can first use stronger passwords and, secondly, check at their own end whether their computer software, especially the anti-virus software, is updated frequently. On the Member's question about why we have not been using second-factor authentication, bear in mind that there are three million users in terms of SingPass accounts of varying capabilities and expertise in understanding the use of the Internet and, therefore, we have to balance the ease of use and the practicality. But we recognise that Singaporeans are now in favour of further authentication. Therefore, we are now mandating for all those services involving sensitive data and transactions to use the second-factor authentication.”
“Madam, once again, I would like to thank the President for his Address and wish the Government and Members of this House success in this half of this Parliament term. Let us work together to make the lives of Singaporeans better and shape Singapore to be a better place to live in and leave our legacy for generations to come. [Applause] [(proc text) Question put, and agreed to. (proc text)] [(proc text) Resolved, (proc text)] [(proc text) "That the following Address in reply to the Speech of the President be agreed to: (proc text)] [(proc text) 'We, the Parliament of the Republic of Singapore, express our thanks to the President for the Speech which he delivered on behalf of the Government at the Opening of the Second Session of this Parliament.'." (proc text)] Page: 57”
“Madam, I have learnt a lot from Members in this debate, including a new phrase – which I attribute to Er Dr Lee Bee Wah. I am going to try this: "wu tia thio sia, bo kua thio ngia". I am going to try "tok kon" also in future. I do not think I will be using this in the future and I hope I do not have to, because I am hopeful that with all the policy shifts and announcements made to serve Singaporeans better, we will do our utmost to see them implemented well and garner the support of our people. Otherwise, I will need to seek more Hokkien tuition from Er Dr Lee Bee Wah in future. Page: 56 Last but not least, Minister Lawrence Wong shared exciting plans for our youths with the Youth Volunteer Corps, the revamp of the NYC as well as *SCAPE. I am also excited with the plans for the SG50, many of which the young and old can look forward to as Singapore celebrates its 50th birthday next year. Mdm Speaker, this week has been a lively debate and I am encouraged to note that all Members of this House have the interest of Singapore and Singaporeans at heart beyond anything else. Mr Hri Kumar made an interesting statement on the difference between a politician and a statesman which I found interesting in his speech. What he said was this, "Statesmen tell you what is true even though it may be unpopular. Politicians will tell you what is popular, even though it may be untrue." I will end my speech by complementing this with a quote from Greek Philosopher, Aristotle, "What the statesman is most anxious to produce, is a certain moral character in his fellow citizens, namely a disposition to virtue and the performance of virtuous actions." As Members of this House, we have the responsibility to shape the nation of the future and what kind of Singapore we want to become.”
“Page: 55 Mr Patrick Tay suggested some ways to help PMEs, including expanding the Workforce Skills Qualifications framework to have greater focus on this group and Government funding should be made more accessible to them. Others, like Ms Denise Phua, called for the end of the elected presidency and also suggested that the civil service be re-designed. I know she had stressed it twice that it was redesign and not resign. Deputy Prime Minister Teo also shared how the civil service will evolve to meet the current and future challenges to Government. Senior Minister of State Lee Yi Shyan and Mr Teo Siong Seng provided suggestions on how Singapore could become a smart city. Mr Teo and Mr Dhinakaran also spoke on providing help to SMEs since they are major employers in our economy. Ms Sylvia Lim accorded more focus on our safety and security as she talked about some of the challenges facing our Home Team officers. She also suggested expanding the use of technology in our policing and for the Government to share more data on crime and justice. Mr Arthur Fong earlier also covered safety, resiliency and Singapore's vulnerabilities as a nation and we should not take our stability, political or our national security for granted. Mr Pritam Singh raised concerns on whether we were ready to handle the growing uncertainty in the region, especially with more immigrants coming here. He also questioned on how the TPP would affect Singaporeans and businesses here and that this impact should be made known. I also like to thank Minister Ng Eng Hen, Mr Alex Yam and Mr Sitoh Yih Pin who spoke about recognising the contributions of our NSmen and the progress we have made in our military service, including that of the Malay community.”
“Clearly, all of these suggestions were designed at helping Singaporeans grow old in Singapore without worrying about how they could sustain their retirement years. But it was not just the elderly that Members were concerned about as there was also a significant discussion on how we could improve the lives of Singaporeans generally, particularly those in the low and middle income. Assoc Prof Eugene Tan called for a review of the meritocratic system and questioned if our conception of merit is too narrow. Mr Muhamad Faisal bin Abdul Manap called for a better assessment of the impact of the Government's multiple layers of social safety nets and to see if the overall situation is improving from year to year. There was an overall emphasis as well on ensuring that Singaporeans at all levels had clear pathways upwards, in education as Ms Indranee Rajah confirmed that more paths will be opened for ITE and polytechnic graduates as alternative to degree programmes. She said that programmes such as continuing education and industry certifications could provide greater job security. At the school and preschool level, Minister of State Sim Ann, Mr Lim Biow Chuan, Mr Ang Wei Neng, Dr Lim Wee Kiak, Mr Edwin Tong spoke about enhancing our education system, ensuring social mobility and inculcating values in how we raise our future generations. Members also raised concerns on the future of our professionals, managers and executives (PMEs), such as Ms Foo Mee Har who asked companies to give Singaporean employees in this category greater priority over foreigners when hiring.”
“She suggested that CPF saving plans and annuity schemes must be improved to allow Singaporeans to plan better for their financial commitments when young and options to unlock the value of their savings and assets when they are older. Mr Heng Chee How suggested that to achieve retirement adequacy, we should work towards increasing the flow of money into Singaporeans' CPF savings and/or to make CPF savings work harder for Singaporeans' retirement. Many alternatives were also suggested to make CPF savings work better for Singaporeans. Ms Tan Su Shan said that the Government should factor in a higher rate of inflation for CPF in calculating retirement adequacy and that there should be more done to educate Singaporeans on retirement planning and the facts of the CPF scheme so that there is no misinformation. Mrs Lina Chiam said that non-mandatory CPF annuity scheme and private annuity schemes should also be considered. But others also felt that there should be greater access to CPF funds, especially for older Singaporeans. Mr Gan Thiam Poh felt that the Government should allow about half of the CPF Minimum Sum to be set aside for flat purchases if buyers above 55 are still working and Page: 54 have income to service their mortgages. Ms Tin Pei Ling suggested that the Government should make rules governing the use of the CPF money more flexible so as to allow mature Singaporeans in genuine dire straits to take care of their family needs such as the HDB mortgages and children's education. Responding to some of these calls, Dr Khor said that these ideas, particularly those to boost CPF rates for older workers, link payouts to inflation and to explore ways in which the elderly can better unlock the value of their flats, will all be considered.”
“However, there are opportunities to do more for our ageing population and some such as Mr Cedric Foo, Mr Chen Show Mao, Minister of State Maliki Osman who have touched on that in this sitting and I will mention some of the points that were raised. Dr Chia singled out MOH for appreciation in disbursing the City for All Ages grant to allow communities to promote Ageing-in-Place, while many Members have also raised the concerns that our elderly may have issues coping with the rising cost of living. I am also heartened to learn from Minister Gan that these discussions on ageing will not just end here and that there will be a nationwide conversation on this and to explore how we can turn into a conversation that celebrates longevity instead of one that worries about Page: 53 ageing. Of course, the other hot topic was retirement adequacy. One of the biggest concerns growing old in Singapore, or anywhere else for that matter, is whether you have enough financial protection when you grow old or whether or not you may have a regular income. Many of you shared your concerns on this and also suggested ways in which this can be overcome. For one, and certainly for those who want to continue working, Dr Khor confirmed that the re-employment age will be extended beyond 65 to 67. This news will be welcomed by those Singaporeans who would still want to be able to contribute to the workforce. But a wider concern was raised this week by several Members of Parliament whether our current systems ensure that Singaporeans can achieve retirement adequacy. Ms Jessica Tan cautioned that with an ageing population, cost concerns are creating additional anxieties over retirement adequacy and increasing Minimum Sum amounts.”
“Mr Lien suggested that in addressing healthcare concerns, we should not just look at building infrastructure but also in targeting the root causes of health problems such as lifestyle and diet. Dr Janil, of course, very interestingly detailed his eight steps to a long, healthy and happy life. Coming from a medical doctor, I would take his advice seriously and have myself taken note of his recommendations. From a Government policy point of view on healthcare, Minister Gan confirmed that MediShield Life Review Committee is currently finalising its proposed recommendations and will be ready to share these next month and that the Health Ministry will implement the final scheme by the end of 2015. He also revealed that the Government will introduce several measures, including permanent subsidies, to ensure that low-income Singaporeans will not face problems in meeting the premiums, which are also being kept affordable in any case. Dr Khor pointed out that communications on healthcare policies will be stepped up, particularly on the Pioneer Generation Package, including thorough training healthcare staff and professionals here. In the area of ageing, indeed, the discussion on healthcare in Singapore becomes even more complex due to ageing population that we are developing. In this regard, the Pioneer Generation Package has played a crucial role in alleviating concerns of affordable healthcare for a large segment of our society. Many of you have spoken up during this week, in appreciation of the package and how it has helped our constituents.”
“It is undeniable and plain to see that, on the whole, the House was given the actual perspective that the community has achieved a lot of progress and, more importantly, the progress was achieved due to capabilities based on merit, which we are proud of and is undisputed. (In English): The theme of constructive politics featured in many of your speeches and much has already been said and debated, particularly in the speeches and exchanges between Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, Mr Low Thia Khiang and Mr Hri Kumar. Mr Seng Han Thong also addressed issues of non-constructive politics earlier. The passionate discussions and clashes of ideas we had this week is an example and a good step forward in the direction of constructive politics – which means putting Singapore and Singaporeans at the heart of each and every one of our policy goals. I note that Members have given general recognition to the Government's efforts in improving the lives of Singaporeans in the last three years and responding to their immediate concerns. This Government has clearly shown that it is about the people and for the people. Regardless of positions taken, Members pointed out concerns and suggested solutions on issues including healthcare, ageing, retirement adequacy, making Singaporean lives better and many more. Allow me to summarise some of these points made. Starting with healthcare in Singapore, Dr Chia Shi-Lu, Mr Laurence Lien, Dr Janil Puthucheary, Minister Gan Kim Yong and Dr Amy Khor all spoke about healthcare over the last few days, among others. Page: 52 Dr Chia spoke about health risks that we face as a society and also the opportunities and threats of a universal health insurance system.”
“Yet, the one thing that stands out was, at the heart of these debates, all of us aspire to create a better future for Singapore and every Singaporean, as laid out in the President's Address. The programmes and policies being planned will move towards fulfilling this aspiration. But as the Prime Minister had stated, the politics must also be right, it must be constructive and can further enhance our achievements. The Government has made a lot of progress on several key issues that Singaporeans are concerned with, that is, housing, public transport, population issues and the social safety net. The challenges that we face are increasingly complex, but we must all work together to plan and implement the solutions. We admit that this is a work-in-progress. But for the Page: 51 Government, this is not merely lip service, but a firm commitment, despite facing continuous sharp criticisms. When we talk about issues of concern that are essential to our survival, we cannot afford to merely grumble, but, more importantly, what are the ideas, suggestions and solutions that are constructive which we can think of and can be implemented. This will allow us to move forward. At the same time, I was also drawn to something that came out clearly throughout these five days of debates, that is, we all want the best for Singapore and Singaporeans. This concern for all our citizens, ensuring that no one gets left behind, gives assurance to every Singaporean that their welfare and needs are being cared for. This includes the Malay/Muslims in Singapore, who are also a focus of our debates.”
“I was under the impression that Member Arthur Fong had the last say. Page: 50 Mdm Speaker, thank you so much for allowing me to speak to close the debate for the Motion on the President's Address. We can all agree that it was a very robust and passionate week of speeches and debates. I would like to thank Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, Deputy Prime Minister Teo Chee Hean, the various Ministers and 62 Members of Parliament who spoke on the various themes in support of this Motion to thank our President for his Address. Of course, the Whip also informed me that the President's Address was so exciting that a Member of this House wanted to speak not just once, but twice. He was referring to me, by the way. Madam, please allow me to begin my closing speech in Malay. (In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Throughout the five days of debate in this Chamber, we have heard and pondered on the arguments from Members in this House on various issues and topics that are close to their hearts, in response to the President's Address. Members in this House had the opportunity to put forth their views and many also gave constructive suggestions in the debates, which, in my view, were very comprehensive. What is clear is that our work does not end here, because there are still much follow-up efforts to be done. Therefore, I would like to put on record my appreciation to all Members in this House for participating in the debates on this Motion. The fact that these debates were conducted with decorum despite differences in points of view, shows that we have gone far in terms of conducting frank discussions.”
“Madam, just to rephrase my question: having spoken to some of these contractors – we have LUP in my estate, for example, and they have also seen delays. One of the common feedback was that they cannot get foreign workers. Will HDB help these companies get the workers they require in order to finish these existing projects which are caught in between?”
“I thank the Minister of State for his answer. I just want to ask this: in terms of the shortage of manpower in the construction industry today, how does HDB manage that? Knowing that the industry is a bit short on workers, at the same time, does the Ministry still bring Liquidated Damages (LD) on them in view that they do have issues with manpower shortages? How does HDB help some of these construction companies get their manpower resource?”
“Madam, I have no alternative but tomorrow. Thank you.”
“It is about belonging here as one people and as one community, knowing that as a citizen, this is where we call home where I am safe and protected, that my livelihood and future are assured. If I need help, my Government will always look after my interests and it is whom I turn to in times of need. This is where our Government needs to go beyond delivering on good policies and logic, win hearts to make Singaporeans feel they belong here and continue to sink their roots here for generations to come. Singaporeans have placed their trust in us and elected us to represent them in this House. It is our duty to ensure that our debates continue to help the Government help the people. Most importantly, this House must create unity in Singapore and not separate Singaporeans. This is how we can ensure that Singapore continues to thrive and prosper for the next 50 years. This is how we can leave a Singapore fit for our children and our children's children to grow up in so that they can remember our legacy in 50 years to come. Thank you, Mdm Speaker, I beg to move. [(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)] 1.51 pm Page: 17”
“But I learnt that even for such a popular and meaningful policy that was covered extensively in the media, a recent report found that 40% of Singaporeans were not aware of the benefit from the PGP. What this means is that we need to put in a lot more effort to explain policy benefits and issues on the ground. We need to put in even more, for policies where citizens will only see benefits in the long term and those that require more convincing. Today, this is the gap where you find destructive politics at play – especially the politics of envy, pitting the haves and the have-nots, and the politics of self-interest, where one Page: 16 group's self-interest is championed above others and above the common good. Misinformation and conspiracy theories travel much faster through the social media and coffee shop talk because these make for more sensational stories and they tell people what they want to hear. So, the Government needs to invest more resources to respond quicker and drive our communication channels more effectively to reach hearts and minds out there. Otherwise, the Government will always find itself on the back foot and these divisive messages become like a festered wound that refuses to heal. Madam, in conclusion, in thanking the President for his Address, regardless of political affiliation in this House, the long-term interests of Singapore and Singaporeans should always be our first priority. I support the President's direction on the way forward. As a citizen, we affirm our pledge of loyalty and love for our country on each National Day. In this globalised economy where we have many options, why do we choose to be Singaporean?”
“As we focus on growing incomes of Singaporean workers, our workers must also be mindful that we are operating in an increasingly globally competitive environment – and that salary costs also contribute to increased costs towards services and goods. On the employer front, employers need to be reassured that our policies will not inadvertently create a negative environment for businesses. We have to be mindful that there are markets around us that are cheaper, more open to talent and provide a larger market base than Singapore. If we do not manage this well, the consequences that we see today – sentiments against foreigners or foreign workers – can send the wrong signals to employers and foreign investors. Some may think that we can afford to let these companies go. But if companies start leaving Singapore, we risk losing jobs, leaving ourselves in a far worse position. Madam, moving on to communications. Our demographics and citizen expectations have evolved. People trust that our Government can come up with good policies that will benefit Singaporeans. But the people's expectations now are whether the Government can show that it cares and has compassion for citizens in the way it runs and operates. Today, there is an increasing expectation for the Government to engage and to communicate to show that it has Singaporeans at the heart of any policy that it formulates. The Pioneer Generation Package (PGP) was a wonderful policy announced recently. So, I expected it to reach the ground easily, given its popular response every time we explain the programme to our seniors and their families.”
“The existing CPF-approved investment funds are pretty much left to the market which often has certain financial risks beyond the understanding of the ordinary CPF contributor. A Government-led plan may come somewhere in between, in that it is a trusted plan, with standard terms and the objective of tracking inflation to protect one's savings for the long term. Madam, the Singaporean dream of a better life must remain an attainable one for every citizen. We must give Singaporeans enough to dream about and aspire towards. So that when they look at someone higher up the ladder, it is not one of resentment but one of inspiration to aspire and climb to achieve those levels. We must uphold a fair and just work environment that our local workers do not feel disadvantaged while working amongst a global workforce. We must encourage an environment where our workers can see themselves having an equal opportunity to rise to the top based on merit and not be limited by an employer's preference for a certain nationality or profile. As a start, I hope that the implementation of the Fair Consideration Framework (FCF) will help Singaporeans to access better jobs, while better Union representation and strengthening of TAFEP will facilitate employers to adopt progressive employment practices. Page: 15 We must continue to encourage companies to invest and train our local talents to groom them to achieve their potential. I am glad that in the Addenda, there is concerted effort by agencies, such as MAS, for the financial sector to develop a strong core of Singaporean financial specialists and leaders. I hope to see more sectors working towards the same objectives. But, at the same time, we must also engage workers to recognise and bridge expectations.”
“If I do get complaints on CET, it is because workers do not necessarily see an upgrade path in terms of employment after undertaking the courses and certifications. So, we must safeguard against under-employment in the workforce. It is not easy to guarantee employment, but we need to finetune the supply chain from training to upward mobility in real income or enhanced career progression. Page: 14 We should also find ways to reduce citizen's unhappiness with the changing "goalposts" of the Minimum Sum amount. Only half of Singaporeans today are able to meet their Minimum Sum. Thus, I can certainly understand the anxiety and fear, given the barriers. Much of the frustration I encounter with the Minimum Sum or the Retirement Account after a certain age, is due to the inflexibility when residents fall into difficulty in the use of funds to pay for mortgage or change in property, especially if they have lost their jobs or are required to take a lower pay, or have drawn down their CPF fully in their senior years. I do not have the answers today, but hope that a comprehensive review can provide a more positive outcome for the CPF to provide better retirement adequacy. However, I would also recommend that the Government find new ways of improving returns on one's CPF savings so that it is not too difficult to achieve the Minimum Sum condition. I have met many residents who have asked the Government to provide an alternative to the CPF-approved investment funds which are currently managed by the private sector. Perhaps, the CPF can consider a Government-backed investment plan that tracks inflation, above the existing Ordinary Account and Special Account interest rates.”
“Our cost of living is, indeed, high by international standards, but given our standard of living and quality of healthcare, one major illness can set back one's savings by a lot. For many in the middle class, they often only see 2Ms – Medisave and MediShield – and not the 3Ms. They face the barrier of being means-tested across the family, having to draw down their savings and those from their family members in the household, before being given access to Medifund. To many, while Medifund is there, it seems inaccessible and so, the feeling of insecurity sets in. The best thing we can do for Singaporeans is to provide them with stronger safety nets and portable health insurance to protect them and their families, and a CPF savings scheme that will provide assurance for their retirement, healthcare and eldercare needs. The CPF system has served us well. Singaporeans have come to expect that the CPF savings will be their foundation for a comfortable retirement. We need to assure Singaporeans that when they retire, they can retire comfortably. The CPF savings is a function of the salary one earns and the cost of living that is expected when they retire. Thus, the Government needs to ensure that Singaporeans can maximise their income and retirement savings during their prime years of employment. Holistically, to help more low-income workers, we should explore other areas to expand the PWM and enhance WIS to cover jobs and industries that have seen lagging salary increases or depressed salaries due to heavy reliance on cheaper foreign manpower. Overall, workers must also see their real wages increase as they support and pursue the Government's wider push on productivity, automation and retraining in CET.”