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 9 of 36.
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to report that the Committee of Supply has made further progress on the Estimates of Expenditure for the financial year 2022/2023, and ask leave to sit again tomorrow.”
“Mr Chairman, may I seek your consent to move that progress be reported now and leave be asked to sit again tomorrow?”
“I thank the Leader of the Opposition for his question. My clarification was basically to say that the Minister's speech quoting the 20,000 is the right number. Because the way I mentioned it, the way I clarified, some might interpret it as the number was different or lower. So, I thought just to clarify that the Minister's speech was the correct number.”
“But in reality, we also have to take into account all their incomes as a whole, because I think we have to also be fair in terms of how we support our lower-wage workers.”
“I thank the Member for his question. In my speech earlier, I did explain why we do so. In fact, moving forward, that is why we are also moving all our PWMs towards gross wages to include the full package, not just overtime pay but also allowances. Why do we do so? We certainly want to ensure that we support our lower-wage workers well and really, these are the bottom 20%. So, for example, if you have a worker earning, say, $2,400 base, but his overtime pay adds up to $3,500 or even $4,000, then that does not qualify him as a low-income technically, because the real income that he gets home is much more than what lower-wage workers are getting. So, our target is really the bottom 20%. If you look at Workfare, we push it slightly above that to cater for wage growth in the coming years and what we hope is to continue supporting lower-wage workers at that level. So, imagine this. A worker earning $2,400 for example, earns overtime pay and it goes much higher, compared to another worker who earns maybe $2,500 on the dot, looks more in terms of basic, but he does not earn any overtime pay because his sector, like administration, for example, that is all they have, hardly much overtime, but that is their base salary. So, is the guy earning $2,400 lower base with higher overtime pay, or the person earning $2,500 with no overtime pay, earning more? So, who is more deserving? In that sense, I think we also have to be very mindful that as we scope our schemes for lower-wage workers, we have to also be calibrated, at the same time also fair, to ensure that equity is maintained. While I agree that many of our lower-wage workers do have the intention to earn more because some can do more overtime, for example.”
“But overall, if you look at where we are in terms of the kind of wage growth that you are expecting for the other PWMs shared here, ranging from fifty-plus percent to eighty-plus percent wage growth, for the vast majority of our lower-wage workers, that would also set the tone and drive competition in terms of the labour market at that level, and perhaps for such merchants, when they need to retain or pay their workers better, I think this is where their workers, too, will start comparing benchmarks in other sectors which are paying far better. So, to that extent, rest assured, for this set of workers, they will still get Workfare and other benefits, whether it is Silver Support and so forth. Back to your question, what are their profiles, they are typically your micro-SMEs in the heartlands and typically family businesses too.”
“I thank the Member for his question on lower-wage workers and recognising that the Government has worked hard to cover 94% of our lower-wage workers with our progressive wage moves. On his question on the remaining 6% of lower-wage workers not covered, what their profiles are like. Actually, for the majority of them, they are already earning $1,400 and above. I think more than half are earning $1,400 and above, even though they are not covered by progressive wage moves, they are already earning that. But the question would more be, what are the exclusions and why did we exclude this group. But really, if you look at most minimum wage systems around the world, there are exclusions. In our case, we found that many of them are actually small businesses with less than 10 persons and most of these are actually micro-SMEs in your heartlands, typically your mom-and-pop shops. What we can we all do? Well, in our estates, I think we probably know many of them, mom-and-pop shops who employ their own family members sometimes to help them out and one way we could do is to support in our Progressive Wage Mark. I hope that in Aljunied and Sengkang, you can also encourage many of these merchants, mom-and-pop shops to come on board the Progressive Wage Mark and say yes, please support and pay our workers more, and we will be happy to give you the Progressive Wage Mark if they do so. These are ways in which I think there is moral suasion.”
“With COMPASS, locals should also feel more assured that firms will be incentivised to improve their employee diversity and strengthen their support for local employment. Chairman, we will also build on our existing efforts to uplift lower-wage workers. We will expand the PWM and implement a new Local Qualifying Salary (LQS) requirement. By early 2023, 234,000, or more than 8 in 10 full-time lower-wage workers will be covered by progressive wages. The Government is doing its part, through the Progressive Wage Credit Scheme (PWCS) which funds the wage increases of our lower-wage workers. We will also enhance the Workfare Income Supplement scheme, to provide higher payouts to all our Workfare recipients. Overall, the Government will spend $9 billion over the next five years on these two schemes. (In English): Mr Chairman, to conclude, our suite of measures will benefit both lower-wage workers and businesses, and allow us to renew and strengthen our social compact. The Government will spend $9 billion over the next five years for the Progressive Wage Credit scheme and enhance Workfare. And this reflects this Government's, the PAP Government's strong belief and commitment to uplift our lower-wage workers and to build a fair and inclusive society. 11.30 am Our social compact must be one which everyone enjoys the fruits of growth and that no worker is left behind as Singapore progresses. We must be careful to not let our social compact be eroded by inequality, otherwise our society, including our businesses, will not function well and much less thrive. We have made significant progress over the last decade. And Mr Chairman, we will do even better in this decade in creating a more progressive and inclusive society. [Applause.]”
“] As Minister for Manpower has shared, MOM is committed to shape our manpower policies to enable greater opportunities for all and for us to progress as a vibrant nation. Let me start by talking about our workforce policies. Our foreign workforce policies are guided by our goals of a strong Singaporean core, complemented by a high-quality and diverse foreign workforce. First, we will ensure that Employment Pass (EP) and S Pass holders are comparable in quality to the top one-third of our local PMET and APT workforce respectively. The qualifying salaries and levies will be raised accordingly to meet this benchmark. We will also introduce Complementarity Assessment Framework, or COMPASS, as part of the Employment Pass framework. COMPASS is a points-based system that holistically evaluates the complementarity of EP applicants. It will take into account; firstly, salaries of applicants relative to local PMET wages in their sector; second, the applicant’s qualification; third, the firm's nationality diversity; and fourth, the firms support for local employment. We will also look at other factors like whether the candidate possesses skills that are in shortage or whether the firm supports our strategic economic priorities. In future, EP applicants must meet the EP qualifying salary, and also score sufficient points under COMPASS. Existing EP holders must also meet these criteria when their work passes come up for renewal. So what does all these mean for our local workforce? COMPASS will take into account many more factors in the assessment of EP applications. Together with the requirement for a higher EP qualifying salary, locals can be assured that EP holders here are of good calibre, and not just because their salaries are lower than locals.”
“Mr Ali’s story is also situated within the larger story of progression for his company, APRO Asian Protection. Spurred by the PWM and industry transformation efforts, APRO has adopted various tech-based solutions to increase their productivity and their value-add to service buyers. Moving onto a separate but pertinent topic, HR plays a vital role in supporting our workers and businesses. I thus echo Mr Edward Chia, Mr Yip Hon Weng and Mr Patrick Tay's calls for companies to build up their HR competencies and capabilities. The Institute for HR Professionals (IHRP) accredits and certifies HR professionals as well as guide their continuous professional development. To date, there are more than 5,000 certified aspiring and practising HR professionals who support one another developing and sharing HR best practices. IHRP also provides curated learning resources such as HR playbooks as well as facilitates peer-led Communities of Practice and networking opportunities. We encourage more employer and HR professionals to join this expanding network. MOM will also continue to work with NTUC, SNEF and the TACs to strongly encourage more HR professionals to be certified by IHRP. Mr Patrick Tay also asked for an update on the Human Capital Partnership (HCP) programme. Since the launch of the HCP Programme in 2017, we have awarded the HCP mark to more than 600 employers, who employ over 210,000 locals, or about 10% of the total local workforce. We will continue to work with the Tripartite Partners to identify and recognise our progressive employers. Mr Chairman, allow me to recap some of MOM's efforts in Malay. (In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.”
“Overall, the enhancements will benefit more workers, over half a million lower-wage workers from 2023 will benefit from Workfare, up from 460,000 today. Progressive Wages and Workfare will continue to form the foundation of the Government's multi-layer support for our lower-wage workers. Even as we roll up our sleeves and implement these moves over the next two years and beyond, I am reminded of our workers like Mr Mohammed Ali. In 2017, Mr Ali was an entry-level Security Officer, earning about $1,700 per month. As a worker earning less, he received some support from Workfare. Guided by the PWM's career pathway and with training support from Workfare Skills Support, he upskilled and took on new responsibilities. Today, he is a Senior Security Supervisor overseeing around forty officers. He earns about $3,100 per month, an increase of $1,400 compared to when he first started. He has since graduated from Workfare as his income exceeds the current Workfare qualifying income cap. This is a good and intended outcome. While Workfare provided Mr Ali with income and training support when he needed it, Progressive Wages also offered a progression pathway to higher wages and better skills for workers like him. Mr Ali, I am glad, made the most out of it and I am happy to share that he has graduated from the Workfare scheme, as Progressive Wages has enabled him to earn more. With the new recommendations for the Security PWM, Mr Ali will earn $3,550 per month in 2024. And by 2028, Senior Security Supervisors like Mr Ali will earn at least $4,430, a significant progress compared to $1,700 when he first started. Members may also be pleased to know that under the PWM, entry-level Security Officers will earn at least $3,530 by 2028.”
“But the worker with high bonuses gets Workfare. Therefore, you can see the challenges of why we go towards gross wages. Mr Chairman, Workfare has supported generations of workers and helped them save more for retirement. We will now extend this same support to younger workers, like Ms Lily. Ms Lily is an anonymised name as she prefers for us to not use her real name. Ms Lily is turning 30 years old next year. She works at a pest control company. She bought a flat four years ago and is living with her six children and her elderly mother. She is current receiving a suite of Government support to help her with her household expenses, including financial support such as the ComCare Short-to-Medium Term Assistance and the MOE Financial Assistance Scheme for her school-going children. From 2023, workers aged 30 to 34 like Ms Lily, many of whom are just starting their families or supporting elderly parents, can expect to receive up to $2,100 Workfare payouts a year. She is looking forward to the boost in income, which will be an additional source of help with her household expenses. She says that the Workfare monies will be used to pay her HDB instalments and buy school supplies for her children. Chairman, these enhancements will apply to all lower-wage employees and self-employed persons (SEPs), regardless of occupation. As pointed out by Dr Shahira Abdullah, to qualify for Workfare, SEPs need to declare their incomes and make the required MediSave contributions. The need to meet CPF obligations is part of Workfare's eligibility criteria and applies to both employees and SEPs. Nonetheless, CPF Board does exercise flexibilities to help SEPs facing difficulties make their CPF contributions.”
“We need to help these part-time workers find jobs of the appropriate quality and quantity of working hours to earn at least $500 or more if they can. And we have a whole suite of employment facilitation programmes and initiatives, ready to assist. Finally, we will increase the payouts. Older workers, like Mdm Timah, will continue to receive the highest Workfare payouts, of up to $4,200 a year or $350 per month. Workfare has supported our persons with disabilities (PwDs) for more than a decade and certainly they can do with some extra support. From 2023, with the enhancements, we will provide a stronger helping hand by placing all PwDs on the highest payout tier of $4,200 a year. We recognise that our younger and middle-aged workers are also dealing with greater family and financial obligations. Many of them are taking care of both their children and their elderly parents, while still paying off their housing loan. This is why we will also be increasing Workfare payouts for them. Mr Abdul Samad Abdul Wahab suggested to exclude overtime pay when assessing a worker's eligibility for Workfare. Overtime pay, together with basic pay and bonuses make up a worker's total income that will help support the worker and his or her family. As Workfare helps lower-wage workers by supplementing their income, looking at the total income earned by the worker enables us to better assess the additional support to be provided via Workfare. If we had only used basic salaries to determine who will qualify for Workfare, some workers with low basic salary but high overall pay may displace another worker with higher basic salary but overall, he does not get much more, that is all he gets. The worker displaced would have needed Workfare more but does not get it.”
“Workers will also need to earn at least $500 a month to qualify for Workfare. Members have debated this extensively. We understand and share your concerns. But allow me to first clarify a statement that I made at the Budget debate about the number of Workfare recipients that would be affected by the new criterion. The 20,000 figure, as cited by Minister Tan See Leng, had already taken into account the expected wage growth from the PWM expansion and new LQS requirement. Our objective, in line with Workfare's overall design, is to nudge all our workers, part-time and full-time, towards more gainful employment so that we give them a higher sense of achievement. We also want to better target Workfare at those who need it, our lower-wage workers, those with lower household incomes and not casual workers doing vacation jobs, for example. At the same, we will ensure that those deserving and in need, will continue receiving Workfare, by providing concessions for them. For low-income part-time workers who qualify for ComCare, they will continue receiving Workfare, even if they earn less than $500 per month. There are some who want to work more but are unable to do so, due to various personal circumstances, such as persons with disabilities (PwDs). They too, will continue receiving Workfare. In fact, PwDs will receive the highest tier of Workfare. I hope this assures Members of this House that those who are in need and who are deserving of Workfare will continue to receive it. Here, I wish to reiterate a point that Minister Tan also made at the Budget Debate – Workfare is not the endgame for these workers earning less than $500 per month.”
“Workfare was introduced in 2007 to narrow income inequality; to help our lower-wage workers save more for their retirement; and to encourage our lower-wage workers to work regularly, whether it is for full-time or part-time work, depending on what best suits their circumstances. Fifteen years on, almost a million workers have benefited from over $8.6 billion dollars in Workfare payouts. One worker who benefited from Workfare over the years is Mdm Timah Binte Mohamad Kasan. Being the sole breadwinner while raising two children was not easy for Mdm Timah. Workfare made it better for her and her family by topping up her income since 2007. In total, she has received over $34,000 cash and CPF top-ups from Workfare. This has helped her support her husband, who is unable to work and her children while paying off her mortgage for her 3-room HDB flat. 11.15 am Mdm Timah is also supported by other Government schemes. For example, she currently receives Silver Support payouts of $720 per quarter. She also chose to boost her retirement income via the lease buyback scheme and received a $30,000 cash bonus on top of the proceeds from selling part of the flat's lease. The support from Workfare has not stopped, Workfare will continue to boost her income for as long as she wishes to continue working. Uplifting our lower-wage workers is a collective responsibility. As businesses and consumers pay our lower-wage workers better, the Government, too, will do our part. As announced by the Minister for Finance, the Government will be making significant enhancements to Workfare from 2023. Let me briefly recap the enhancements here. Workers earning up to $2,500 a month will now be able to qualify for Workfare, up from the current qualifying income cap of $2,300.”
“We urge employers to use this period of support to also accelerate the structural transformation of their business processes. Employers must take the lead in improving firm-level productivity, so that wage increases will be sustainable for businesses, even when the support ends. I thus agree with Mr Sharael Taha that employers must press on to innovate and digitalise. The Government is expanding the range of solutions under schemes such as the Productivity Solutions Grant and Advanced Digital Solutions scheme to support such efforts. Working in tandem with these schemes, I encourage our trade associations and chambers to play a key role in promoting innovation and digitalisation efforts, and share best practices. Workers should also continue to take the initiative in upgrading their skills and applying these skills at work, be it to increase productivity or to take on new roles. This will help them continue to support business transformation and ensure that wage improvements are sustainable in the long run. Therefore, I fully support Mr Sharael Taha’s suggestions for encouraging lower-wage workers to upskill. Today, the Workfare Skills Support scheme provides incentives to encourage lower-wage workers to upskill, through training allowances and a training commitment award. In 2020, MOM expanded the income qualifying criteria, and increased the amount of allowance and award. I hope that our workers will take the opportunity to upskill and improve their career prospects. Moving on to the Workfare Income Supplement (WIS) Scheme, or what we know as Workfare for short.”
“From March 2023, we will require all suppliers awarded Government contracts to be accredited with the PW Mark, starting with contracts with larger value. More details will be announced in the coming months. We encourage potential suppliers to apply and obtain the PW Mark early once it is launched. Chairman, putting our Progressive Wage measures together, this increases our coverage of Progressive Wages further up to 266,000, or 94% of full-time lower-wage workers – put together, 94%. As we significantly widen the coverage of Progressive Wages and introduce the new Local Qualifying Salary requirement, we recognise that the employers would need some transitional support to adjust to the changes in the immediate term. The Government has thus committed its strong support through the Progressive Wage Credit Scheme, or PWCS, which was announced by the Minister for Finance earlier. To recap, under the PWCS, there will be two tiers of funding. First, the Government will co-fund the first two most recent years of wage increases given to resident workers up to a wage ceiling of $2,500, for a five-year period from 2022 to 2026. Co-funding will be at 50% in the first two years, 30% in the next two years, before tapering off at 15% in 2026. With economic conditions remaining uncertain in the immediate term, the PWCS will also provide a second tier of funding to cover those earning between $2,500 and $3,000, for a shorter period of three years. With PWCS, the Government is providing direct support to the firms as they adjust to the Progressive Wage and LQS moves. We want to encourage all firms, including those not in the PWM sectors, to provide wage increases voluntarily in the immediate term when the Government’s support is the strongest.”
“The new Tripartite Standard on Advancing Well-Being of Lower-Wage Workers will encourage employers to provide better workplace support for our lower-wage workers, focusing on areas of training and career development, to provide rest areas as well as care for their mental well-being, as mentioned by Mr Melvin Yong. We recognise that our workforce has experienced significant disruptions to their jobs during COVID-19. Therefore, it is important that employers cultivate a healthy working environment. Minister of State Gan Siow Huang will elaborate on these efforts in her speech. To strengthen our social compact, the efforts of the Tripartite Partners and employers alone are not enough. We must recognise that all of us have a role to play – all of us as consumers. It is in this light that the Tripartite Workgroup recommended establishing a new Progressive Wage Mark, or PW Mark, accreditation. We want to help individual consumers and corporate buyers easily identify progressive employers that are supporting lower-wage workers, and support these employers through their purchases. The PW Mark will be launched in the second half of this year. Employers that pay at least the relevant Sectoral or Occupational Progressive Wages to eligible workers, as well as the Local Qualifying Salary to all other local workers, will be accredited with the PW Mark. For employers that have gone one step further to adopt the new Tripartite Standard on Advancing Well-Being of Lower-Wage Workers, they will be recognised with the PW Mark Plus accreditation. To rally the industry to adopt the PW Mark, the Singapore Business Federation has agreed to help administer the PW Mark. The Government will do our part to lend strong support to the PW Mark.”
“It is this sustainable progress that gives the Tripartite Partners confidence and the impetus to expand the Progressive Wage Model to cover new sectors and new occupations. Starting in September this year, we will implement the new Local Qualifying Salary requirement, as well as the Retail PWM and the extension of PWM to cover in-house cleaners, security officers and landscape workers. This will be followed closely by our second wave of moves in March 2023, just next year about this time, when we implement the Food Services PWM and Occupational Progressive Wages. Overall, by early 2023, 234,000, or more than eight in 10 full-time lower-wage workers will be covered by Progressive Wages. Given the competitive labour market, we are confident that the PWMs will continue to set the pace for the wage growth of our lower-wage workers. Hence, even when lower-wage workers who are not covered directly by any PWM should still see good wage growth, as their employers will likely have to adjust their wages to keep pace with the market and to retain them. Beyond uplifting wages, we also want to encourage our employers to pay more attention to other aspects of the well-being of our lower-wage workers. Therefore, following the recommendation of the Tripartite Workgroup, I am pleased to now launch a new Tripartite Standard on Advancing Well-being of Lower-Wage Workers. The Tripartite Standards (TS) are a set of good employment practices that all employers should implement at their workplaces.”
“Thank you. The Tripartite Workgroup on Lower-Wage Workers report was released in August 2021 and outlines our recommendations for a refreshed approach and ambition for an inclusive and uplifting society. We have seen good progress since the release of the recommendations. New PWM sectors, such as Retail and F&B, have been identified and negotiations are underway. We can expect to see significant progress in wage outcomes in the coming years for our existing PWMs in the Cleaning, Security, Landscape and Lift and Escalator sectors. For example, from 2022 to 2028, entry-level cleaners will see a cumulative wage increase of up to 84%, to receive baseline wages of about $2,400 in 2028. The other existing PWMs have also shown similarly strong momentum, and you can find them in our factsheet; you will see significant increases across the various PWMs. They reflect the Workgroup’s commitment to narrow income dispersion between workers at the lowest 20th percentile and median and this will strengthen our social compact. At the same time, our overarching principle continues to be that wages and productivity should rise in tandem. Hence, we not only want wages to rise, but we also want to see productivity increase, through upskilling of workers and through the transformation of businesses. We have seen more Singaporeans joining sectors with the PWM, such as Security and Landscape, as wages and working conditions improve. For example, the employment of locals in the Security sector grew by an average of 5% per year, compared to 2015, which was before PWM was introduced. This is different from some other countries where broad-based minimum wages caused unintended unemployment.”
“Mr Chairman, in his National Day Rally speech last year, Prime Minister Lee accepted the recommendations by the Tripartite Workgroup on Lower-Wage Workers. This refreshes the Government’s social compact with our lower-wage workers to better support them, provide stronger wage outcomes and for all of us to play a stronger role to create a more inclusive and cohesive society. We have already made good progress in uplifting our lower-wage workers through efforts such as Workfare and the Progressive Wage Model (PWM). In the last five years from 2016 to 2021, we have seen good wage growth across our workforce. Real median income of full-time employed residents has increased steadily at 2.1% per annum. In comparison, real income at the 20th percentile – our lower-wage workers – has risen faster than median at 2.7% per annum. This means that we are reducing the income gap even as we move up as a workforce. Our moves to enhance wage growth in the PWM sectors and introduce the new Local Qualifying Salary, or LQS, provide us with further opportunities to narrow income inequality in the coming years. In my speech, Mr Chairman, I will elaborate on the progress of the Tripartite Workgroup on Lower-Wage Workers recommendations, and how Progressive Wages and Workfare will continue to be the key thrusts in our efforts to uplift our lower-wage workers. I will also elaborate on our efforts to strengthen HR capabilities, so that HR professionals are better able to support businesses. With your permission, Chairman, may I ask the Clerks to distribute a handout detailing our efforts to support our lower-wage workers.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, I beg to report that the Committee of Supply has made progress on the Estimates of Expenditure for the financial year 2022/2023, and ask leave to sit again on Monday, 7 March 2022.”
“Chairman, as the Ministry that promotes work-life balance and care for our mental well-being, especially on Friday evening, may I seek your consent to move that progress be reported now and leave be asked to sit again on Monday, 7 March 2022?”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, may I seek your consent and the general assent of Members present to move a Motion to take this day's proceedings on the Estimates for the Financial Year 2022/2023 beyond 7.30 pm?”
“Sir, may I seek your consent to move that the Chairman do leave the Chair? This is to enable me to move a Motion to take the proceedings on the business of Supply today beyond 7.30 pm.”
“Mr Speaker, I beg to report that the Committee of Supply has made progress on the Estimates of Expenditure for the Financial Year 2022/2023 and ask leave to sit again tomorrow.”
“Chairman, may I seek your consent to move that progress be reported now and leave be asked again to sit tomorrow?”
“Sir, may I seek your consent and the general assent of Members present to move a Motion to take this day's proceedings on the Estimates of the Financial Year 2022/2023 beyond 7.30 pm.”
“Sir, may I seek your consent to move that the Chairman do leave the Chair? This is to enable me to move a Motion to take the proceedings on the business of Supply today beyond 7.30 pm.”
“I am heartened that Singaporeans want to do their part for Total Defence through understanding and action and we will partner you to work towards securing our collective future. By working together, we have every reason to be confident that we will keep Singapore strong today and for generations to come.”
“MINDEF has also embarked on a refresh for our volunteer programme and Singaporeans will soon be able to contribute in different capacities, including as educators, researchers and guides in our museums. This year, we commemorate 55 years of National Service (NS), as both Minister Ng Eng Heng and Senior Minister Heng Chee How have mentioned. NS has been the bedrock of our defence. Generation after generation have served, first as NSFs, then as NSmen, to protect and defend Singapore's interests. That is why it is important to appreciate the dedication, service and sacrifice of our National Servicemen and to thank them for their efforts. ACCORD, for one, will step up efforts to recognise, support and appreciate NSmen across the community. Members Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim and Yeo Wan Ling asked about this. Last year, ACCORD members raised several ideas on how Singaporeans can show their support for NS and we will expand on some of them this year. We will enhance the "We Support NS Campaign" where businesses, for one, can offer discounts and privileges to NSmen. We will also expand the spaces for Singaporeans to reflect on the significance of NS, whether through close engagement with our youths or experiential camps for families and the public. More details on the initiatives will be shared later in the year. The three SAF Services will also continue to engage the community, such as through their open houses and charity events. In conclusion, Mr Chairman, I would like to close by reiterating that the world remains uncertain. We recognise that the security challenges we face are immense and constantly evolving. MINDEF will continue to build Total Defence as our best response to the threats and challenges that might come our way.”
“Mr Chairman, every Singaporean must understand Singapore’s security environment, unique vulnerabilities and the roles that we can play. Only then can we recognise the opportunities to contribute and step up where needed. I am grateful to our ACCORD partners, who are instrumental in this effort, and have been reaching out to more youths and women in their current term. They have conducted NS engagement talks, a webinar series on NS and defence issues for University undergraduates and grassroots dialogues with women. Through these efforts, we prepare those who need to serve NS and help their families and friends take steps to support them. 12.15 pm There is a part for everyone to play, no matter how small, to make our defence total. Member Carrie Tan had shown interest and asked if MINDEF would consider expanding NS to include community care roles and enlist both men and women. NS is based on the critical need of national security and defence. Currently, our NS population adequately meets our national security and defence needs. Both Minister Ng Eng Hen and Senior Minister of State Heng Chee How have spoken about MINDEF and the SAF's continued efforts to enhance manpower resource efficiency. However, contributing to Singapore's defence should not be limited to just those serving NS. There are many different opportunities for Singaporeans to contribute actively through Total Defence and I encourage everyone to do so. One example is by equipping oneself with practical emergency response skills for Civil Defence. I would like to encourage women, first-generation Permanent Residents and new citizens without NS commitments who are keen to do more for Total Defence to volunteer with the SAF Volunteer Corps.”
“As players hunker down behind sandbags, they will experience how the regiment defended themselves against waves of opponents and they will also understand the grit and determination that Lieutenant Adnan and his men had shown despite the odds. SDC’s lower gallery, "Sandbox", opened last November. In that interactive space, a simulated digital environment allows visitors to experience Singapore’s history and the threats that we faced. Startups and students, including those in the AR/VR domain, can also use a new incubator space to collaborate on projects, experiment with technology and bring ideas to life. SDC has also been investing in innovative energy solutions and renewables, and implementing various energy efficiency measures to reduce energy demand and emissions. Today, more than 60% of its energy use comes from renewable energy and SDC is working on becoming a net carbon-neutral facility. If you have not been to SDC recently, I encourage you to do so and, perhaps, I can invite and organise Members in this House, if you are interested, for a visit. In the next few years, Singaporeans will have more to look forward to in our museums. We are developing capabilities and investing in technology to make the visitor experience in our three military museums, SDC and the upcoming NS Gallery at Marina Bay more fun and interactive. Museums and galleries are wonderful channels to learn about defence, as history offers important lessons while we look ahead to chart our course in an uncertain, ever-surprising future. We hope that visitors will walk away with an understanding of the competing needs, goals and trade-offs that we have made as a nation and those we might make in the future.”
“We look forward to supporting projects that target today’s most salient challenges, such as cyber threats, food insecurity, are some examples. Some ideas we have heard so far include workshops to increase awareness of cybersecurity and campaigns to promote environmentally sustainable habits. The possibilities are vast and we look forward to Members' contributions. We will also continue conversations with Singaporeans to expand and reimagine the actions that we can take for Total Defence – both in the current security environment and for the challenges that we will face in the near future or the future to come. As the security environment continues to evolve, Singaporeans must be aware of the threats to our sovereignty and stability as well as vulnerabilities. Only then can we understand the roles that we might play and how some of these will impact on our actions. Let me now touch on how MINDEF will work alongside partners to bring to life some of these challenges and the actions Singaporeans can take, which Member of Parliament Rachel Ong also asked about. The Singapore Discovery Centre (SDC), for one, will be transformed to better tell Singapore’s stories. Member of Parliament Chong Kee Hiong asked about this. SDC has made strides in Augmented Reality (AR) and Virtual Reality (VR) and environmental sustainability, and in recent months, refreshed its galleries. In the upper gallery, an AR, first-person shooter game, takes visitors back to the Battle of Bukit Chandu on 14 February 1942. That day, even though Lieutenant Adnan Saidi and the Malay Regiment soldiers were outnumbered and eventually ran out of supplies, they fought valiantly against the Japanese Army and refused to surrender.”
“It is with these questions in mind that we embarked on a review of Total Defence. In the past 16 months, we heard from over 2,000 Singaporeans from all walks of life. We asked them how Total Defence might better rally Singaporeans in times of crisis and this was even before the Ukraine situation happened. From these conversations, we learnt that Total Defence has room to be more resonant and relatable, even as the actions within the six pillars remain relevant. Some found it too abstract, prescriptive and focused on present-day threats at the expense of emerging challenges, while some others did not want to be told what Total Defence was about. Instead, they wanted to be proactive, and wanted space to contribute ideas and efforts towards shaping a Singapore that they aspired to see. I am grateful for the feedback, which will guide our ongoing review. We have started building on some of these suggestions. For one, we will work to make Total Defence less prescriptive and more inclusive, by encouraging more ground-up and community-led efforts. I say "more", because many Singaporeans have already stepped up to support the causes that they care about. For example, more people are choosing to buy local produce and dabble in community gardening to strengthen food security. Member of Parliament Rachel Ong asked what MINDEF is doing to engage youths. This year, we have launched a two-year campaign, beginning with the Total Defence Sandbox initiative. A sandbox is a safe environment where you can test ideas and programmes. And that is what we hope this can be: a space that links ideas to resources, to turn ideas into prototypes and prototypes into solutions.”
“There are many contributions beyond these and too many heroes to name today. I thank you all for your efforts because you have shown that Total Defence is very much alive and is in every one of us. The threats to our way of life – our sense of stability and security – come in many forms. A study by Check Point Research found that Singapore saw a 145% increase in cyberattacks from 2020 to 2021. The healthcare sector was the most targeted sector. Throughout the pandemic, fear-mongers have spread falsehoods about variants and the ill-effects of vaccines, which have directly threatened public health and, if not, weakened trust. As Singapore imports 90% of our food, we are highly dependent on continued access to quality food supplies. Threats to our supply chains, natural disasters and climate change have affected our supplies and food prices. Minister Ng touched on the situation in Ukraine in his speech yesterday. As we watch events unfold, it is a lesson in real-time for Singaporeans on how a country’s stability can be threatened on multiple fronts, including cyberattacks, information campaigns and border threats, and all these ahead of military aggression. It is tragic and sad how events in Ukraine have unfolded. What is now clear to me, and I hope for many Singaporeans, too, is that we must always be ready and we can only depend on ourselves for our defence. Total Defence – being able to defend ourselves economically, socially and even psychologically – has to be every Singaporean’s responsibility. As threats become more complex, multidimensional and multifaceted, how can we ensure that we are ever ready to meet them? Member of Parliament Denise Phua asked about this. How can Total Defence continue to galvanise every Singaporean for our survival, security and success?”
“We understand that Member of Parliament Cheng Li Hui is interested in this topic. Let us take our vaccination programme as an example. Today, 91% of our total population is fully vaccinated and 68% have received their booster shots. I am heartened that many have stepped up in support of our national vaccine effort. One example is National Serviceman Captain Dr Shane Abucewicz-Tan, a medical officer for the Home Vaccination Team, who supported COVID-19 operations. He conducted household visits as part of the Home Vaccination Programme, ensuring that Singaporeans who were immobile and immunocompromised could receive their vaccinations. Another example is the Singapore Federation of Chinese Clan Associations. It put together videos in dialects, such as Hakka, Cantonese and Teochew, to encourage seniors to receive their vaccinations. Indeed, we have looked out for and supported one another. In 2020, the migrant worker community was disproportionately impacted when COVID-19 began spreading in the dormitories. MINDEF, together with other MINDEF-related organisations, and more than 20 partners, set up the Community Facility at Kranji in May that year − a temporary dormitory for migrant workers, which also served as a vaccination care centre and community care facility. It served over 70,000 migrant workers over 20 months. I am grateful to our partners who have made this possible. Academic institutions, such as the Solar Energy Research Institute of Singapore, also helped make the site more sustainable. For instance, they tested lightweight solar panels and piloted energy storage solutions, which could be scaled to other temporary sites like these and contribute to our sustainability efforts in the long term.”
“Mr Chairman, Minister for Defence Dr Ng spoke about the global geopolitical shifts, transnational threats and the attendant impact on Singapore. Increasingly, the security challenges that test us will lie outside of traditional battlefields – some call this "grey zone" contestation. Now, more than ever, our investments in both the SAF and Total Defence continue to be crucial as Singapore’s bulwark against crises, challenges and potential aggression. In 1984, we launched Total Defence in the context of a conventional threat landscape. Both then and now, our Total Defence pillars reinforce our belief that a strong foundation for our defence goes beyond the military domain and requires a whole-of-society response. Over the years, we have faced numerous challenges, from pandemics to economic recessions, to terrorism. The six pillars of defence – military, economic, social, civil, digital, and psychological – working in concert have allowed us to respond to the threats that jeopardise Singapore's future. In the last two years, we have grappled with the COVID-19 pandemic as it upended our lives and stress-tested us as a nation. It has pressured our healthcare systems and strained our supply chains. Many amongst us have lost jobs and had to pivot to new sectors or roles. And just when it felt like we had turned a corner with the vaccines, there have been new variants like Delta and Omicron. While this has not been a conventional war, it has been a crisis that has impacted all of us. We are dealing with an unknown threat – COVID-19 – which, even today, remains elusive and ever-evolving. In order to meet this threat and protect one another from the virus, we have needed a whole-of-society response through Total Defence.”
“Mr Speaker, may I seek your consent to move, "That the debate be now adjourned."”
“As what I have shared that as part of the concession given, for as long as you are low-income, you get ComCare, you will get Workfare. So, that differentiates our low-income workers from the casual workers who may not necessarily come from low-income households. There is a difference. And also, from some of those who are doing vacation jobs and so forth, this puts a differentiation and puts our focus on our social compact that you are low-income, and you need the money, you would not be left behind. I hope that answers.”
“I thank the Member for his question. So, I responded earlier and as I responded to Leader of Opposition, every low-wage worker who is working part-time, who is also receiving ComCare, will get Workfare. Whether there is a bar or not, as long as you are low-income, part-time, working and getting a sum less than $500, you will get Workfare. So, to some extent, I hope that clarifies and responds to the Member's question.”
“Indeed, yes. So, as I shared, if you are on ComCare, means you are low income and most likely, if you are earning less than $500, part-timer, you will get it. And that extends to all our persons with disabilities too, to ensure that no one gets left behind. This separates our truly low-income part-time workers who may be constrained for whatever reason, whether caregiving or other constraints, that they are still provided assistance, not just from ComCare. Holistically, they also get Workfare.”
“I thank the Leader of the Opposition for his clarification. On the minimum income criterion, I just want to say quickly that: one, it is not meant to discount any of our lower-wage workers from receiving Workfare. When Minister Tan spoke about concessionary Workfare, what it means is that: if you are receiving ComCare, or if you qualify for ComCare, then automatically you will get Workfare as well. Even if you are a part-time worker, earning less than $500. So, that is one assurance that today. As Minister Tan shared, the number is about 20,000. This is because with the Local Qualifying Salary (LQS) coming into play, the number that Mr Pritam Singh cited will certainly reduce, because the hourly rates will go up. And therefore, we will see less. Like the example that Deputy Speaker raised, for someone like that, if they are truly low income, if they are on ComCare, they will automatically get Workfare. I hope this clarifies.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That Parliament do now adjourn." [(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)] A Fairer and More Inclusive Singapore for Low-wage Migrant Workers 7.47 pm”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That Parliament do now adjourn." [(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]”
“Indeed, taxes feature so little in such decisions that in a recent PWC report that listed 12 factors that made Singapore "best in class within the region" for asset and wealth management, not one of these was "low taxes". Tax competition is a mindset more suited for the 20th, rather than the 21st century. Wealth taxes can improve the diversity of our Government's revenue sources and help manage the societal dislocations that result from rising inequality. We already have experience with other forms of wealth taxation in the past, and we need not fear the competitive position for the future, because other jurisdictions have already moved ahead with similar taxes on capital. Mr Deputy Speaker, in Christopher Nolan's masterful Dark Knight trilogy, Bruce Wayne – a billionaire playboy – rediscovers his life's purpose in the mountains, dons a suit and cape, and returns to bring justice to a fallen city. Gotham was dank, crime-ridden and deeply unequal, but Mr Wayne, like his philanthropic father before him, chose to expend his own enormous wealth to redress the very imbalance that he had been such a beneficiary of. My heartfelt belief is that all of us, the ultra-wealthy included, want to live in a world where we can all contribute our fair share to make it a better place, both today and for our children. That is how I view wealth taxes: it is another salve for our imperfect world, an opportunity to create new opportunities for Singaporeans, and an idea whose time has come.”
“We could even permit tax loss harvesting for up to two years or restrict taxation to only instances where net wealth gains are positive. In either case, the returns on wealth in any given year would typically significantly exceed these tax rates. Otherwise, they should get rid of their wealth manager. So, the ultra-rich should generally not expect to see any decrease in the principal on the asset. The natural reservation to doing so would be that it would threaten our competitive position as a global wealth management centre, especially relative to our closest competitors, Hong Kong and Switzerland. But circumstances have changed. Recent geopolitical developments in Hong Kong are a reminder that political stability and respect for property rights are far more important determinants for factors for siting one's immobile wealth. And all but on canton of Switzerland – the world's leading wealth centre – maintain progressive estate taxes, and the canton of Zürich – the beating heart of Swiss wealth management – applies wealth taxes even more aggressively, starting at CHF 77,000 for singles and CHF 154,000 for households, with the top bracket of a little more than CHF 3 million. International developments have also pointed to a greater appetite for cross-country cooperation on tax regimes, such as the OECD deal on the global corporate taxes I mentioned earlier. It is therefore not inconceivable that similar agreements on wealth taxation could be in the offing. More generally, we need to disabuse ourselves from the mistaken notion that low taxes offer the most competitive advantage for our status as a global financial centre.”
“Furthermore, the significant amount of work in the run-up to implementation, legislative design, asset valuation, collection mechanisms will only be drawn on once. Any revenue gain, redistributed benefits and impact on inequality will also be temporary. A practical solution to this is to require one-off assessment but have payments rendered over time. Another strategy to limit evasions is allow the wealthy some agency in the deployment of their tax contributions. For instance, a wealth tax could be directed to foundations, which by mandate will be required to spend a fixed amount of the endowment each year on approved causes until depleted. Alternatively, the tax can be levied annually and collected amounts automatically channelled to the foundation. This is not such a novel concept. Indeed, legal instruments such as charitable trusts or foundations already exist. All that is required is for us to pair the wealth tax with these entities. Mr Deputy Speaker, I believe the time has come for a more explicit tax on wealth. This tax should be designed in a manner that takes into account current realities, including the inherent mobility of capital and wealth but also the importance of not just taxes but other non-monetary motivations for why high net worth individuals may choose Singapore as a home for asset and wealth management. While I have mentioned a number of possibilities, my simple proposal is to introduce a tax of 0.5% on net wealth in excess of $10 million, 1% above $50 million and 2% above $1 billion. This tax may be designated to a special-purpose foundation mandated to exhaust its entire endowment on an accrual basis over time with some flexibility in terms of the allocation of payouts toward Government-approved uses that are consistent with national priorities.”
“The top marginal tax rate for properties above $1 million is currently set at 4%. We could introduce another tier for higher value properties – at 5% for properties valued above $5 million or for owners of multiple properties that cumulatively exceed $5 million. The suggestion was recently raised by my Sengkang GRC colleague, Louis Chua, in his speech to this House on the Income Tax (Amendment) Bill. As he shared, with a relatively high threshold, the aspiring middle class would not be penalised by such a tax. This option has the additional benefit of tempering increases in house prices even in public housing because private housing prices have a spillover effect on public markets in Singapore. Or, alternatively, we could introduce a progressive net worth tax. While wealth taxes could, in principle, be applied to any amount of asset holdings, most proponents have in mind only the highest tier of wealthy individuals such as those in the top 1% or, more likely, in the top 0.1% of the wealth distribution. The wealth tax can itself be progressive with different marginal rates for various income tiers. The key advantage of such wealth taxes is that it ensures that the large and growing asset basis of ultra-high net worth individuals, which is typically held in non-property form, would not be inadvertently exempt. In choosing the target tax base, we should strike a balance between raising revenue and effecting redistribution versus heightening the incentives for avoidance and evasion. One way to minimise evasion is to make such taxes one-off. However, one-off taxes are best when there is no prior announcement since doing so will impose the least distortion due to tax avoidance behaviour. However, sudden major policy announcements are seldom infeasible in the real world.”
“The Estate Duty Act was amended in 2005 to apply only to estates of those that passed prior to 15 February 2008. During the debate on the abolition, Members explained that wealth was now being generated by other means, thereby rendering the inheritance less impactful. The duty was also viewed as a tax that affected mostly the middle class as the wealthy had generally been able to shelter the estates from such taxes. Stamp duties and Additional Buyer's Stamp Duty (ABSD) are also currently applied to properties in Singapore. The Buyer's Stamp Duty is applied progressively up to a marginal rate of 4% for property values in excess of $1 million. ABSD is payable on additional properties and by most non-Singaporeans and it is likewise progressive. Both taxes play triple duty by not just raising revenue and enhancing progressivity, but also by helping contain speculative pressure, especially from wealthy international buyers. Mr Deputy Speaker, so, in thinking about taxes on capital, we have several options. We could consider reintroducing the inheritance tax. The major strategic reason for eliminating taxes on inheritance was to provide greater ballast for Singapore as it sought to position itself as a globally competitive wealth management centre. Singapore has since indeed emerged as a leading cross-border wealth management hub managing $1.2 trillion in worth, just behind Switzerland and Hong Kong. The fear is that in reintroducing an estate duty, even a limited one, could weaken our value proposition as a wealth centre. This may also seem unnecessary, given the small amounts that will be raised by the reintroduction of such a tax. Or we could weave in greater progressivity into our estate duty.”